Starfield [XBSX|S, PC, XGP]

There was a bit of chat about that, probably earlier in this thread. Don't know if we reached any conclusion other than devs can't do everything.

Cyberpunk use Jali as part of their character for lip sync throughout the game. I assume Bethesda are using some iterated from their prior games.


I meant the camera. The wooden facial animation is still okay.

But the camera is very jarring. While cp2077 conversation camera is really good.

The conversation camera in starfield felt like something that was made for "final" camera position. But missing the in between animation and in conversation animation
 
Having read a number of reviews now, I get the impression that this is gonna be much like Fallout 4 where 'gamers' are gonna act very disappointed over it, all while I ultimately end up quite loving it cuz I dont seem to play and love these games for the same reasons they do.
I've put a few hours into the game on PC and I'm really enjoying it. Quite a few people were expecting more of the space and stars in Starfield and while what is there seems quite good (I've only had a few space battles), it's no Elite Dangerous, nor No Man's Sky which it has unfortunately been compared against.

However, the criticisms of the inventory being awful, lack of maps causing frustration in cities and loading-screen-fest space navigation are all valid complaints and get old very quickly. And there isn't much you can do about some of these but hopefully modders can remedy some of this.

Firstly, there is literally no excuse for the inventory. This is a Bethesda game so you're going to be looting a lot of stuff, which means you'lll be managing your, your ships, your companions and various storage inventories. A lot. But unlike every previous Bethesda game you cannot see the contents of your inventory and the target companion/storage inventory at the same time. Let me be clear, this is a miserable experience.

Whilst earlier games didn't have detailed maps showing amenities, the cities/towns were much smaller and more open. New Atlantis is big and sprawling and whilst there are as many visual cues as to where amenities are, Starfield's cities and bigger and less open. I gather Neon is a bit of a maze and it's particularly bad there. Several reviews say they once you find a particular type of trade, and memories where it is in a city, it's easier to just fast travel between cities and go to your known trade rather than explore to find a trader in the city you are in which sounds insane, but it's mentioned in a bunch of reviews. I expect city maps will be among the early mods.

The loading-screen infested space navigation can be marginally sidestepped as you don't need the starmap for setting destinations and jumping to all places but the game only briefly tutorialises this once and never mentions it again. If you miss you, you're in starmap click-load-screen hell and even when you can avoid some loading screens, you can't avoid them all.

Performance for me is a solid native 4K/60 (no DRS) but I'm running Starfield on a 13700k/RTX4090 with 32Gb DDR5 and 7Gb/s NVMe drive - which keeps loading times as short as possible. Windows I/O file cache makes good use of surplus RAM. Performance on RTX30x0 cards seems to be bad for quite a lot of people, but I've yet to try it on my 12700k/RTX3080(12Gb) with 32GB DDR5.

These issues aside - and these are persistent issues that will irritate you all the time - I am thoroughly enjoying what I've playing and I'll be putting a lot more time into the game today. It feels overwhelmingly massive and I kind of love that, because I think that's why they are going for. Tutorials seem pretty thin for core stuff but if you're the type of person who likes to work things out for themselves (like research), you will. Just have a play at the research terminal in your ship.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Do I must kill everything to scan them? How to scan without killing?

It looks like you can aim the scanner at some weird angle and the "Scan" button becomes available then you press E to scan it.
However, many animals seem to be quite aggressive when you are too close so... :)
 
Also to note, there is a HELP menu available in the main game menu and filled with a solid enough of information on the various game gameplay systems!
 
my 980ti and old cpu can run the game fine despite being below min sys reqs, the game defaulted everything to low and 50% scaling and i bumped it to 100% and it seems to run fine? i should play with the settings some more, i wish there was a benchmark (maybe there is, but i havent looked very hard for it)
 
Did the game get downgraded? Some portions look outstanding like the most beautiful open world game released, whereas some other areas look mediocre and underwhelming. The trailers and gameplay videos released before had a more consistent appearance.
 
Did the game get downgraded? Some portions look outstanding like the most beautiful open world game released, whereas some other areas look mediocre and underwhelming. The trailers and gameplay videos released before had a more consistent appearance.
I don’t think it got downgraded the trailers just selected best condition to show game. And I agree some portions looks amazing and others not so much. I think it’s engine limitation.
 
I don’t think it got downgraded the trailers just selected best condition to show game. And I agree some portions looks amazing and others not so much. I think it’s engine limitation.
I'm playing on ultra (minus motion blur on medium and film grain on 25%) and it looks, plays and feels stellar on an LG C9 OLED TV. The detail everywhere is great, as are shadows and lighting. They may have tweaked the individual settings on Xbox over time. I reckon they really wanted to nail that 30fps which according got DF, they've done apart from a few isolated areas in cities.
 
Reached the first city. My experience

- gunplay is very dry
- music is not as strong as skyrim
- too many immersion breaking design. Like why the planet landing is menu based instead of something like Freelancer
- the space ship feels very awkward to control. Maybe because they moves like a quad copter with auto hold, instead of a space ship?

The worse thing is the fov. It's VERY CLAUSTROPHOBIC.

The good things are basically yes, this is a Bethesda game with Bethesda freedom. Including doing silly stuff like moving objects, collecting potted plants...
 
my 980ti and old cpu can run the game fine despite being below min sys reqs, the game defaulted everything to low and 50% scaling and i bumped it to 100% and it seems to run fine? i should play with the settings some more, i wish there was a benchmark (maybe there is, but i havent looked very hard for it)
Define 'runs fine'. lol

I'm watching a video right now showing a 2060(so roughly 1080 equivalent, more powerful than a 980Ti) only doing like 36fps at 1080p/High and 62% resolution scale. Even at 1080p/Low with 50% scale, it couldn't hit 60fps. To be clear, this was a heavier area of the game, but still.

So I'm guessing you're basically looking to get 30fps here to say it's fine? Which is cool, just want to be clear cuz not everybody will be ok with that. Thanks for taking one of the team here trying the game out on older hardware, though! Got a 1070 myself so about the same GPU as you, but I have zero faith in my 3570k to handle this game in any way even if the GPU can hit bare minimums. I had already expected this would be a game I'd wait til I could do it justice with a full upgrade/new build.
 
Define 'runs fine'. lol

I'm watching a video right now showing a 2060(so roughly 1080 equivalent, more powerful than a 980Ti) only doing like 36fps at 1080p/High and 62% resolution scale. Even at 1080p/Low with 50% scale, it couldn't hit 60fps. To be clear, this was a heavier area of the game, but still.

So I'm guessing you're basically looking to get 30fps here to say it's fine? Which is cool, just want to be clear cuz not everybody will be ok with that. Thanks for taking one of the team here trying the game out on older hardware, though! Got a 1070 myself so about the same GPU as you, but I have zero faith in my 3570k to handle this game in any way even if the GPU can hit bare minimums. I had already expected this would be a game I'd wait til I could do it justice with a full upgrade/new build.
it starts, i can move about, i see pictures animating smoothly on my gsync monitor, i dont know what fps i get but it seems fine? at 1440p at low 100% scaling
 
it starts, i can move about, i see pictures animating smoothly on my gsync monitor, i dont know what fps i get but it seems fine? at 1440p at low 100% scaling
Yep, if it runs well enough for you to enjoy the game then that's great, you get to put off upgrade just a little bit longer. Probably until some high end UE5 games come out :)
 
it starts, i can move about, i see pictures animating smoothly on my gsync monitor, i dont know what fps i get but it seems fine? at 1440p at low 100% scaling
Hey, if it's good enough for you, that's all that matters!

Also seeing lots of reports that the game just doesn't like Nvidia GPU's too much, or at the very least, AMD GPU's are doing a fair bit better. Maybe not surprising with all the extra optimization work they probably did to get the XSS version running as it does.
 
Yep, if it runs well enough for you to enjoy the game then that's great, you get to put off upgrade just a little bit longer. Probably until some high end UE5 games come out :)
Hey, if it's good enough for you, that's all that matters!

Also seeing lots of reports that the game just doesn't like Nvidia GPU's too much, or at the very least, AMD GPU's are doing a fair bit better. Maybe not surprising with all the extra optimization work they probably did to get the XSS version running as it does.
yeah i will need to upgrade soon, maybe when the next generation of gpus come? new cpus? lets see

edit: to be honest, im just happy it actually runs. since im below min sys reqs wrt cpu and gpu, it didnt have to.
 
Last edited:
to be honest, im just happy it actually runs. since im below min sys reqs wrt cpu and gpu, it didnt have to.
Seemingly VRAM means very little to Starfield, so this probably even runs on a regular 980.

I wonder if Starfield is using SFS on Xbox, and on PC it is using significant CPU resources to stream in textures. CPU activity is constant across all threads with little deviation on the viewport, and VRAM usage at Ultra is insanely low, around 4Gb on my 3090. As a comparison, Diablo 4 "uses" around 20Gb VRAM for me. Possibly some kind of virtual texturing?
 
Seemingly VRAM means very little to Starfield, so this probably even runs on a regular 980.

I wonder if Starfield is using SFS on Xbox, and on PC it is using significant CPU resources to stream in textures. CPU activity is constant across all threads with little deviation on the viewport, and VRAM usage at Ultra is insanely low, around 4Gb on my 3090. As a comparison, Diablo 4 "uses" around 20Gb VRAM for me. Possibly some kind of virtual texturing?
It wouldn’t surprise me if it were. VRAM usage being low is interesting, and worth discussing how they got it so low; 4GB is super low. We’ve seen other VT games that are significantly higher in VRAM
 
Back
Top