***The Official Starfield Thread*** (As endorsed by TNA)

mid_gen said:
If only life were that simple, making games would be easy.
Click to expand...
I suppose it is very difficult when a dev has such little time to make and release such a game, I mean they only had 10+ years after all so it can be excused.

It is genuinely laughable that you are pulling that card in defence of such actions.

Calin Banc said:
On consoles, apparently, is doing 22-23second loading times with only around 8s on PC.

Streaming even more would increase this, as Bethesda doesn't know to stream
:)
)

Click to expand...
We should be thankful then haha :D
 
Last edited:
  • Haha
Reactions: TNA
mid_gen said:
Plenty of jobs around bud if you want to show us all how easy it is :)
Click to expand...
Don't need to as other developers have done it countless times the last few years so the proof is actually out there in games you too can play right now!!


Don't delay...
 
Last edited:
  • Haha
Reactions: TNA
CaptainRAVE said:
Annoying though, especially when it seems to move to another slot.

Companions as bugged as ever, they rarely follow when fast travelling.
Click to expand...

Doesn't move to another slot on pc.

I only stared so my robot buddy seems to be doing fine. I am sure I will find out what you mean soon however.
 
What I don't understand about how CPU intensive this is, is what does it do that is seemingly many times more taxing (CPU wise) than games which are 17 years old like Oblivion?

Ok, it has more NPC's in view at a given time, but I don't see how with the processing power we have now compared to 2006 that isn't easily done.

It's not like the game has some groundbreaking new level of ai interaction or routine etc. We don't have fully destructible and interactive environments etc.

It feels like CPU bottlenecks in a lot of games are entirely unwarranted.
 
Last edited:
ebilcake said:
I've got a refund on this. Runs like a turd, looks like something released from 2018. No HDR, NO DLSS.

Most the graphics settings don't make any difference, GPU maxed but the power draw is very low. Even Cyberpunk 2077 release was better than this.
Click to expand...
I think you should have got a refund from your optician appointment you had
 
mrk said:
Don't need to as other developers have done it countless times the last few years so the proof is actually out there in games you too can play right now!!
Click to expand...
If you had a bit of actual experience working on this kind of tech, you'd realise how amusing 'just do this' 'just do that' is.

For every thing you 'just do', another thing has to be 'just not done'.... and when the thing you want to do is years of work, the things you don't do as a result are equally large.

As in sat here playing Starfield I'm marvelling at all the stuff they HAVE done. Occasional loading screens are pretty minor compared to depth of experience on offer here that aren't on offer from anywhere else.
 
Jono8 said:
What I don't understand about how CPU intensive this is, is what does it do that is seemingly many times more taxing (CPU wise) than games which are 17 years old like Oblivion?

Ok, it has more NPC's in view at a given time, but I don't see how with the processing power we have now compared to 2006 that isn't easily done.

It's not like the game has some groundbreaking new level of ai interaction or routine etc. We don't have fully destructible and interactive environments etc.

It feels like CPU bottlenecks in a lot of games are entirely unwarranted.
Click to expand...

I suppose it depends on what CPU you have.

My 12700K @ 5.1/4.0 is just ticking over, no bottleneck what so ever, even in New Atlantis.

I'm running everything maxed out, bar motion blur, with DLSS, @ 3440X1440.

I'm entirely GPU bound.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom