this post was submitted on 11 Sep 2023
119 points (91.0% liked)

Starfield

2860 readers
1 users here now

Welcome to the Starfield community on Lemmy.zip!

Helpful links:

Spoiler policy:

Post & comment spoiler syntax:

<spoiler here>

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 8ender@lemmy.world 59 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Why is it bizarre they clearly put all their effort into making it run on the Xbox and that’s AMD hardware.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] djsoren19@yiffit.net 48 points 1 year ago (5 children)

Don't worry though, Todd Howard himself said that Bethesda definitely did a lot of work on optimizing Starfield. This is all still the fault of the end users, who just need to "upgrade their hardware." Just ignore the decrepit Gamebryo engine that still has all the same old bugs and quirks that it's had for nearly two decades.

[–] Neato@kbin.social 11 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)
[–] Stovetop@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago (3 children)

I mean, to their credit, the game is relatively bug-free. Still a few oddities here and there and AI that probably needs a tweak or two, but otherwise it's been stable for me and I've not soft locked myself out of major quests...yet...

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] lemmylommy@lemmy.world 20 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Don’t worry, there will be plenty bugs left for AMD users as well.

[–] VelociCatTurd@lemmy.world 12 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] WarmSoda@lemm.ee 11 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Someone tried to argue that this game is as polished as Tears of the Kingdom lol

[–] 520@kbin.social 2 points 1 year ago (18 children)

Ahahahahahaha!

The worst that game suffers from are duplication glitches

load more comments (18 replies)
[–] Jakeroxs@sh.itjust.works 19 points 1 year ago (2 children)

In this thread, people who understand very little about technology and how it works

[–] fox2263@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I mean it’s an Xbox game made with AMD.

Bizarre indeed

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] muddybulldog@mylemmy.win 11 points 1 year ago (3 children)

AMD being a “partner” is business speak for “AMD paid us a bunch of money because having their brand on our product is a much larger advertising reach than they can accomplish on their own”.

That performance is better on AMD is in no way “bizarre”… it’s exactly what would be expected.

[–] Hyperreality@kbin.social 25 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

It's unexpected for nvidia users, who have grown used to games being optimised for them rather than AMD users.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Shepstr@feddit.uk 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Well, maybe. It's optimised for the Xbox which runs AMD hardware.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Neato@kbin.social 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

PS5 and Xbox Series both run on AMD hardware. Do you really think AMD has the cash to bribe Microsoft?

[–] muddybulldog@mylemmy.win 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Bribery?

Every time you start a game and see an Intel, AMD, Nvidia or other logo outside of the studio or publisher, that’s paid advertising, plain and simple.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Brunbrun6766@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago (7 children)

It is? Am I doing something wrong? Because I get a solid 60-70 fps at all times on a 3070ti

[–] 520@kbin.social 2 points 1 year ago (3 children)

What CPU are you using? I've read it can be CPU heavy.

[–] Ethanice@kbin.social 2 points 1 year ago

Not original dude but
I'm using an i7 11700k and a 1660 super and getting 60fps with occasional drops to 50.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[–] Kolanaki@yiffit.net 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (9 children)

I want to know how the hell I am lucky enough to not have any real performance or graphical issues...

I'm not even using a supported GPU (1660 Super) and it's still very playable with the lowest fps being 27 and the highest being about 70.

Outside is on the low end. Interiors are higher, with empty interiors (IE no NPCs) being the fastest. Just dropping a single NPC into a space I am getting 72 fps in drops the frame rate to 50. NPCs aren't handled by the GPU; they are CPU bound.

My CPU is a Ryzen 5 3600x; the exact AMD chip Bethesda lists as the recommended. In fact, other than my GPU, the rest of my system meets recommended requirements.

Edit: I kinda wonder if it's simply how things are tested in QA. For years, I see users claiming to have high end systems having tons of problems across various games, and I am starting to think if they aren't simply lying about their specs (which seems an odd thing to do if you want real support), is that they are simply too new and the focus was more on hardware more users use. Going by Steam hardware survey stats, most people have pretty old stuff while only a small fraction are on super high end systems.

[–] thanevim@kbin.social 3 points 1 year ago

Yeah, I second that. I run the game to a perfectly playable extent, low-to-medium settings, and I have a barely better GPU, 1660-Ti, with a 10th gen laptop i7

[–] circuitfarmer@lemmy.sdf.org 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I've had a similar experience (and similar performance) on my all-AMD rig. There's slowdown in cities but nothing that makes the game unplayable.

Still, it should be optimized.

[–] Kolanaki@yiffit.net 3 points 1 year ago

Still, it should be optimized.

I can't argue there. Considering how well it runs as it is on this card, it feels like their minimum requirements are way off, and they could have supported some older hardware if they optimized certain systems a little more. I don't want to make it sound like no effort was taken at all, because... Damn. I've seen every release from Morrowind to Starfield as it was at launch, and this is by far the most well built right out of the gate.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] Jaysyn@kbin.social 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Starfield doesn't even run on Arc GPUs.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Halosheep@lemm.ee 4 points 1 year ago (6 children)

If anyone wasn't aware, there is a mod to replace FSR2 with DLSS and it is INCREDIBLE for performance if your system supports it. I went from all minimum with 40-50fps to well over my 144 target on medium (indoors) and running okay (60 with some drops) in tough scenes outdoors.

Running on a 2070.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] Send_me_nude_girls@feddit.de 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

You can force it to use resizable bar and get more fps. It just needs to be enabled and it's such an easy thing for the Bethesda devs to do, yet people need Nvidia profile inspector to enable it. For no reason.

[–] Psythik@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

You mean to tell me that enabling ReBAR in the BIOS doesn't automatically enable it for every game?

[–] Nanabaz2@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

Not for Nvidia. Nvidia maintain a whitelist in the driver. But not a blacklist

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›