this post was submitted on 07 Sep 2023
434 points (93.9% liked)

PC Master Race

15058 readers
3 users here now

A community for PC Master Race.

Rules:

  1. No bigotry: Including racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, or xenophobia. Code of Conduct.
  2. Be respectful. Everyone should feel welcome here.
  3. No NSFW content.
  4. No Ads / Spamming.
  5. Be thoughtful and helpful: even with ‘stupid’ questions. The world won’t be made better or worse by snarky comments schooling naive newcomers on Lemmy.

Notes:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

lol. has anyone found ways to optimize starfield for their pc, like reducing stuttering, FPS drops, etc?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] red@sopuli.xyz 60 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (4 children)

They didn't optimize it for consoles either. Series X has equivalent of 3060 RTX graphical grunt, yet it's capped to 30fps and looks worse than most other AAA games that have variable framerates up to 120fps. Todd says they went for fidelity. Has he played any recent titles? The game looks like crap compared to many games from past few years, and requires more power.

The real reason behind everything is the shit they call Creation Engine. An outdated hot mess of an engine that's technically behind pretty much everything the competition is using. It's beyond me why they've not scrapped it - it should have been done after FO4 already.

[–] stigmata@lemmy.world 19 points 1 year ago

Weird how everyone jokes how shitty Bethesda developers are but everyone's surprised how bad Starfield runs.

[–] Huschke@programming.dev 11 points 1 year ago

And don't forget the constant loading screens. A game that has so many of them shouldn't look this bad and run this poorly.

[–] Cethin@lemmy.zip -3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Look, I agree with everything from the first paragraph, and the CE does seem to have a lot of technical debt that's particularly shown in Starfield, which is trying to do something different than the other games. The engine being "old" is bad though (I know you didn't make it, but it's often said), and it being "technically behind" other engines is really true in all ways.

The Creation Engine had been adapted by Bethesda to be very good at making Bethesda games. They know the tools and the quirks, and they can modify it to make it do what they want. It has been continuously added onto, just as Unreal Engine has been continuously added onto since 1995. The number after the engine name doesn't mean anything besides where they decided to mark a major version change, which may or may not include refactoring and things like that. I have a guess that CE2 (Starfield's engine) is only called CE2 because people on the internet keep saying the engine is old, but tell them to use UE (which is approximately the same age as Gamebryo) but adds numbers to the end.

[–] MonkderZweite@feddit.ch 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

which is trying to do something different than the other games.

The other games from Bethesda, right?

[–] Cethin@lemmy.zip 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yeah, I meant Bethesda games, but it's different from what most games are trying to do. The exception being Elite Dangerous and Star Citizen (which the Kickstarter was more than 10 years ago at this point...).

[–] MonkderZweite@feddit.ch 2 points 1 year ago