Why is no one talking about DirectStorage for Starfield?

tvdaXD

tvdaXD

Member
Since this is basically a Microsoft title, I'm surprised they haven't pushed for some of their technology like DirectStorage. I'd be perfect for this game and all it's loading screens!
 
Bro they barely can throw out a function product that community's have to patch together to make it a actual half decent product. They just discovered DLSS after getting bombarded by posts on forums that they probably couldn't ignore. These guys are a good decade behind.
 
Maybe it didn't integrate in to their engine? Maybe it was too late to add it? Maybe it's coming in a patch? Why are you asking us?

Game literally loads in a few seconds as it is
 
acm2000 said:
Maybe it didn't integrate in to their engine? Maybe it was too late to add it? Maybe it's coming in a patch? Why are you asking us?

Game literally loads in a few seconds as it is
Click to expand...
Those few seconds are a few seconds too long. To simply finish a lot of quests you have to go outside from a building:, loading time 1, enter your ship, loading time 2, enter a destination for example the shack where you bring your stuff, loading time 3, enter said shack, loading time 4. That's a regular 4 loading times within about a minute of gameplay.

Total loading time of that is around 20 seconds or so, but using direct storage it might be 3 or 4 in total, it would make a huge difference in how the game feels to play.

It's silly that ms doesn't force its own studios to use the technology, why even have a new Xbox if you don't use any of its features?
 
You're asking Bethesda too much probably, also the game was in development for years before DS was a thing, so the reason is the same: On going project, nobody is gonna delay an already long production process in order to implement a non essential tech. The same results for SFS, Nanite, etc. For future games yeah, they won't have any excuse
 
acm2000 said:
Maybe it didn't integrate in to their engine? Maybe it was too late to add it? Maybe it's coming in a patch? Why are you asking us?

Game literally loads in a few seconds as it is
Click to expand...
No. I have a beefy system but some load screens, and there are plenty, take double digit seconds. Once, I alt-tabed out thinking the game had crashed only to have the game finish as it went to desktop. It's too much.

Op it's probably engine limitation/cost to implement.
 
Last edited:
Bethesda didn't forget to flip the switch (and they also didn't forget to use the integral Velocity Architecture components in the Xbox version, where it also incurs loading.)

This is how the Starfield is designed. The game is apparently written with unusually small block sizes for whatever reason (maybe intentional for how it needs to work with its scale and intricacies? maybe legacy from the core engine?) Tons of small blocks are bottlenecks to a hard drive, even a super fast SSD drive with an API for snagging files as fast as possible. The DirectStorage API can't make that kind of problem go away.

www.tomshardware.com

SSD Usage In Starfield Is Causing Stuttering Issues: Report

DirectStorage is not even required to fix it.
www.tomshardware.com www.tomshardware.com
 
Last edited:
They can't even put a brightness slider and you want direct storage? Nice one



giphy.gif
 
CamHostage said:
DirectStorage isn't magic.
Click to expand...
It would still help, and if they optimize their game further it would help even more.
That article is a good one though, all I've been seeing about the game is the poor performance with many GPU's, NVIDIA specifically and high CPU usage.
 
Their engine is still from the PS360 era at its core, they don't seem capable of updating it to modern standards (beyond the superficial visual aspects).
 
CamHostage said:
DirectStorage isn't magic.

Bethesda didn't forget to flip the switch (and they also didn't forget to use the integral Velocity Architecture components in the Xbox version, where it also incurs loading.) This is how the Starfield is designed. The game is apparently written with unusually small block sizes for whatever reason (maybe intentional for how it needs to work with its scale and intricacies? maybe legacy from the core engine?) Tons of small blocks are bottlenecks to a hard drive, even a super fast SSD drive with an API for snagging files as fast as possible. DirectStorage can't make that kind of problem go away.

www.tomshardware.com

SSD Usage In Starfield Is Causing Stuttering Issues: Report

DirectStorage is not even required to fix it.
www.tomshardware.com www.tomshardware.com
Click to expand...
i remember skyrim 2011 with its inablity to utilize more than 4gb ram which caused stutters , that was fixed only after the release of skyrim SE 2016
these people at bethesda never learn
 
Ancient ass engine.
RoadHazard said:
Their engine is still from the PS360 era at its core, they don't seem capable of updating it to modern standards (beyond the superficial visual aspects).
Click to expand...
I think it's still based on Gamebryo, like COD using Quake3 arena engine, so a touch older than PS360 even!
 
Because this is Bethesda and their Creation engine is just old tech with some patch work to pretend it's modern and advanced.
 
LostInTime said:
Cause nobody but Xbox shills care about Starfield.
Click to expand...
Yes, and yet all of you can't stop fucking yapping about it for two weeks. Seriously, that game has broken so many brains it is kind of sad.

Edit: DirectStorage would have definitely help loading times, I guess.
 
Last edited:
I imagine DirectStorage with GPU based decompression would have made things more performant for a game which is already heavily taxing the CPU.
 
Starfield is Hogwarts Legacy for Playstation people

Also if you are loading milions of small files, which needs its own ancient decompression algo, it could have been on PS5 and the difference would be marginal. PCs pull ahead, because of more powerful CPU.
 
CamHostage said:
DirectStorage isn't magic.

Bethesda didn't forget to flip the switch (and they also didn't forget to use the integral Velocity Architecture components in the Xbox version, where it also incurs loading.) This is how the Starfield is designed. The game is apparently written with unusually small block sizes for whatever reason (maybe intentional for how it needs to work with its scale and intricacies? maybe legacy from the core engine?) Tons of small blocks are bottlenecks to a hard drive, even a super fast SSD drive with an API for snagging files as fast as possible. DirectStorage can't make that kind of problem go away.

www.tomshardware.com

SSD Usage In Starfield Is Causing Stuttering Issues: Report

DirectStorage is not even required to fix it.
www.tomshardware.com www.tomshardware.com
Click to expand...

That article is talking about a PC architecture performance perspective, but the implementation and use of DirectStorage on Xbox Series consoles is different from the PC version.

They don't implement DirecStorage and all the Velocity tech on console because they need to make deep changes to the engine to support and take full advantage of, and because replicating the same behavior on PC is not possible right now.
 
Direct storage might not be the answer here. If starfield works like other ES games there is more than loading going on during loading screens. There is also some simulation being calculated during loading Like when you sleep.
 
Not sure if this is shared already, but direct storage wouldn't solve it's loading issues.



The game's file and I/O system Ultimately bottlenecks every drive and doesn't seem to be very optimized. It's internal assets steaming system seems old.
 
The game loads so fast and manages to utilise cpus much better than 99% of the games in existence so it doesnt really even need it since their engine is so good. Would be nice though.
 
Last edited:
tvdaXD said:
Since this is basically a Microsoft title, I'm surprised they haven't pushed for some of their technology like DirectStorage. I'd be perfect for this game and all it's loading screens!
Click to expand...
Game was already in production before Microsoft bought them . Those features have to be implemented before programming started.
 
Because bottom line, look how long its been in development.

There is a real argument that it could have been cross gen.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Raphael Colantonio (Arkane Co-Founder) "Why is no-one talking about the elephant in the room? Cough cough (Gamepass)"
Social Opinion  4 5 6 7 8
392
1K
ChorizoPicozo replied
A Potential Switch 2 Problem No One Seems to be Talking About (yet)
25
839
Heimdall_Xtreme replied
Why is nobody talk about the portables war?
2 3
102
5K
GigaBowser replied
Why is no one talking about Indika?
31
3K
mdkirby replied
TronicsFix - The PS5 Pro upgrade no one is talking about
Analysis 
7
2K
Donald mac Ronald replied
Top Bottom