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

  • schmidtster@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Read the comment chain again, because you missed the persons original point….

    They talk about old and modern hardware, you can’t just ignore half their point.

    • verysoft@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I think you are imagining modern hardware to just be like a 4090. Any modern hardware here meaning current generation GPU/CPUs. They should be able to run at max settings yes. The performance match ups of low to mid range hardware of this generation overlaps with mid to high of the last generation (and so on), so just talking years here doesn’t really translate. People holding on to their 1080tis obviously shouldn’t be expecting max settings, but people with 3080s, 4070s, 6800XTs (even 2080ti/3070s), should absolutely be able to play on max settings. Especially games like Starfield that are not exactly cutting edge, there’s a lot older games that had a lot of work put into performance from the start and they look and run a lot better than this.

      Any PC? Sure, no they should not, but PCs older than you think absolutely should, especially if you are okay with 60fps.

      • Asafum@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I have an i9 9900k and a 4070ti and can play it butter smooth max settings in 4k 100% rendering. The CPU is definitely starting to show its age, but I haven’t had any complaints about starfields performance.

        That said I can’t fucking stand consoles. I get that companies would be stupid to not sell something to as many people as possible, but I’m so sick and tired of seeing good games handicapped because they need to run on a rotten potato Xbox from 10 years ago or whatever…

        • verysoft@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Like 40-45fps? I’ve seen a couple people say this now, but every outlet I have seen benchmark performance contradicts it. I don’t consider 40fps smooth at all, but I guess consoles even have to suffer with 30fps in some cases, so a lot of people are okay with it.

          Consoles dictate a lot of triple A games, that’s where the biggest profit is and why PC is an after thought like it was here.

          • Asafum@feddit.nl
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            I actually never pulled up an FPS meter as it has been so smooth I never felt the need to check. I’ll see when I get home later what it actually is in neon or somewhere “busy.”

              • Asafum@feddit.nl
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                I’ll never understand why developers add stuff that make the game look so much worse…

                Looking at you chromatic aberration, motion blur, film grain, vignette…

                The first thing I do with a new game is check graphics settings and nuke that extra garbage lol

                • verysoft@kbin.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Yup like sure add it but at least disable it all by default, but motion blur does make low fps look better, if you can put up with the blur that is (I can’t), it’s used heavily on consoles for that reason.