Comment on Todd Howard asked on-air why Bethesda didn't optimise Starfield for PC: 'We did [...] you may need to upgrade your PC'

avater@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

• FooBarrington@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  Crysis was built by a company specialising in building a high fidelity engine. It was, by all accounts, meant primarily as a tech demo. This is absolutely not the case with Starfield - first, the game doesn’t look nearly good enough for that compared to Crysis, and second it’s built on an engine that simply can’t do a lot of the advanced stuff.

  The game could be playable on max settings on many modern computers if it was optimised properly. It isn’t.

  source
• GeneralEmergency@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  complains about others wearing nostalgia goggles

  calls Cysis dope

  source

  • TwilightVulpine@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    After all this time I don’t think I ever heard anything about how Crysis plays or what’s the story and such. People only talk about how hard it was to run and how fancy these graphics were. Doesn’t make it sound all that great.

    source

    • abbotsbury@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      Story is meh but lots of people will say how the open ended nature of Crysis was fun and a pity that it was removed for a more linear CoD style in Crysis 2

      source
  • SrTobi@feddit.de ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Wtf Crysis 1 was awesome… At least the first part without the aliens… And not because of the graphics

    source
• regbin_@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  Except this time even with 1024x768 and lowest settings you can barely break 60 FPS due to the huge CPU overhead.

  And that’s with a Ryzen 7 5800X.

  source

  • avater@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    I have the same processor and no issues. 1440p 80-125 fprs, high Details, 100% and FSR2

    source

    • regbin_@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      In New Atlantis City outdoors? Mine barely stays above 60 FPS, sometimes dipping under.

      source

      • avater@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

        yep. 70 fps in the worst case

        source
  • vagrantprodigy@lemmy.whynotdrs.org ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    It’s system by system, I have the same cpu and do fairly well, admittedly with it boosting to 4.5ghz. My wife has the same cpu and it struggles on her machine. It feels like the game just wasn’t tested well.

    source
• hogart@feddit.nu ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  There will always be that game that pushes the boundaries between current gen and next gen. Sometimes even more. Crysis is the perfect example of the past. Starfiels seems to do a decent job right now even if it’s probably not even close to what Crysis did. When people spend a lot of money we feel entitlement, thats only natural. No one did anything wrong. So no need to point a finger anywhere.

  source

  • rambaroo@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Please explain in detail how Starfield is pushing the edge graphically in any way that’s comparable to Crysis.

    source

    • hogart@feddit.nu ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      You seem to have missed the part where I wrote that Starfiels is probably not even close to pushing the boundaries in the same way that Crysis did. So I can’t do much explaining in detail about it is.

      source
  • RogueBanana@lemmy.zip ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    But it didnt tho, it looks shit and hogs more resources compared to other games like cyberpunk which is probably a better example for next gen graphics

    source