Support NeoGAF

[Mr Reasonable]

If the game is a creative choice of 30fps then it should be 30 on pc no?

Lol.

The choice isn't the frame rate, it's the scale of the game that necessitates the frame rate. As has been said many, many, many times.

 

[DenchDeckard]

Quick question, do we think Alan wake 2, Star wars outlaws, avatar will be 60fps on console?

I have my doubts.

I feel the real current gen games are basically going to be 30fps with some half naked 60fps modes maybe?

 

[Ozriel]

Pretty sure there will be a mod on consoles that unlocks the frame rate. Much like they did on fallout And Skyrim. I’d be surprised if there wasn’t at some point. Being all the same engine….

Skyrim and Fallout 4 can be modded to run at 60fps on Xbox Series X

Word emerged last week that with a simple mod, owners of the Xbox Series X console were able to revisit The Elder Scrol…

www.eurogamer.net

Wouldn’t put much hope in that. On the same Xbox console (Xbox One) the games launched at, the mod took the game from a locked 30fps to 33-43fps

The news of a working Skyrim 60fps mod first emerged on Reddit, courtesy of user annathetravelbanana, and looking into it, the story behind the mod doing what it does on Series X is intriguing. The original mod - known as Uncap FPS by Smudgey5000 - seems to be very old, and was actually designed for the original Xbox One. The way it works is to enable a higher frame-rate by disabling v-sync and removing the hard-set 30fps cap. On last-gen hardware, its effects and its overall usefulness are limited. On the intro cart ride, Xbox One X's locked 30fps becomes 33-43fps with a lot of judder and tearing. I imagine it's used in combination with other mods designed to improve frame-rate to push overall output higher. Regardless, on its own, it's not particularly impressive.

That suggests we’d only see major gains with a pro console. Though VRR could help

 

[feynoob]

If the game is a creative choice of 30fps then it should be 30 on pc no?

Lol.

PC isnt the same as consoles. We can modify our FPs unlike consoles.

 

[Bernardougf]

Yes, absolutely.

Are people really arguing that it should NOT have a 60 FPS mode? lol.

we dont want to compromise the artistic vision*


*artistic vision not included on the series S and low/mid settings on pc

 

[feynoob]

Cook it very well todd. I want to life my pirate flag.

 

[adamsapple]

If the game is a creative choice of 30fps then it should be 30 on pc no?

Lol.

We really are gonna keep getting terrible takes like this about Starfield for a while, aren't we

 

[Low Moral Fibre]

I'm not simping for Bethesda here as there is zero percent chance this gets installed on any console I own until maybe XSXXX comes out in 2030 but I think we just have to be realistic about what these machines can do. There will be linear stuff like TLOU2 with baked lighting and no dynamic time of day that will look insane all the way up to the end of this gen but for anything with a bit more scope I think we'll get more poor performance, poor IQ or both.

In terms of resolution I think sub 1080p for 60fps is just to be expected going forward for open world stuff pushing any kind of technical boundary and for me FSR is useless from such a low resolution - maybe UE5 super resolution is better but I've not tried it out.

Maybe Bethesda will give a very low res 60fps version in the future (unless Starfield is also CPU bound). The engine has always made possible what no other games do but it is also a complete dog so it may just be that too.

Here are the last two games I played on PS5 so maybe anomalies (and one is a demo but I have a bridge to sell you if you think the last second day one patch will improve FF16 IQ and performance to a point where it is comparable to the cross gen stuff we've had).

Here's Jedi Survivor which as we know can drop to 648p and into the 30's in terms of FPS in performance mode. Here is a comparison between the 'graphics mode' which looks like shit and the 'performance mode' which looks like shit through eyes with cataracts. Literally nothing is happening on screen so it's a best case scenario for performance mode - looks :chefskiss: on a 65" OLED let me tell you.

And here's what it looks like with that super high quality FSR and motion blur. Simply sumptuous stuff here lads.

If people are happy with this then fine but I'm definitely not.

I can't pixel count this FF16 shot as it is so blurry but it looks like Xbox One resolution and FSR can't magic detail out of thin air. Even then outside of the swamp none of the combat sections in the demo are close to locked 60fps. Again this has drops to the 30s but isn't as bad as Jedi Survivor at least although the demo locations are absolutely tiny so I'm curious how the bigger and better looking locations perform as Jedi Survivor was acceptable on the first level then shits the bed on Koboh.

Maybe these games are just badly programmed as Ratchet and Clank still looks crazy and runs 60fps plus at a good resolution with some minor RT reflections but the best looking levels are very linear:

While the open world levels can look pretty barren so they have obviously had to tone things down to get things to run acceptably.

I think now that the cross gen period is over we are just seeing the limitations of 2019 hardware.

 

[feynoob]

I'm not simping for Bethesda here as there is zero percent chance this gets installed on any console I own until maybe XSXXX comes out in 2030 but I think we just have to be realistic about what these machines can do. There will be linear stuff like TLOU2 with baked lighting and no dynamic time of day that will look insane all the way up to the end of this gen but for anything with a bit more scope I think we'll get more poor performance, poor IQ or both.

In terms of resolution I think sub 1080p for 60fps is just to be expected going forward for open world stuff pushing any kind of technical boundary and for me FSR is useless from such a low resolution - maybe UE5 super resolution is better but I've not tried it out.

Maybe Bethesda will give a very low res 60fps version in the future (unless Starfield is also CPU bound). The engine has always made possible what no other games do but it is also a complete dog so it may just be that too.

Here are the last two games I played on PS5 so maybe anomalies (and one is a demo but I have a bridge to sell you if you think the last second day one patch will improve FF16 IQ and performance to a point where it is comparable to the cross gen stuff we've had).

Here's Jedi Survivor which as we know can drop to 648p and into the 30's in terms of FPS in performance mode. Here is a comparison between the 'graphics mode' which looks like shit and the 'performance mode' which looks like shit through eyes with cataracts. Literally nothing is happening on screen so it's a best case scenario for performance mode - looks :chefskiss: on a 65" OLED let me tell you.

And here's what it looks like with that super high quality FSR and motion blur. Simply sumptuous stuff here lads.

If people are happy with this then fine but I'm definitely not.

I can't pixel count this FF16 shot as it is so blurry but it looks like Xbox One resolution and FSR can't magic detail out of thin air. Even then outside of the swamp none of the combat sections in the demo are close to locked 60fps. Again this has drops to the 30s but isn't as bad as Jedi Survivor at least although the demo locations are absolutely tiny so I'm curious how the bigger and better looking locations perform as Jedi Survivor was acceptable on the first level then shits the bed on Koboh.

Maybe these games are just badly programmed as Ratchet and Clank still looks crazy and runs 60fps plus at a good resolution with some minor RT reflections but the best looking levels are very linear:

While the open world levels can look pretty barren so they have obviously had to tone things down to get things to run acceptably.

I think now that the cross gen period is over we are just seeing the limitations of 2019 hardware.

Most of time, I am busy trying to fight enemies or trying to do dumb shit. I barely pay attention to quality picture that much even when it glitches or stutters. Maybe that is why I dont care about it

 

[adamsapple]

I can't pixel count this FF16 shot as it is so blurry but it looks like Xbox One resolution and FSR can't magic detail out of thin air. Even then outside of the swamp none of the combat sections in the demo are close to locked 60fps. Again this has drops to the 30s but isn't as bad as Jedi Survivor at least although the demo locations are absolutely tiny so I'm curious how the bigger and better looking locations perform as Jedi Survivor was acceptable on the first level then shits the bed on Koboh.

Looking at this, it looks like the game is literally dropping to near 50% resolution in battles.

They have the luxury to do that because the game enters a bespoke combat mode where they have a through line of when they can trigger such a heavy drop in resolution.

A first person shooter like Starfield, that would be extremely jarring if they're dropping resolution so much every time you run across an enemy in the world.

 

[Edder1]

A headline like this wouldn’t have happened back then.

I really don't think it matters what a lesser known site like Prima Games have to say about this. One or two articles ain't really gonna do anything. At the end of the day 90%+ of the people who buy these games don't take part in these discussions and don't read these articles. This is always about a small group of very loud fans on internet making a lot of noise that means squat all at the end of the day.

Most people who are taking part in this discussions are the ones that don't plan to play Starfield anyway. Just wait till it's their beloved franchise that has 30fps cap and they'll sing a very different tune. We've seen it play out too many times now.

 

[Dunnas]

If the game is a creative choice of 30fps then it should be 30 on pc no?

Lol.

Sure, if you think the creative choice was choosing 30 fps, instead of it being the creative choices that resulted in it only being limited to 30 fps on the consoles. But you'd have to be pretty stupid or completely disingenuous to actually think that.

 

[nemiroff]

Starfield seems to trigger everyone.
Todd, thank you for this glorious game. You keep dominating the headline everyweek.

- YouTube

Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.

youtube.com

 

[Pharaoh 117]

Oh Jesus, another genius who thinks the solution is just lowering the resolution. If you don't have even the most basic notion of how a thing works you should refrain from giving your opinion.

 

[Bumblebeetuna]

The funny thing about all this fake outrage is that it's coming from "concerned" gamers who critique the game being 30FPS, but then in the same breath say they'll play the game on a PC at 60FPS, because they all obviously got 13900K's and 4090's as is the PC gaming standard right now.

What I don't see is swaths of real Xbox Series gamers lossing their sh*t like the narrative is being pushed around Startfield right now. Are people disappointed and the odd upset person yeah, but huge majority has come to terms with it being 30 FPS, because of the scope of this game and how its multiple games stacked into one making it most likely the game of the generation and potentially one of the greatest video game ever made if it sticks its landing.

 

[Roxkis_ii]

Here we go with people making excuses for a game to not have options. I wonder if all these same people would feel the same if the game came with no options on PC.

 

[Morrie’s wig shop]

Yes, but the internet is full of fucking idiots who think that they can just turn down some of the graphics and BAM! 60fps.

Let’s make this super fucking clear, again.

This is a CPU bound game from everything seen, turning down the graphics will not really help the game get to 60fps!

Digital Foundry also spoke about this at length, go watch that video if you cannot get that concept around your head.

Also, Todd shouldn’t have said anything about the game being able to get to 60. This has gone against them at this point when they know full well that the game can’t achieve that framerate.

But there are 3 Gaffer’s in this very thread, that took their time away from developing the game to inform us it’s not CPU bound….

 

[Minsc]

Here we go with people making excuses for a game to not have options. I wonder if all these same people would feel the same if the game came with no options on PC.

What about the ol' I game on consoles BECAUSE I don't want any options argument?

 

[Roxkis_ii]

What about the ol' I game on consoles BECAUSE I don't want any options argument?

Can you quote a post that says that? I've never heard anyone ever say that my life.

 

[Ar¢tos]

Should devs limit "creative choices" when they cripple a game instead of making it more enjoyable?
If the game ran at native 4k and fixed 30fps it would be one thing, but running at sub 4k with framerates hitting 19fps is not acceptable.

Save that specific "creative choice" for the next gen.

 

[Minsc]

Can you quote a post that says that? I've never heard anyone ever say that my life.

Oh it's an old argument for not having (hundreds) graphic options including editing .ini files to further change graphics like there are on PCs in consoles. Something I've read many times, but long back.

 

[Belthazar]

Not really a problem until the game releases. They’ve promised 30fps, it better be locked at release.

It's a Bethesda RPG... It won't be anywhere close to locked.

 

[8BiTw0LF]

 

[adamsapple]

Can you quote a post that says that? I've never heard anyone ever say that my life.

https://www.neogaf.com/threads/im-so-tempted-to-switch-permanently-to-consoles.1651885/

 

[SF Kosmo]

Do people really think Bethesda didn't think of that?

The game doesn't run at 60. They have been working on it for 8 years and it doesn't run at 60. They're not doing it to fuck with you.

 

[FUBARx89]

Skyrim isn't even 4k locked 60fps on PS5 or Series X.

PS5 is full 4K with drops to 50fps

Series X is dynamic 4k with drops to 50fps.

So I'm not really surprised that Starfield isn't 60fps, it looks alot better graphically than Skyrim and seems to have more systems tacked onto the engine BGS use.

 

[Roxkis_ii]

https://www.neogaf.com/threads/im-so-tempted-to-switch-permanently-to-consoles.1651885/

I see a thread on a guy who can't afford to upgrade their pc, could you quote a post of someone saying they don't want options?

 

[JimboJones]

Can you quote a post that says that? I've never heard anyone ever say that my life.

exactly!
What's up with people recently demanding tons of options form these consoles.
let consoles be consoles or get a pc

 

[adamsapple]

I see a thread on a guy who can't afford to upgrade their pc, could you quote a post of someone saying they don't want options?

Honestly, you can search for rofif 's posts like above, he's been extremely vocal on gaf about devs pushing with single profiles.

 

[Gudji]

Creative consistent vision.

 

[Roxkis_ii]

Oh it's an old argument for not having (hundreds) graphic options including editing .ini files to further change graphics like there are on PCs in consoles. Something I've read many times, but long back.

I'll take your word for it, but all I'm advocating for is a proformance option that has been standard so far in games releasing for current gen consoles. I think Xbox console gamers deserve at least that.

 

[Minsc]

Do people really think Bethesda didn't think of that?

The game doesn't run at 60. They have been working on it for 8 years and it doesn't run at 60. They're not doing it to fuck with you.

They (the developers) say it runs at 60fps (and above) on a XSX right in the OP.

 

[adamsapple]

They (the developers) say it runs at 60fps (and above) on a XSX right in the OP.

A locked 30 > fluctuating 30 ~ 60 all the time.

 

[Sanepar]

Why is so hard for console players to understand that both machines are weak in 2023? These consoles are equivalent to a 7600 at best($269 gpu)

 

[Ozriel]

It's a Bethesda RPG... It won't be anywhere close to locked.

Not sure we can extrapolate that way. Updated engine, more powerful CPUs.

We'll see.

 

[Gudji]

In an interview during Summer Game Fest with IGN, Todd Howard confirmed that Starfield had the capability to reach 60 FPS on the Xbox Series X. Todd Howard said, “Fortunately in this one, we’ve got it running great. It’s often running way above that. Sometimes it’s 60. But on the consoles, we do lock it because we prefer the consistency, where you’re not even thinking about it.”

Oh shit a STARFIELD DEV.

 

[feynoob]

They (the developers) say it runs at 60fps (and above) on a XSX right in the OP.

Locked means stable framerate.
It can do 60 fps, but doesn't mean it's locked on 60 fps. People here will go mad if that happens, as fluctuated frame rate is not good visually.

 

[LiquidMetal14]

There's hardly any defense to not shoot for 60fps in a cut down mode on console.

You can twist it and be happy and I hope it's solid 30 but it doesn't change that it's not as acceptable as the PR machine wants you to think.

Enjoy the game but that will be a talking point no matter what.

 

[Gudji]

Locked means stable framerate.
It can do 60 fps, but doesn't mean it's locked on 60 fps. People here will go mad if that happens, as fluctuated frame rate is not good visually.

So they can do a performance mode after all. No more cpu bound or too much simulation or even weak hardware bullshit anymore? Who would have thought.

 

[Roxkis_ii]

A locked 30 > fluctuating 30 ~ 60 all the time.

I could have sworn there was a thread asking people what mode they played the FF16 demo in and a majority selected performance mode in the thread poll. That games isn't a locked 60.

 

[MadchesterManc]

I don't get why they don't just have an unlocked framerate option too seen as Xbox has Freesync support. Seems like a lot of performance is being left on the table from what the man himself has been saying in interviews, I'm sure 40-60 on a VRR display is preferable to those that have one than a locked 30

 

[Ozriel]

Here we go with people making excuses for a game to not have options. I wonder if all these same people would feel the same if the game came with no options on PC.

What is this mythical 'PC' that is only one fixed spec and has a relatively mid GPU and CPU?

People understand why it's 30fps and - while not ideal - will happily play it at 30fps on console. You are completely free to skip the game, or buy it on PC where your specs determine your framerate.

Hell, you've publicly claimed you have no interest in Bethesda RPGs and Starfield, so not sure why you're crusading on behalf of people who aren't complaining.

 

[amigastar]

Will Starfield be released on old gen also, or just new gen?

 

[FoxMcChief]

These people are going to look so dumb soon.

Soon? Look pretty dumb now.

 

[Gudji]

Will Starfield be released on old gen also, or just new gen?

Just the current generation.

 

[Ozriel]

You can twist it and be happy and I hope it's solid 30 but it doesn't change that it's not as acceptable as the PR machine wants you to think.

Enjoy the game but that will be a talking point no matter what.

It's barely a talking point at this stage. It won't influence reviews on consoles, and fps is unlocked for the PC release. Nobody gave a damn about the 30fps framerate for TOTK, for example.

Everything lies with the quality of the final version. If they deliver on its potential and land a solid 90+ game, nobody's going to care about 30fps on console except the usual angry fanboys.

 

[Gudji]

It's barely a talking point at this stage. It won't influence reviews on consoles, and fps is unlocked for the PC release. Nobody gave a damn about the 30fps framerate for TOTK, for example.

Everything lies with the quality of the final version. If they deliver on its potential and land a solid 90+ game, nobody's going to care about 30fps on console except the usual angry fanboys.

They would if the switch had the hardware to back up a 60 FPS mode.

 

[LiquidMetal14]

It's barely a talking point at this stage. It won't influence reviews on consoles, and fps is unlocked for the PC release. Nobody gave a damn about the 30fps framerate for TOTK, for example.

Everything lies with the quality of the final version. If they deliver on its potential and land a solid 90+ game, nobody's going to care about 30fps on console except the usual angry fanboys.

I agree in the end. I just want that patented stability for console and PC to fully enjoy this because the last thing we need is frame pacing, horrible 1% lows, and visual inconsistency.

Definitely looks like their best visual presentation to date but they still have an uphill for me other than just hype. It's looking better after the showing but that doesn't guarantee with me based on their evolution. I hope it's good.

 

[Ozriel]

Well Nintendo isn’t really boasting that they have “the most powerful console” that’ll “power your dreams” either..

You reap what you sow.

The people have the same eyes. if 30fps wasn't a 'stuttery mess' and 'unplayable' in Zelda TOTK, then it certainly can't be described as unplayable in Starfield.

'The most powerful console' still had to make do with an affordable Zen 2 CPU and RDNA 2 GPU combo from 2020. Do we now demand for full path-tracing in all games because the current consoles were marketed as a powerfiul leap in processing power?

They would if the switch had the hardware to back up a 60 FPS mode.

Digital Foundry showed off Star Citizen chugging at 17fps in some sections with a Zen 2 CPU roughly equivalent to that in the PS5 and Series X.
Bottlenecks can exist if the game is CPU bound.

I wonder when you guys will realize that the 'switch hardware is old' line isn't the point. Aside from the fact that there are existing 60fps titles on the Switch, including demanding stuff like Bayonetta 3, something you've described as 'uncomfortable' and 'unplayable' doesn't suddenly become magical because of the age of the hardware.

 

[RyanEvans21]

It's barely a talking point at this stage. It won't influence reviews on consoles, and fps is unlocked for the PC release. Nobody gave a damn about the 30fps framerate for TOTK, for example.

Everything lies with the quality of the final version. If they deliver on its potential and land a solid 90+ game, nobody's going to care about 30fps on console except the usual angry fanboys.

Switch is almost 6 yrs though. plus switch is very weak spec compare to PS4 or Xbox One.