@@G360LIVE Well yeah because it also taking clips from the showcase and discuss it with prediction, nobody know it's true or not until it release though
I really like this format where you guys break stuff down together without being super heavily scripted. And I'm also glad you release it in video and podcast form. It does take away from the experience some not being able to see the examples, but it's good enough that I wanted to go back after getting home from work and watch parts again.
@@rizzo-films same... Its also a reason why i think it would be particularly hard to remaster without losing the vibe possibly, some games have an art style that can be retained easier but oblivion could so easily lose that if not handled properly.
Skyrim was beautiful too. But in a way so was Fallout 3. I loved the atmosphere it created with the green filter. It really brought you into the struggle.
@@albanier8426This is a stupid statement. It’s not as if they have first hand knowledge about what the CPU performance overhead is on Series X. There is a good chance that the game could run at 40fps, even if that involved more testing and some extra time.
The storing of object locations and such actually wrecked Morrowind on Xbox as after a while your save size would get so large that the Xbox could not load it into RAM and you would get an error. To remedy this two ways were to always close each door and always leave items stored in your inventory or NPCs inventory and not in the game world. edit: Bethsda added a 'loot overflow bag' to the game I remember now, which would activate if you put too many objects on the ground in one area, but I dont think it solved the problem fully.
It could happen to Oblivion too if you duplicated too many different items into the open world into the ground eventually with a DLC they changed it so eventually the game world might cull objects with **!** Assets lol
yea.. this game is doing nothing at all to justify 30 fps. it does look good, it gameplay is Fallout in space, and why are they pretending that this engine does not have a known cpu threading issue that causes problems? this studio always gets a pass for releasing unpolish games in ways that no one else gets a pass for.
that shouldn't happen, and it's actually ironic, that for a game like Minecraft, they have no issues saving millions of world blocks and player items with no issues..IN FUCKING JAVA.
@@BrotherO4 and i think it justifies the 30 fps, these kinds of physcics simulation, world rendering etc is taxing as fuck, and the cpu that is +- equal to ryzen 5 3600 probably isn't enough to run all these simulation while keeping item position and such in memory. Just like an first xbox wasn't able to keep up with morrowind. They could make engine forget the objects location, not render scenes that u can't see, nor calculate physcis for them, but as they said, they don't want to. U just don't understand how many things there actually is on the screen and how many things cpu has to calculate. Flat 30 fps is a lot better than fps fluctuating between 30-60.
ESPECIALLY considering how many people are so up in arms about it being 30fps and claiming that is unacceptable. To them I say: 1. If you feel that way, then don't buy it. 2. Beauty in anything is subjective, but I would argue that when comparing this game to any other game of it's scale, Starfield definitely comes out on top. 3. No one cares that you're upset that this game is 30fps and I challenge you to create a game this massive and manage 60fps. Best of luck! (spoiler alert: you won't)
@@NamelessJoja tbf just because no one else makes games with as big a scope as Bethesda's doesn't mean Bethesda can't do better themselves. They definitely do have a bit of a longstanding performance optimization problem. And by longstanding I mean like 20 years lol. But yeah... no one else is even gonna try to make a game like this, can't argue there.
@@yewtewbstew547 I do agree that everyone should strive to do better. Even I would prefer 60 over 30, no doubt. But to claim they aren't trying hard enough would be silly. Of course they'd rather it be 60. My guess is that is what they were initially shooting for. But this video as well as Todd's statements make it clear that 30 was the only way they were going to get away with it being as visually appealing and technically capable as it is. Here's hoping that the next generation consoles are easily capable of 60/4k or better. Time will tell!
@@NamelessJoja both the Ps5 and Xbox were sold with the promise of 60fps to 120fps at least Sony is keeping that promise for now because every exclusive runs at 60 or 30 on quality mode. 30fps should be a thing of the past right now
@@mxg8475 Can you mention which Sony game has this level of load for the CPU? Sony's open worlds look beautiful, but they don't even come close to having the number of objects, and interactive elements, systems, etc. of a beteshda rpg? Will studios now have to limit their vision to achieve 60 fps?
Not related to the topic at hand, but watching these two discuss anything is super enjoyable. Unlike many other channels and even other TV shows, people love to talk over one another. These guys do a great job of "passing the mic" if you will. Good stuff as always!
@@faceurhellRight? I want anyone who complains about "lazy game developers" to take just one CS class and realize it's an absolute miracle that functional videogames even exist.
You hit the nail on the head. I don't generally like motion blur because it is frequently implemented really badly. If it's done right, I should barely notice it but wonder why the image is so smooth. The REAL question is this: what appears when you utter the words "Real-time cubemaps" three times in a dark field at night?
I used to love playing Mechwarrior 2: Mercenaries when I was a kid, and I was always astounded by the pre-rendered cut scene intro. I remember thinking, "it would be amazing if we could play games that looked that good!". Not only are we there now, we're so far beyond it. Maybe I'm just getting old, but I can't imagine being critical of games graphics today. I appreciate John and Alex sharing a grounded analysis of modern rendering techniques and tricks compared to other modern titles. I just feel like just about any game today looks really fantastic compared to where we came from 20 or 25 years ago.
Right there with you! I was terrible at Mercenaries but I loved the hell out it. I was just a couple years too young to grasp the strategies and planning needed to win missions. Just loaded my mech with what ever gun seemed the coolest to me. Thanks for taking me back.
@@skatecar1596Can’t the console or any hdmi device for that matter set a fixed refresh rate at whatever Hz 1-60 ? Xbox has a couple of options to enable 24,30 and 60 I think plus Amazon fire sticks are able to set refresh rates based on content ?
@@gadgetcritic 40Hz on a 60Hz screen doesn't look good. 60/40 does not equal a whole number. But if you're playing on 120Hz tv, 120Hz/40Hz = 3, which is why it would look good on a 120Hz panel.
@@skatecar1596 Current TVs don’t refresh at 60hz. The point of Xbox One X and Xbox Series X was to push 4K gaming. and all 4k TVs that are the worth the salt are 120Hz TVs. 40fps is apt compromise bcos 30fps on a 120Hz tv looks atrocious as each frame has to be repeated 4 times. We didnt mind 30fps in previous gen bcos most of us had 60hz TVs/Monitors. So 60/30 means 30fps games had to repeate a frame only 2 TIMES. But now they have to repeat 4 TIMES. Add to that OLED Tvs perfect pixel response with no motion smoothing and 30fps looks like literal turd on a OLED 120Hz TV. So PLEASE get a 40fps mode like PlayStation 1st party games.
@Teja most of what is you said is true but to a tiny degree. 30 fps looks fine on my c2, this is coming from someone with a gaming pc that plays at 144hz most of the time.
When it comes to the general ui and inventory screens i get starfields is way more functional than the pip-boy, but one thing I always really liked about how the fallout games handle inventory screens was that it felt grounded in the world seeing as its literally a device on your arm, and you can see your charater interacting with it, instead of the menu feeling like an entirely different "dimension" separate from the actual game world.
If all the pipboy mods and UI mods for fallout and Skyrim are anything to go by I'm sure there will be a mod for that pretty quickly. Now we just need to see if you can get mods on Xbox or not.
@@EggEnjoyerhmmm guns, a hud like hardware on your arm, robots and traits that affect dialogue I wonder why its closer to fallout than a medieval fantasy game with dragons.
@@reasonjefferey4644 Because setting and genre don’t dictate everything. Game design does. I personally never felt like fallout was a game about exploration like how elder scrolls and starfield is
@@EggEnjoyer well that’s like what you said “personally” Skyrim and fallout are both are exactly the same in game design fallout is essentially Skyrim with guns lol so it’s closer to starfield. Also give fallout a space ship and what do you have.... starfield it’s got base building, resource management and even empty wastelands lol.
@@76_SPZL didn’t even notice. Are we really gonna notice all the small stuff in real time footage. These guys are basically zooming in and slowing down everything to critically nitpick everything that’s going on to know what the devs did to make it happen. Even as a longtime viewer of this channel you just don’t care to notice a lot of these small things right away.
@@76_SPZL honestly, screen space reflection is a double edged sword. it looks good when everything you want reflected is on-screen...if not, then the reflection gets abruptly cut off and it looks more jarring than if it was just a lower detailed cubemap.
@@nikoc8968Yeah. GTA V uses the same technique, but reflections break on far objects like building's windows, because they reflect stuff right beside you.
Oh no... you're far too invested in well written narratives to enjoy Starfield. lol sorry just figured I'd warn you in advance. You WILL be disappointed by the writing. But if you're just a slut for graphics? I mean... sure? I guess you can get excited for this. We're all entitled to make our own mistakes.
The amount of people assuming you can just lower visual fidelity to hit 60fps is surprising, and the amount of people that adamantly dismiss CPU load as a non issue is actually insane. Whether it's people that are annoyed it's not on Playstation, people that have overcorrected from being disillusioned with Bethesda, or just trolls, the discussion around this game has been shockingly bad. Nobody should be expected to fully understand technical details, but hopefully people like DF can help inform the wider gaming audience about performance characteristics that are usually discussed only in PC gaming circles.
They simply just have zero clue what they’re talking about. They put together a pc or watch a video about how performance works and automatically think they know what goes into developing a game.
@@ElderSnowball even that would give you a lot more information than just mindlessly playing on consoles that figure it all out for you. Nothing wrong with consoles, but they don't enable learning this kinda thing. CPU vs GPU bottlenecks are like the no1 thing you learn if you get into the settings customisation side of pc gaming. That and Vram. Task manager on one side, game on the other, and see which setting effects the actual bottleneck you've got without sacrificing other elements you'd loose by lowering the preset.
Yeah totally not the 20 years old modified engine. It’s the magic of the game which is two generations ahead that makes it run at native 1080p 30 fps with 4 delays over 3 years . I usually play games at 30fps and it doesn’t bother me, but Starfield doesn’t have any good reasons to not run at 60 fps or at least native 4k. Also most people don’t count the fact that we now have ssd which really really helps these types of games . Also the budget is immense for this game, and the team at Bethesda is working on this game since fallout 4 ( even before fallout4) . This was supposed to be a last gen game. They really need to move to a new engine .
You guys were absolutely crucial this year with all the horrible half baked releases on PC. The revisits are much appreciated as well, thanks for all you do.
I'm going to guess there will still be a lot of crying on the forums about performance. Eventhough the recommended specs online have been bumped up to a Ryzen 7700X + RX 6800 XT for 1440p (high fidelity and fps, or so they say). So they are absolutely right the CPU load will be very high. And those requirements are steeper than most people's systems according to steam survey. So you can already grab the toast and cheese, because there will be lots of wine... i mean whine.
@@The_Noticer.I love how when people have bad performance you blame it all on the customer. Like it isn’t their job to optimize the game. Which they won’t because it’s Bethesda
@@FlipFlopGod No but people are too dumb to judge what is happening on screen. They think a corridor shooter running at 120fps means a openworld map that retains all information about every object you've placed and has huge planets implies it should also run at 120fps. Optimizing, like bottlenecking, are just overused terms. And implies that anything not running 120fps on their entry level system means its poorly optimized. They cried about cyberpunk being poorly optimized aswell and that didnt hold water then, and it doesn't now. It scales perfectly fine with settings and hardware, its just very graphically intensive. I'll happily point out the game that doesn't warrant poor performance, like remnant 2. But a game of this scope, you can imagine CPU's having a hard time, and then some person says "he has a 4070TI and therefor it should run 100fps", not even mentioning the fact he's running it on a Ryzen 1600 AF.
@@FlipFlopGod It's a two-way street, bro. Devs need to have good optimization and the player needs to have decent system specs. You need to consider that "optimization" only goes so far. I read somewhere recently that it is highly recommended Starfield be installed on a fast SSD or M.2. Is that poor optimization on Bethesda's part? No. Games are becoming too big and are including significantly more high resolution textures than even a few short years ago, along with all the fancy lighting models and physics. Little Timmy can't just load up Starfield on a potato with a 7200rpm HDD, i5 2500, and a GTX 660 and expect the game to have good performance. We all don't want to see a game run like steamy doo doo, of course. Building a clean game without bloated code really does help, and taking advantage of all the modern advances in game engines does create more performant games, but at some point you will hit a wall and then it becomes a computational problem. Which means you need faster hardware. All the optimization in the world can't create high frame rates and ultra settings without the computational and GPU horsepower to make it happen.
I generally prefer the real-time cube map approach to screen space reflections. SSR artifacts are incredibly immersion-breaking. To me, at least, they're more noticeable than the cube-map weirdness.
Agreed. I can easily get used to something that doesn't look quite realistic but very consistent as opposed to something that looks great some of the time but has a tendency to break constantly. It's why I love what the devs have done with the Metroid Prime remake. It's just so consistent and solid looking.
@@JustFun-ho6qy This, there are many things your brain chooses to ignore or process in a way where you dont care - like getting used to a third person game with a 'smooth' actually-30fp OR cube maps that dont look stupid. SSR are nice, right up until something magically disappears from a reflection, and then you are ripped out of the experience.
@@xBINARYGODxI can't even enjoy checkerboard rendering or the insane sparkly effect that still occurs with RTX. & I feel worse because I feel lik most people don't even perceive it
@@infernaldaedra the sparkly effect from the RTX reflection is because it’s being rendered at a lower resolution. Don’t feel bad , some people don’t notice shader comp stutters 💀, and will say the game runs “fine”.
Cyberpunk had issues with SSR for a long time. The reflections would look horrible and grainy if your settings weren’t maxed out, which at the time was pretty hard to achieve.
low distant and close clouds was always something fascinating for me... i remember Just Cause 2 back then had particle clouds which could be set through modding all the way down above JC2 ocean and even spread the height variety so they would show higher too and they were visible from any distance, amazing stuff back then, seems like decade ago 😁
StarField is created on a framework called The Forge by ConfettiFX. It’d be interesting if DF can interview the mastermind behind that framework, Wolfgang Engel.
If Bethesda releases Starfield with a 30fps cap on consoles then that doesn’t speak highly of their development team. Anything less than 60fps even on consoles these days is completely unacceptable.
You’re correct as these New Consoles are definitely capable of 60fps in all games so long as the devs actually put in the required time, effort, and energy at pushing maximum optimization and when it doesn’t happen it’s because the devs aren’t pushing for it and it’s somewhat excusable with small indie devs but not when it’s a major triple a game studio pushing a major 1st party game…….. Indie devs created the next gen plagues tale requiem and it launched at 30fps on all New Consoles and people said it was because the consoles was too weak and blah blah blah and yet the devs recently patched the game and now you can get between 60fps and 120fps on Xbox Series X and PlayStation 5 so we know the systems are more than capable but again it’s all on the devs
Really, one of the things that makes or breaks a game is the score - I’d like to hear more from channels about the music in games. The Skyrim soundtrack 100% set that game in it’s world and it wouldn’t be at all the same or as good without that amazing music. So hoping Starfield’s score gets the attention it deserves.
The music from the showcase was pretty varied I was surprised. I really liked the main theme of the game when it released but wanted to hear more variety also. The music during the Skill section overview was particularly great
This will be a once in a generation type game in my opinion. Think back to how much of an impact skyrim had on the gaming landscape, that is what we're about to get again with starfield. And it's so fucking exciting! I genuinely cannot wait for this game, 2 and a half long months to go!!
@@mdog86 cod sells more than anything doesn't make it the best game. And now that it's a gamepass only titles none of their games will come close to those skyrim sales which was released and re-released on any platform imaginable. Dark souls was better than skyrim. Many games try to copy soul games, how many skyrim look alike game have we seen? So who really changed the landscape.? The witcher 3 was also better than skyrim, but I bring up dark souls cause they released the same year. I like what starfield is doing, we haven't seen space games on such scale, but comparing it to skyrim is not a flex in my book.
Interesting to note about Starfield - it seems that the creation engine is now (at least partially) using the open-source The Forge rendering engine, as The Forge Interactive, the developers of such, were contracted by Bethesda to integrate it. Not entirely sure what the capacity of usage is, but its there !
Didn't know about that so thanks for pointing this out. What makes me the happiest about Starfield is that *Creation Engine 2 looks to be holding the comparison with next-gen engines* , such as (not to name it) UE5, in most of its features: animation, gunfire/combat framework, textures, lighting, etc. (but for the facial animation, tho...). As we can hope this game's gonna be delivered with a CE2 toolkit, this means *the game is supposedly going to be moddable as is, making it an insane new tool for modders to dive into* .
@@mezzb The CE is a fantastic engine that does ALOt of very complex things. people just love to find something to hate on even if there is zero logic in it. not to mention UE is not mod friendly
@@mezzbPerfectly said. Not to mention that, personally, I find the concentration of the industry in a few outsourced, shared engines to be somewhat negative in the long run. I'm glad Bethesda sticks by the Creation Engine and I hope they continue to do so. I wish CD Projekt hadn't completely abandoned REDEngine..
12:36 I'd more say that it's graphically beautiful and artistically beautiful, while their previous games have only been artistically beautiful, if you understand what I mean. The graphics used in Skyrim were nothing impressive, but I thought the artstyle and views were absolutely stunning.
same. I actually disliked a lot of the modded HD texture packs because they never nailed the balance of detail and contrast of the original materials. The gritty look was well handled for the time, and well contrasted by the fantastical skyboxes and architectures.
I've literally been commenting on many videos trying to shed some light about this that lowering the resolution or turning down graphics only helps if your CPU isn't a bottleneck and that a game like Starfield cannot be directly compared to any other game in the marked due to its complex systems and simulation. Unfortunately the discourse around Starfield is hijacked by people that participate in console wars in many cases so that's unfortunate.
Yeah cause as we all know, no other game like Starfield has ever existed, therefore an Xbox Series X is incapable of running anything like it… This is just Cope from fanboys. They could drop it to 1440p and give you 60FPS, but they don’t want to. You guys need to stop acting like this is some Simulation Powerhouse. It’s an ARPG like many others.
@@LordLentils That was sarcasm. Many games exist that are similarly hard to run. The fact that it’s in space is irrelevant. There’s many other games that are equally as taxing on the system. This game doesn’t even have SSR. It’s using basic cube maps. It’s not even using RT. It’s a joke that you’ve all accepted the lies that this game is some NASA level simulation that isn’t possible to run over 60 fps. Todd Howard get you guys every time! Hook, Line, and Sinker!
@@Quizack Not many games do what Bethesda games do and based on what they presented Starfield is an evolution of what they are doing. No one is claiming this is some Nasa level of simulation other than you maybe. We're simply discussing what was shown, as that's common for video game enthusiasts to do. Could they be lying and the game isnt what they claim to be? Maybe, anything's possible but I have no evidence to suggest that they are. You say that its just an ARPG like many others, when it obviously isn't and the fact it takes place in space doesn't matter when it obviously does because a big part of the game takes place in space, you travel in it, interact with it, your ship, modifications, companions and base buildings etc. How could it not matter? The one game I can think of that does some of what Starfield does to a degree is Star Citizen and you can click on my channel and videos and search for Star Citizen to see what an obvious CPU bottleneck looks like, and I'm using a 7700X there which blows the Series X cpu out of the water and it can't do a locked 60 leaving the spaceport. Optimization discussions aside its a point of consideration. We will benchmark the game though on similar hardware as Series X on PC and see how demanding and well optimized the game is.
Hardware tessellation is also in No Mans Sky. Actually every ground texture has it and it looks pretty nice, very high detailed. It was not in the base game in 2016 but was added some years ago.
You can not land your ship yourself. The game will do it for you. Also you will not see entering and exiting the atmosphere of a plant/moon. You'll see only a cutscene of you ship landing.
Im surprised that they praised the motion blur in the FFXVI. At least in the graphics mode of the demo the blur was so aggressive and the camera felt jumpy, that I switched to performance mode. Its still there but in motion it felt better. Ive never been too framerate sensitive but how motion blur is implemented can be very critical to my enjoyment.
PC gamers can lower the fidelity to get better performance, but Todd won't allow it on the Series X? ... what a load of BS..., such a dumb excuse, obviously the game is unfinished for the Series X, as MS is making games for PC, Series X AND S (3 systems), and wants the game out asap ... Sony only needs to focus only on ONE system, the PS5.. (no wonder they are getting timed exclusives so easy, and all with performance modes) ... Todd, we are not asking for Starfield to only run @60fps, but for the OPTION .. ... Starfield should be invalid from any Goty nominations, as its beeing shipped too early.. ... now every next gen Xbox game might only have 30fps modes on the most powerful console (Hellblade 2,.. dont see them bothering with a 60fps mode..)
@@VampireNoblesse Assuming it's a CPU bottleneck, then there is nothing they can do to get it up to a consistent 60fps on consoles. Lowering the resolution and textures and shadows would do nothing. They would have to start cutting things from the dynamic simulation itself, which destroys the entire point of the game.
Almost done talking myself into getting a Series X for this game. My brother thinks I'm crazy for considering going this far for one game given I already have the competitor but as a huge all things space buff as myself, it's really tempting. Will wait to see in what state the game releases though.
Get it on pc you cant turn down the settings on console and will have a worse experience at 30fps they aren't even adding a performance mode its a total joke
@@tatianaes3354 I think i'd take that over something generic and crappy but good looking. I don't think they can afford to make it look any better anyway
you can't call this fanboyism. the excuses they game for 30FPS don't even make sense. for example, storing object's location is not a heavy task that bogs down the system. that's only when you place ungodly amounts of objects in a single place and render them. 30 FPS in such a title is just stupid and people should be angry otherwise we return to the 30FPS only era.
DF comparing Starfield a single player game with loading screens to Star Citizen which is an MMO as to why its 30fps on Series X, and then trying to say 30fps is going to be the norm this gen. No, 60fps is the norm on other platforms, 30fps is the norm on Xbox. In fact DF were instrumental last gen in getting devs to lock games at 30fps with no toggle, then as the next gen came in all games were stuck and needed manpower to to revisit old titles. Demand 60fps, demand better, when it releases on PC it will have an option to lower the graphics on lesser machines yet still still run at +60fps, they are talking nonsense to you.
@@ElderSnowball Well thats the problem, they should not make games this big, if the hardware cant run it proplerly. just my opinion. They knew it from the start that they Would make it 30 fps only for xbox.
@@Amhoj1 Yeah, that's likely the case - that they always knew it would be a 30fps title on console, that is. Bear in mind that this project started before the Microsoft acquisition, and despite the UI woes BGS titles have always been primarily best played on PC. So despite claims that the game was "built from the ground up" for Xbox, that's marketing spiel. And perhaps just my bias speaking, as a PC player who will not be capped at 30fps, but they absolutely should make games this big and this ambitious. It's why their titles are so beloved to this day, where higher-performing games have been forgotten. Because they don't base their scope around current hardware, per se, but project vision. Why you hear Todd say "wasn't possible until now" a lot here. Worst case scenario it'll run beautifully next generation, as with Skyrim Special Edition, although I'm sure that's not news you'd like to hear at this point, soz.
I wish they just gave an option for a unlocked frame rate so those with a VRR can take advantage (or any future consoles). Just add a disclaimer (like what some games do with a fov slider), more options the better.
I’d love 60 fps on this game but I prefer a stable experience. For single player games it’s not as big of an issue for me. A lot of multiplayer games coming out now are up to 120fps on series X which I think is more important.
i usually reject any game that runs below 60 fps nowadays, but Starfield looks so big and impressive that i can understand the decision to lock it at 30
If you call frames down to 12fps stable you have low standards especially on a fps shooter but get keep on getting fucked by xbox that does it form me im done with them time to switch
What people don't realize half the time is that it's even remarkable that the consoles now a days can even run these new games for $500 give or take. Build a pc with 500 same specs as a ps5 or Xbox series x it's not as easy if even possible as it once was.
Locking a game at 30fps and the amount of motion blur that usually comes with it is bad enough but even if you have a VRR display is unacceptable. Quite a few people I know have bought a monitor for console gaming for the reduced latency as they play a lot of FPS games and FIFA, almost all mid range monitors support VRR over HDMI these days. It makes such a huge difference.
I think it was also the Remedy CEO or someone that said (I think specifically about SSDs and loading times) but in general, that just because hardware gets better doesn't mean games will perform better. As the hardware gets better, good AAA devs are going to push that new hardware. They're not just going to keep graphics and scale consistent and push 1000fps. They're going to be like "Oh, we have 3X the power... alright boys let's up the physic sim, let's up the geometric detail, lets add RT, let's add particle effects, let's make our AI more advanced..." etc. There goes your frame rate.
Great point. This is also why webpages still take 5 seconds to load (on average). Another parallel point is that games are made to target the lowest common denominator of hardware. You might have a $3k gaming PC, but you still have to play more or less the same games as little Timmy on his mom's $400 business laptop. Imagine how great games would be if devs just said "screw it, Timmy's 8 year old laptop is out, we're only making games for PCs with 64 GB of RAM, the latest CPU and GPU, and 8TB of SSD storage.". We'd get an instant 5-10 year leap in game capability overnight.
I think the grass on the planets are on a grid system. Like voxels. This is really noticeable at 26:24 through 26:26 if you keep looking near the robot's feet and you'll see a "block" of grass get culled out at the bottom of the screen. The rest of the grass is in a box pattern as well. There's areas after this that show it off too.
@@questionmark9713 I have. I've worked on a couple and (foolishly) went to college for it earning a BFA. Most engines, by default, use mainly either hand placed, hand painted instances, or scatter systems. Not a hard grid. Just thought it was interesting and may give in a little behind-the-scenes look at the new generation tools in this new version of The Creation Engine.
The fact that some fanboys are comparing graphics of these massive open world games to corridors like The Last of Us really highlights the importance of videos like this.
Both had different hurdles to be as advanced as they were. Last Of Us maxed out the PS3 hardware to get where it got, Starfield probably melted so many CPU’s tracking all the objects, characters and mapping let alone the actual gameplay.
@@makaiokalahama 30 because it's truly next gen. Ubisoft or CDPR can hit higher framerates because of their dead open world. Even Rdr2 was extremely disappointing in that sense. Technologically speaking Starfield is the largest leap in gaming in a looong time.
Great video as always. Explains BGS's viewpoint and why they chose 30 FPS, but it does highlight the limitations of console; both technical limitations as well as user choice. Even being able to add a 40 FPS down the line would be a notable improvement for those who use high end panels.
Consoles are physically limited, but PC players are limited by their wallets, and in many cases, MUCH more limited than console players based on the average specs by Steam userbase. People always make it seem like PC players aren't limited... sure, if you can afford the latest generation of high frequency clock speed, multi-core processors and RTX 40 Series GPUs. If you don't have that, these newer games are going to also start destroying the first couple generations of Ryzen CPUs, 12th gen intel CPUs and 30 Series Nvidia GPUs, and systems without PCIe SSDs. Star Citizen is a prime example, let alone terrible ports that run so much worse on high end PCs than consoles lol. Limitations can be technical, but there are other limitations that are just as bad, or worse. However, I do agree that console users should have some choice, but it's also not obvious that Starfield even run well with lower resolution or lower visual settings, so sometimes developers just don't give you a choice if it's going to be sh*t and make the console or the developers look bad.
@@af4396 Money's a limit for everyone. It applies to both consoles and PC. But consoles hit their ceiling far, far sooner. The other key limitation of consoles in this case is you're stuck with Howard's vision of the game. What settings he wants, what framerate he wants. PC provides such much more freedom to shape your experience and tailor settings based on what's important to you.
Yeah no matter how many generations we get into there's always gonna be a dev that wants to push the envelope somewhere just to force 30fps. I still think most games these days going forward will be able to play 60fps on Series X/Ps5 but yeah that's our reality as console gamers.
@@Csal92 It's better than last gen at least, where every AAA developer was pushing the envelope to the point where games were regularly seeing dips below 20. I still remember my first playthrough of The Witcher 3 on PS4 and how bad that was. If the new _minimum_ standard is a stable 30fps, I'd be totally fine with that. The thing a lot of people (mostly people who don't watch DF lol) don't get about frame rate is that the actual frames per second number is not the most important factor of how smooth the game runs. It _is_ important, but not the _most_ important. The frame pacing is the most important factor by a long shot. A game running at 30fps with a completely flatlined 33.3ms frame pacing will always feel better to play than a game running at 60fps with frame times skipping between 10-30+ms (for reference, with 60fps you want a steady 16.6ms pacing). Whenever that frame time drops below the mean, or even just at all in many cases, it results in a noticeable stutter. Maybe not visibly, not everyone is going to notice a difference of milliseconds with their eyes, but you will definitely "feel" the sudden loss of responsiveness even if you miss the visual stutter itself. And when that is happening constantly, as it does in many poorly made games both on console and PC, any additional frames per second are basically meaningless. Even high refresh rates like 120+ still feel pretty bad when their pacing is off, just not quite as bad as 30 or 60. That said, only time will tell with Starfield. Hopefully, since they're targetting 30fps, it's actually a _stable_ 30. If it's 30fps with bad frame pacing, then I expect to see it get torn to shreds.
I'm assuming i've missed something, but isn't FSR supposed to be implemented on consoles? Surely, these types of massive open world games should have that baked in.
Another point not mentioned in this video about the 30fps. Todd Howard said the environment was procedurally generated when you walk to new locations, then they put gameplay elements to make things interesting. Which means CPU are potentially computing these kinds of things in the background, it may not be cheap.
@@mryellow6918 I've been saying this since it was announced that to me as someone that plays a ton of games on PC and benchmarks them I can see this game being taxing on the CPU. It's like some of these people don't think. Obviously they've tried to see what a 60 fps mode would look like and came to the realization that 30fps is the only option. It sucks that you cant remove the FPS caps on consoles or use performance measuring software but it's what it is. If it was possible they would've done it but some people don't want to believe it. Oh well.
It's actually what many gamers seem to forget, if a game is targeting 30fps and pushing the cpu hard, it's hard to scale that to 60fps, especially considering that higher frame rates tend to hit the cpu harder. On the gpu front, that scales far better, they can lower the resolution, the frame rate or visual settings to get what they want, so a bump to 60fps in this case, but if the cpu is the bottleneck, lowering the resolution or visual setting will make little difference to the cpu demands, but going from 30fps to 60fps will likely hit the cpu harder. That isn't to say it couldn't be done, but it would need some major work and cut backs to achieve that. It's like that Matrix demo, imagine trying to get that to 60fps when it targets 30fps on consoles, dropping as low as 20fps, and if the PC part of that demo is any indicator, it's quite demanding on the cpu, basically, it would need major work to get it running at 60fps and the cuts needed might be too big to be worthwhile. Personally, I think console gamers are getting accustomed to 60fps because most games are crossgen games, not that difficult to offer 60fps or 120fps for a game that targets the last gen consoles but on the newer consoles, but at the end of the day, gamers by the next gen consoles for next gen gaming, not last gen gaming with better visuals, after all, wasn't that the reason they were drooling over that Matrix demo? that was a clear indicator of what was to come, 30fps if you truly want next gen.
@@vandammage1747 That would be fine if the game was targeting minimal specs on the consoles, we know that isn't going to be the case, also, usually console cpu's are strip back versions of the desktop PC version to reduce cost and looking at the specs on the PC, that could be targeting 30fps for all we know at those specs, I suspect on the PC, this game could be quite demanding if it's pushing the Xbox console hard at 30fps.
I have absolutely no problem with 30FPS. I played games at that setting for years. It always allowed me to crank whatever game I have to max settings and maintain consistent framerate while also keeping GPU temperatures incredibly low and extending it's lifespan.
@@pocketsand76 you’re right, it’s not in the FPS genre, I shoulda said first-person perspective, which I still argue feels like shit when played in 30 FPS… Especially for someone like me that’s used to 240hz/fps esport kinda FPS. I know it’s a very different game, but 60 FPS should be a minimum target.
Dare I say it was mildly hinted at without directly saying so? Maybe. I have to feel it also a case of "engine needs way more horsepower to achieve anything more." Maybe if you have a Threadripper system with triple 4090s you can force it lol.
@@raymondwhiting6267 that is objectively false. Skyrim and Oblivion are well known for literally having quests break to the point of even ruining saves at higher than 60hz
@@Legion849 yeah 60 is usually the threshold, which is why I'm a little concerned there might be more to that the half assed "we did it for the ARRRT" justification for a 30 lock now
I hope 30fps only does not become the main option for this next generation, 60 fps for most new releases has been a breath of fresh air since the ps4/Xbox one days. I thought DF of all outlets would be more on board with that idea but it seems they are defending its use now
@@Akkbar21 DF didn't make this game or any other game they're just guessing like you and I and they have been wrong in the past claiming "cpu limited" when it's not. Minimum pc requirements are much lower than XSX|S and Bethesda aren't even using directstorage that would optimize cpu tasks a lot.
@positivevibe5034 most developers aren't making games like starfield. The only comparison would be rockstar. Who will also be releasing gta 6 in 30fps unless a new console releases
@@alexlyster3459 It’ll probably happen but it will be when Starfield gets it’s huge 1 year update that these Beth games usually get. No lie if I didn’t have a kid on the way I’d invest in a Series S just to play Starfield. I’m on PS5 but Starfield looks amazingly fun.
@@Mark-99999 Not every game but the majority of Sony studios implement both a capped 40fps mode and a VRR uncapped mode. Thing is that Sony’s most recent games have typically been way less ambitious than Starfield is and have plenty of CPU and GPU overhead on PS5 to make those systems worthwhile.
@@joeystar1043nah, it’s not the like the said developer has made any of the greatest games of all time is it with multiple GOTY awards 😂 Clearly they know nothing!
@@AntonKushnir-tc5kz you’ll be able to run at 60fps if you are CPU is very fast. If not you won’t. What is so hard to understand that games can be CPU limited on console? You can be unhappy about that but that’s the design choice that has been made. I think it’s a good choice but we will see.
Isn't the StarCitizen facial animation actually the same tech that was later bought by Epic and became Meta Human, and they just still use an "older" version of that for SC?
@@DigitalFoundry i actually wonder if CIG can still get updates or if they can update or develop it further themselves, since they were partners before Epic bought out 3Lateral to make Meta Human for them.
DF is without a doubt THE BEST channel for everything gaming, very grounded perspectives and very thorough investigations. Always exciting seeing a new upload
@@jm9523 I wouldn't say so. Whenever the topic of motion blur comes up, John often cannot help himself and make some kind of a comment/joke about people/the idea of disabling it. At one time, he called people that disable it 'heathens'.
Side note about FF16. The Demo is Version 1.1. The State of Play last month was running Version 1.3. You can see it on the bottom corner of the main menu (as you could when it was shown in the State of Play)
Yea. I remember the breakdown of the specs reveal of the XBSX... Not even half of what you guys predicted performance wise vs the PS5 came true. Smh.... Now i see why people say DF is biased... 1200p @30fps is now cool and acceptable by xbox standards now
I love the last part of the video. I’m hearing a bunch of people say they’re worried about a lot of the planets being empty. Every time I hear that I’m like, but in real life most planets are empty, so it makes perfect sense 🤷🏽♂️
surprised both Rich & Oliver aren't here for the deep dive Starfield coverage as it would have been great to hear their opinions but still as always, great coverage to both John & Alex👌
2:00 But it's mainly a first-person game with combat in first-person. Sure, it's doesn't have Doom-like pacing, but you still shoot enemies in first-person, fly around and stuff. Doing all that at 30fps does not seem enjoyable. That said, I'm playing it on PC anyway.
@@youtubeshadowbannedmylasta2629 Morrowind used NetImmerse 3.0. The engine developer then changed the name to GameBryo (4.0), which was used for Oblivion and FO3. After that Bethesda bought the source code and developed their own branch, Creation Engine (GameBryo still exists as its own thing).
The best part of any Bethesda game is the modding which takes place after the fact. I am hopeful that this game will be solid because MSFT told them to delay the game to just polish everything and not rush it out because of pressure to cash in like CP2077. You can see the improvements from last year and you can tell they didn't change the game at all they just made it look/work better. I think this is a big benefit of being own by Xbox as they have the money to delay if needed. We will see if they are lying or not in September.
what an excellent breakdown! I'm not familar with all the software technology that's described, but the detail and compliments during the breakdown make me excited to play this game when its released!
Ah, so you don't know about it, but do you think it's an excellent contribution? Much of what is said is nonsense... Horizion could be 40 times bigger and still run at 60 fps... Only as much is loaded as fits into memory and everything that comes after that is reloaded anyway. The engine is just at the end and the console is not that good either, especially with the block by the one called XSS..
That is incorrect. Horizon Forbidden West is nowhere near the scale of this game and how the games play are entirely different too. For one, Alloy is not a customizable created character with a different voice and unique Rpg like dialogue. It is closer to Uncharted than it is Skyrim or Fallout. Because it is more of an action game, things like objects and unique and random encounters take a back seat. Even if it were 40X larger, it still wouldn't be as complicated as this game. Horizon also takes place in one world and so it isn't like you're going to thousands of different places. That is why it is 60fps. Sony knows how to pick talent and so the things that their teams like Naughty Dog, Santa Monica Studios, or Guerilla Games do should be impossible even going back to the Ps3 era.
I don't buy their excuses for 30fps. This is simple: if your primary HW target can't run the game at 60fps even with visual quality tradeoffs (performance mode), you should take a step back OR wait for the next gen of HW to realize that vision. What Microsoft did instead was if CP2077 made that Path-Tracing update mandatory, now the game only works in RT Overdrive mode, so framerate sucks for almost everyone (and even on a 4090 it doesn't really work well if you care for IQ in action not in static scenes or cherrypicked places).
My 4080 can run Cyberpunk's Path Tracing mode at 4k & DLSS performance mode + frame generation at a stable 60 fps in literally in scene. Sure, frame generation isn't as cool as getting real frames, but the gameplay still feels very responsive and fluid, so I'm fine with it. Anyway, 30 fps has always been the standard on consoles. That's just the natural consequence of weak hardware.
@@faultier1158 Notice that my comment about performance contains that caveat about image quality; yes you can get 60fps but the visual quality has very clear compromises even without DLSS. DF's video about Overdrive explores this well so I'm not repeating them. It's an impressive step towards AAA-grade path tracing, but we're still one GPU generation away from doing that well. "30 fps has always been the standard on consoles" = complete bulls*it, consoles have been supporting 60fps for decades, all the way back to the NES and maybe before. In every gen it's always a balance of FPS vs resolution vs rendering & gameplay features. Most modern AAA games do 60fps in the curr-gen consoles, some even go up to 120fps. This limit of 30fps is completely abnormal. Name one big game for PS5 or XSS that can't do 60fps.
@@faultier1158 I know the problem is the CPU load for simulation. What I'm saying is that this is too ambitious for this console gen. A turn-based game or something like Factorio is OK at 30fps, but Starfield is not just that, it also features the kind of fast-paced first- or third-person combat and other game mechanics that totally suck at 30fps. They should either scale back the simulation or find a way to optimize it more. Otherwise, this is a PC exclusive game in practice if you want an acceptable experience.
No Man's Skyrim, regardless of whether John "likes" the comparison or not! The similarities are obvious and apparent so consumers are perfectly entitled to make them. We are not here to act like PR and marketing guys for Bethesda/Microsoft albeit I can appreciate that DF may be in a different place with its history of having previously produced content sponsored by Microsoft.
I don't understand why df always trying to normalize 30 fps on consoles instead of pushing the industry to progress forward, it's like you guys are happy games are running at 30fps so you could justify your 3000$ pcs. you guys have a voice and your words matter in this industry, if this game needed to run at 30fps, then don't try to normalize it as the standard and the future, you should treat this as a justified anomaly ! Also you keep bringing up jedi survivor in every damn video like it's performance is justified ! It looks like last gen game for god sake, this was a matter of optimization not the visuals being complex ! And gotham knights isn't a game you should reference in every video when you already said in it's tech review that it looked bad and isn't representable of what this generation would offer. I think the industry will move backwards with you guys trying to push 30fps as the new normal, so use your voice wisely.
To me there's no "Next-gen" experience without better framerate. If a game cannot run at 60 fps on console, give it at LEAST a 40 FPS option for those who have 120Hz screens..
Oh my, after a 45 minute Starfield showcase, now we have a 45 minute Starfield Tech Breakdown!
Yes, and I feel like the tech breakdown was much more informative.
@@G360LIVE Well yeah because it also taking clips from the showcase and discuss it with prediction, nobody know it's true or not until it release though
45 minutes of damage control more like.
It's a shame they haven't decided for a 40fps mode. That would be a perfect compromise
@@DryMouth-p9idon’t play it
Nowadays, I spend more time watching video breakdowns of modern video game graphics than I spend actually playing video games.
That's pretty sad ngl
Seems stressful. Just have fun man
Soo Sad lol
Lmaoo that's funny, but not sad you do you my boy
@@ElderSnowball That is fun for some people. I enjoy shader programming and higher level of rendering technique explanations as a relaxing hobby.
I really like this format where you guys break stuff down together without being super heavily scripted. And I'm also glad you release it in video and podcast form. It does take away from the experience some not being able to see the examples, but it's good enough that I wanted to go back after getting home from work and watch parts again.
Oblivions landscapes were beautiful... Like a blurry water colour painting and the calm tranquil music was bliss
Perfect way to describe Oblivion. I still play it now sometimes for this reason. It has a great atmosphere.
@@rizzo-films same... Its also a reason why i think it would be particularly hard to remaster without losing the vibe possibly, some games have an art style that can be retained easier but oblivion could so easily lose that if not handled properly.
Skyrim was beautiful too. But in a way so was Fallout 3. I loved the atmosphere it created with the green filter. It really brought you into the struggle.
& the surreal as fuck characters (not even talking about Sheogorath here, just the regular people....) Dreamlike!
Oblivion looked average and had clunky mechanics.
The amount of DF content this week has been insane and I’m loving it
It's so good
Agreed. Feels like Christmas
Why did you assume that people think you would hate it?
Posted 30 minutes ago and your comment is 5 hours old….. how come?
I wish I were so easily fulfilled
We definitely need more 40Hz modes on consoles.
Sony does it. I don’t know why Microsoft hasn’t done any yet. This game would be perfect for a 40hz mode.
@@PhotoJohn80 Literally watch the video you're commenting on and you'll know why.
40 fps is still shit. These consoles were supposed to do 4k 60 ffs.
It’s so good on Ratchet & Clank…
@@albanier8426This is a stupid statement. It’s not as if they have first hand knowledge about what the CPU performance overhead is on Series X. There is a good chance that the game could run at 40fps, even if that involved more testing and some extra time.
DF Direct has gone from weekly to daily and I'm here for it.
Golden Age of DF (Direct)
Oh absolutely, all day.
I’m so fucking sick of hearing “I’m here for it”
@@vexili dudes pissed and im here for it.
@@vexili LOL
The storing of object locations and such actually wrecked Morrowind on Xbox as after a while your save size would get so large that the Xbox could not load it into RAM and you would get an error. To remedy this two ways were to always close each door and always leave items stored in your inventory or NPCs inventory and not in the game world.
edit: Bethsda added a 'loot overflow bag' to the game I remember now, which would activate if you put too many objects on the ground in one area, but I dont think it solved the problem fully.
It could happen to Oblivion too if you duplicated too many different items into the open world into the ground eventually with a DLC they changed it so eventually the game world might cull objects with **!** Assets lol
@@lifewarrior64 That's a good question
yea.. this game is doing nothing at all to justify 30 fps. it does look good, it gameplay is Fallout in space, and why are they pretending that this engine does not have a known cpu threading issue that causes problems?
this studio always gets a pass for releasing unpolish games in ways that no one else gets a pass for.
that shouldn't happen, and it's actually ironic, that for a game like Minecraft, they have no issues saving millions of world blocks and player items with no issues..IN FUCKING JAVA.
@@BrotherO4 and i think it justifies the 30 fps, these kinds of physcics simulation, world rendering etc is taxing as fuck, and the cpu that is +- equal to ryzen 5 3600 probably isn't enough to run all these simulation while keeping item position and such in memory. Just like an first xbox wasn't able to keep up with morrowind. They could make engine forget the objects location, not render scenes that u can't see, nor calculate physcis for them, but as they said, they don't want to. U just don't understand how many things there actually is on the screen and how many things cpu has to calculate. Flat 30 fps is a lot better than fps fluctuating between 30-60.
Always love DF coverage of gaming tech and this perspective is so important with games like this.
ESPECIALLY considering how many people are so up in arms about it being 30fps and claiming that is unacceptable. To them I say:
1. If you feel that way, then don't buy it.
2. Beauty in anything is subjective, but I would argue that when comparing this game to any other game of it's scale, Starfield definitely comes out on top.
3. No one cares that you're upset that this game is 30fps and I challenge you to create a game this massive and manage 60fps. Best of luck! (spoiler alert: you won't)
@@NamelessJoja tbf just because no one else makes games with as big a scope as Bethesda's doesn't mean Bethesda can't do better themselves. They definitely do have a bit of a longstanding performance optimization problem. And by longstanding I mean like 20 years lol.
But yeah... no one else is even gonna try to make a game like this, can't argue there.
@@yewtewbstew547 I do agree that everyone should strive to do better. Even I would prefer 60 over 30, no doubt. But to claim they aren't trying hard enough would be silly. Of course they'd rather it be 60. My guess is that is what they were initially shooting for. But this video as well as Todd's statements make it clear that 30 was the only way they were going to get away with it being as visually appealing and technically capable as it is. Here's hoping that the next generation consoles are easily capable of 60/4k or better. Time will tell!
@@NamelessJoja both the Ps5 and Xbox were sold with the promise of 60fps to 120fps at least Sony is keeping that promise for now because every exclusive runs at 60 or 30 on quality mode. 30fps should be a thing of the past right now
@@mxg8475 Can you mention which Sony game has this level of load for the CPU? Sony's open worlds look beautiful, but they don't even come close to having the number of objects, and interactive elements, systems, etc. of a beteshda rpg?
Will studios now have to limit their vision to achieve 60 fps?
Not related to the topic at hand, but watching these two discuss anything is super enjoyable. Unlike many other channels and even other TV shows, people love to talk over one another. These guys do a great job of "passing the mic" if you will. Good stuff as always!
"and even other TV shows" - TV is still a thing? ;-)
@@igorthelight LOL I don't know actually, I only ever use a TV to play games! :D
Yes they make good conversationalists. It's very nice to see.
It's called mutual respect
I really appreciate how respectful you are towards the developers. I mean the effort that went into this project seem to be insane.
Game development is not easy yeah especially when making complex systems
Video Games are and always were seemingly held together by glue. The fact anything works is incredible.
@@stylie473joker5Complex star systems 🥁
@@faceurhellRight? I want anyone who complains about "lazy game developers" to take just one CS class and realize it's an absolute miracle that functional videogames even exist.
This X1,000,000!
Gamers tend to encompass the 3 D's sadly, without the sligtest grasp on what goes into any of it.
You hit the nail on the head. I don't generally like motion blur because it is frequently implemented really badly. If it's done right, I should barely notice it but wonder why the image is so smooth.
The REAL question is this: what appears when you utter the words "Real-time cubemaps" three times in a dark field at night?
I used to love playing Mechwarrior 2: Mercenaries when I was a kid, and I was always astounded by the pre-rendered cut scene intro. I remember thinking, "it would be amazing if we could play games that looked that good!". Not only are we there now, we're so far beyond it. Maybe I'm just getting old, but I can't imagine being critical of games graphics today. I appreciate John and Alex sharing a grounded analysis of modern rendering techniques and tricks compared to other modern titles. I just feel like just about any game today looks really fantastic compared to where we came from 20 or 25 years ago.
Man I love the Mechwarrior games. So glad they've made a minor comeback of late.
Those games were great!
As someone with the gamertag Mechwarrior1, I'm right there with you❤
Right there with you! I was terrible at Mercenaries but I loved the hell out it. I was just a couple years too young to grasp the strategies and planning needed to win missions. Just loaded my mech with what ever gun seemed the coolest to me. Thanks for taking me back.
Also I remember Killzone 1, and how we got better graphics
It sounds like a perfect game for a 40fps mode considering how they described the preformance profile
As ideal as the would be, it wouldn't be feasible on a majority of consoles since tv's refresh at 60hz
@@skatecar1596Can’t the console or any hdmi device for that matter set a fixed refresh rate at whatever Hz 1-60 ?
Xbox has a couple of options to enable 24,30 and 60 I think plus Amazon fire sticks are able to set refresh rates based on content ?
@@gadgetcritic 40Hz on a 60Hz screen doesn't look good. 60/40 does not equal a whole number. But if you're playing on 120Hz tv, 120Hz/40Hz = 3, which is why it would look good on a 120Hz panel.
@@skatecar1596 Current TVs don’t refresh at 60hz. The point of Xbox One X and Xbox Series X was to push 4K gaming. and all 4k TVs that are the worth the salt are 120Hz TVs. 40fps is apt compromise bcos 30fps on a 120Hz tv looks atrocious as each frame has to be repeated 4 times. We didnt mind 30fps in previous gen bcos most of us had 60hz TVs/Monitors. So 60/30 means 30fps games had to repeate a frame only 2 TIMES. But now they have to repeat 4 TIMES. Add to that OLED Tvs perfect pixel response with no motion smoothing and 30fps looks like literal turd on a OLED 120Hz TV. So PLEASE get a 40fps mode like PlayStation 1st party games.
@Teja most of what is you said is true but to a tiny degree. 30 fps looks fine on my c2, this is coming from someone with a gaming pc that plays at 144hz most of the time.
Very educational & informative, love yalls work!
same
When it comes to the general ui and inventory screens i get starfields is way more functional than the pip-boy, but one thing I always really liked about how the fallout games handle inventory screens was that it felt grounded in the world seeing as its literally a device on your arm, and you can see your charater interacting with it, instead of the menu feeling like an entirely different "dimension" separate from the actual game world.
If all the pipboy mods and UI mods for fallout and Skyrim are anything to go by I'm sure there will be a mod for that pretty quickly.
Now we just need to see if you can get mods on Xbox or not.
Fallout fans keep comparing this game to fallout when in reality its gonna be much closer to elderscrolls
@@EggEnjoyerhmmm guns, a hud like hardware on your arm, robots and traits that affect dialogue I wonder why its closer to fallout than a medieval fantasy game with dragons.
@@reasonjefferey4644 Because setting and genre don’t dictate everything. Game design does.
I personally never felt like fallout was a game about exploration like how elder scrolls and starfield is
@@EggEnjoyer well that’s like what you said “personally” Skyrim and fallout are both are exactly the same in game design fallout is essentially Skyrim with guns lol so it’s closer to starfield. Also give fallout a space ship and what do you have.... starfield it’s got base building, resource management and even empty wastelands lol.
Real-time cubemaps are a clever solution, it's kind of nice to see new games use well established techniques in creative ways.
Agreed
@@76_SPZL didn’t even notice. Are we really gonna notice all the small stuff in real time footage. These guys are basically zooming in and slowing down everything to critically nitpick everything that’s going on to know what the devs did to make it happen. Even as a longtime viewer of this channel you just don’t care to notice a lot of these small things right away.
@@76_SPZL honestly, screen space reflection is a double edged sword. it looks good when everything you want reflected is on-screen...if not, then the reflection gets abruptly cut off and it looks more jarring than if it was just a lower detailed cubemap.
@@nikoc8968Yeah. GTA V uses the same technique, but reflections break on far objects like building's windows, because they reflect stuff right beside you.
Driving games have been using them for the player car reflections for years, I think Forza games way back to 3 or so had them.
As someone who loves science fiction books like Isaac Asimov's and Arthur C. Clarke's novels, I can't put into words how excited for Starfield I am.
Oh no... you're far too invested in well written narratives to enjoy Starfield. lol sorry just figured I'd warn you in advance. You WILL be disappointed by the writing. But if you're just a slut for graphics? I mean... sure? I guess you can get excited for this. We're all entitled to make our own mistakes.
Same here. I love 'Foundation' series.
Does Starfield have a plot ?
The amount of people assuming you can just lower visual fidelity to hit 60fps is surprising, and the amount of people that adamantly dismiss CPU load as a non issue is actually insane.
Whether it's people that are annoyed it's not on Playstation, people that have overcorrected from being disillusioned with Bethesda, or just trolls, the discussion around this game has been shockingly bad.
Nobody should be expected to fully understand technical details, but hopefully people like DF can help inform the wider gaming audience about performance characteristics that are usually discussed only in PC gaming circles.
They simply just have zero clue what they’re talking about. They put together a pc or watch a video about how performance works and automatically think they know what goes into developing a game.
@@ElderSnowball even that would give you a lot more information than just mindlessly playing on consoles that figure it all out for you. Nothing wrong with consoles, but they don't enable learning this kinda thing.
CPU vs GPU bottlenecks are like the no1 thing you learn if you get into the settings customisation side of pc gaming. That and Vram. Task manager on one side, game on the other, and see which setting effects the actual bottleneck you've got without sacrificing other elements you'd loose by lowering the preset.
@@existentialselkath1264agreed 100% but generally it’s the people with pcs going against the 30fps situation so it’s a bit confusing really.
@@ElderSnowball as someone that games on a pc, no pc the price of a console is targeting 60
Yeah totally not the 20 years old modified engine. It’s the magic of the game which is two generations ahead that makes it run at native 1080p 30 fps with 4 delays over 3 years . I usually play games at 30fps and it doesn’t bother me, but Starfield doesn’t have any good reasons to not run at 60 fps or at least native 4k. Also most people don’t count the fact that we now have ssd which really really helps these types of games . Also the budget is immense for this game, and the team at Bethesda is working on this game since fallout 4 ( even before fallout4) . This was supposed to be a last gen game. They really need to move to a new engine .
You guys were absolutely crucial this year with all the horrible half baked releases on PC. The revisits are much appreciated as well, thanks for all you do.
I'm going to guess there will still be a lot of crying on the forums about performance. Eventhough the recommended specs online have been bumped up to a Ryzen 7700X + RX 6800 XT for 1440p (high fidelity and fps, or so they say). So they are absolutely right the CPU load will be very high. And those requirements are steeper than most people's systems according to steam survey.
So you can already grab the toast and cheese, because there will be lots of wine... i mean whine.
@@The_Noticer.I love how when people have bad performance you blame it all on the customer.
Like it isn’t their job to optimize the game. Which they won’t because it’s Bethesda
@@FlipFlopGod No but people are too dumb to judge what is happening on screen. They think a corridor shooter running at 120fps means a openworld map that retains all information about every object you've placed and has huge planets implies it should also run at 120fps. Optimizing, like bottlenecking, are just overused terms. And implies that anything not running 120fps on their entry level system means its poorly optimized. They cried about cyberpunk being poorly optimized aswell and that didnt hold water then, and it doesn't now. It scales perfectly fine with settings and hardware, its just very graphically intensive.
I'll happily point out the game that doesn't warrant poor performance, like remnant 2. But a game of this scope, you can imagine CPU's having a hard time, and then some person says "he has a 4070TI and therefor it should run 100fps", not even mentioning the fact he's running it on a Ryzen 1600 AF.
@@FlipFlopGod
It's a two-way street, bro. Devs need to have good optimization and the player needs to have decent system specs. You need to consider that "optimization" only goes so far. I read somewhere recently that it is highly recommended Starfield be installed on a fast SSD or M.2. Is that poor optimization on Bethesda's part? No. Games are becoming too big and are including significantly more high resolution textures than even a few short years ago, along with all the fancy lighting models and physics.
Little Timmy can't just load up Starfield on a potato with a 7200rpm HDD, i5 2500, and a GTX 660 and expect the game to have good performance. We all don't want to see a game run like steamy doo doo, of course. Building a clean game without bloated code really does help, and taking advantage of all the modern advances in game engines does create more performant games, but at some point you will hit a wall and then it becomes a computational problem.
Which means you need faster hardware. All the optimization in the world can't create high frame rates and ultra settings without the computational and GPU horsepower to make it happen.
The only reason more people aren't complaining about the 30fps is because people who are bothered by that will play it on pc on 60 fps.
120hz on pc can't wait 🔥
I wonder if anyone will have specs to run this game very high though. Bethesda is making the game sound very intensive.
i9 12900k and rtx4090 and just preordered Starfield.
@@TheCocreator I think Starfield will run on 60 fps on a much lower spec pc than that one.
@@Odie50000 they have posted the system requirements already.... it is not that hard to run barring RT effects
Very excited for this game. Glad they are requiring an SSD, too. Should be a fun one to test!
Not required, that probably just mean that they dont test game on HDD
They won't require it. They want their games to run on the lowest end specs as possible.
@@avual1501Fallout 4 already benefited immensely from an SSD so I’m guessing Starfield is really going to struggle with a hard drive.
@@saesang352 the game does say ssd required on steam.
Fallout 4s loading is more dependent on the framerate stupidly enough so at a 30fps cap you got 1 to 5 minutes loading screens no matter what.
Watching you guys talk about this stuff is one of the highest pleasures of my life.
get a life
Mine was ecstacy
I generally prefer the real-time cube map approach to screen space reflections. SSR artifacts are incredibly immersion-breaking. To me, at least, they're more noticeable than the cube-map weirdness.
Agreed. I can easily get used to something that doesn't look quite realistic but very consistent as opposed to something that looks great some of the time but has a tendency to break constantly.
It's why I love what the devs have done with the Metroid Prime remake. It's just so consistent and solid looking.
@@JustFun-ho6qy This, there are many things your brain chooses to ignore or process in a way where you dont care - like getting used to a third person game with a 'smooth' actually-30fp OR cube maps that dont look stupid. SSR are nice, right up until something magically disappears from a reflection, and then you are ripped out of the experience.
@@xBINARYGODxI can't even enjoy checkerboard rendering or the insane sparkly effect that still occurs with RTX. & I feel worse because I feel lik most people don't even perceive it
@@infernaldaedra the sparkly effect from the RTX reflection is because it’s being rendered at a lower resolution. Don’t feel bad , some people don’t notice shader comp stutters 💀, and will say the game runs “fine”.
Cyberpunk had issues with SSR for a long time. The reflections would look horrible and grainy if your settings weren’t maxed out, which at the time was pretty hard to achieve.
low distant and close clouds was always something fascinating for me... i remember Just Cause 2 back then had particle clouds which could be set through modding all the way down above JC2 ocean and even spread the height variety so they would show higher too and they were visible from any distance, amazing stuff back then, seems like decade ago 😁
I have bad news for you - it was *more* than a decade ago. 2010.
Fallout 76... "16 times the detail... *Cheap edit ends.. In distant landscape and weather render technology."
Been playing some JC2 recently, still holds up. And all packed into 4GB👌
im glad to be a PC gamer with a higher end PC. 30fps is unacceptable for me personally. 60 fine but 30 nope
StarField is created on a framework called The Forge by ConfettiFX. It’d be interesting if DF can interview the mastermind behind that framework, Wolfgang Engel.
If Bethesda releases Starfield with a 30fps cap on consoles then that doesn’t speak highly of their development team. Anything less than 60fps even on consoles these days is completely unacceptable.
You’re correct as these New Consoles are definitely capable of 60fps in all games so long as the devs actually put in the required time, effort, and energy at pushing maximum optimization and when it doesn’t happen it’s because the devs aren’t pushing for it and it’s somewhat excusable with small indie devs but not when it’s a major triple a game studio pushing a major 1st party game……..
Indie devs created the next gen plagues tale requiem and it launched at 30fps on all New Consoles and people said it was because the consoles was too weak and blah blah blah and yet the devs recently patched the game and now you can get between 60fps and 120fps on Xbox Series X and PlayStation 5 so we know the systems are more than capable but again it’s all on the devs
Bethesda launching next gen Starfield with an intentional 30fps lock on Xbox Series X is an embarrassment to say the least
Really, one of the things that makes or breaks a game is the score - I’d like to hear more from channels about the music in games. The Skyrim soundtrack 100% set that game in it’s world and it wouldn’t be at all the same or as good without that amazing music. So hoping Starfield’s score gets the attention it deserves.
So you don't play games? You just look for the scores and never play it for yourself? Are you a sheep? What is wrong with you.....
So far from what I've heard it's really good and atmospheric.
The music from the showcase was pretty varied I was surprised. I really liked the main theme of the game when it released but wanted to hear more variety also. The music during the Skill section overview was particularly great
From what I’m hearing in the trailers and showcase, it’s a mix of old sci-fi, space opera movies. Looking foward to the release of the ost.
Hoping that composer Inon Zur puts out a great soundtrack. I would hope we get some sort of musical preview in the months leading up to release.
I’m more worried about the animations and character models on how they look than actually the graphics.
This was so good. Thanks guys. I am so pumped for Starfield.
Man…. I need to second that. I am SO excited for this game. I feel like this is a once a decade type experience.
This will be a once in a generation type game in my opinion. Think back to how much of an impact skyrim had on the gaming landscape, that is what we're about to get again with starfield. And it's so fucking exciting! I genuinely cannot wait for this game, 2 and a half long months to go!!
@mdog86 dark souls was better than skyrim.
@@kbthegoat824 Is that why skyrim has sold twice as many copies, at 60 million sold mind you, as the entire dark souls series?
@@mdog86 cod sells more than anything doesn't make it the best game. And now that it's a gamepass only titles none of their games will come close to those skyrim sales which was released and re-released on any platform imaginable. Dark souls was better than skyrim. Many games try to copy soul games, how many skyrim look alike game have we seen? So who really changed the landscape.? The witcher 3 was also better than skyrim, but I bring up dark souls cause they released the same year. I like what starfield is doing, we haven't seen space games on such scale, but comparing it to skyrim is not a flex in my book.
Interesting to note about Starfield - it seems that the creation engine is now (at least partially) using the open-source The Forge rendering engine, as The Forge Interactive, the developers of such, were contracted by Bethesda to integrate it. Not entirely sure what the capacity of usage is, but its there !
Didn't know about that so thanks for pointing this out.
What makes me the happiest about Starfield is that *Creation Engine 2 looks to be holding the comparison with next-gen engines* , such as (not to name it) UE5, in most of its features: animation, gunfire/combat framework, textures, lighting, etc. (but for the facial animation, tho...).
As we can hope this game's gonna be delivered with a CE2 toolkit, this means *the game is supposedly going to be moddable as is, making it an insane new tool for modders to dive into* .
@@mezzb The CE is a fantastic engine that does ALOt of very complex things. people just love to find something to hate on even if there is zero logic in it. not to mention UE is not mod friendly
@@mezzbPerfectly said. Not to mention that, personally, I find the concentration of the industry in a few outsourced, shared engines to be somewhat negative in the long run.
I'm glad Bethesda sticks by the Creation Engine and I hope they continue to do so. I wish CD Projekt hadn't completely abandoned REDEngine..
I haven't been excited for a game in a LONG time but starfield has me genuinely hyped and I'm a playstation gamer.
12:36 I'd more say that it's graphically beautiful and artistically beautiful, while their previous games have only been artistically beautiful, if you understand what I mean. The graphics used in Skyrim were nothing impressive, but I thought the artstyle and views were absolutely stunning.
same. I actually disliked a lot of the modded HD texture packs because they never nailed the balance of detail and contrast of the original materials. The gritty look was well handled for the time, and well contrasted by the fantastical skyboxes and architectures.
I've literally been commenting on many videos trying to shed some light about this that lowering the resolution or turning down graphics only helps if your CPU isn't a bottleneck and that a game like Starfield cannot be directly compared to any other game in the marked due to its complex systems and simulation.
Unfortunately the discourse around Starfield is hijacked by people that participate in console wars in many cases so that's unfortunate.
Yeah cause as we all know, no other game like Starfield has ever existed, therefore an Xbox Series X is incapable of running anything like it… This is just Cope from fanboys. They could drop it to 1440p and give you 60FPS, but they don’t want to. You guys need to stop acting like this is some Simulation Powerhouse. It’s an ARPG like many others.
@@QuizackYou literally said it yourself; "no other game like Starfield has ever existed".
@@LordLentils That was sarcasm. Many games exist that are similarly hard to run. The fact that it’s in space is irrelevant. There’s many other games that are equally as taxing on the system. This game doesn’t even have SSR. It’s using basic cube maps. It’s not even using RT. It’s a joke that you’ve all accepted the lies that this game is some NASA level simulation that isn’t possible to run over 60 fps. Todd Howard get you guys every time! Hook, Line, and Sinker!
@@Quizack Not many games do what Bethesda games do and based on what they presented Starfield is an evolution of what they are doing. No one is claiming this is some Nasa level of simulation other than you maybe. We're simply discussing what was shown, as that's common for video game enthusiasts to do. Could they be lying and the game isnt what they claim to be? Maybe, anything's possible but I have no evidence to suggest that they are. You say that its just an ARPG like many others, when it obviously isn't and the fact it takes place in space doesn't matter when it obviously does because a big part of the game takes place in space, you travel in it, interact with it, your ship, modifications, companions and base buildings etc. How could it not matter?
The one game I can think of that does some of what Starfield does to a degree is Star Citizen and you can click on my channel and videos and search for Star Citizen to see what an obvious CPU bottleneck looks like, and I'm using a 7700X there which blows the Series X cpu out of the water and it can't do a locked 60 leaving the spaceport. Optimization discussions aside its a point of consideration. We will benchmark the game though on similar hardware as Series X on PC and see how demanding and well optimized the game is.
Hardware tessellation is also in No Mans Sky. Actually every ground texture has it and it looks pretty nice, very high detailed. It was not in the base game in 2016 but was added some years ago.
this game looks massive! i just can't wait to land my spaceship on a planet and walk around
You can not land your ship yourself. The game will do it for you. Also you will not see entering and exiting the atmosphere of a plant/moon. You'll see only a cutscene of you ship landing.
@@khodamn1irrelevant, you can pick any spot on the planet to land on, hence the original comment you responded to.
This is far more like a much larger Outer Worlds than Elite Dangerous, you can't manually land your spaceship.
@@BattleneterThey're not talking about manual landing
@@irecordwithaphone1856 """i just can't wait to land my spaceship on a planet""". He is not going to land his spaceship, he can't.
Im surprised that they praised the motion blur in the FFXVI. At least in the graphics mode of the demo the blur was so aggressive and the camera felt jumpy, that I switched to performance mode. Its still there but in motion it felt better. Ive never been too framerate sensitive but how motion blur is implemented can be very critical to my enjoyment.
I agree. When I tried graphics mode any rotation of the view reduced everything but Clive to a smeared mess.
Agreed, I had to stop the demo, felt sick 😭 Maybe the release version will be better than the demo?
PC gamers can lower the fidelity to get better performance, but Todd won't allow it on the Series X?
...
what a load of BS..., such a dumb excuse, obviously the game is unfinished for the Series X, as MS is making games for PC, Series X AND S (3 systems), and wants the game out asap
...
Sony only needs to focus only on ONE system, the PS5.. (no wonder they are getting timed exclusives so easy, and all with performance modes)
...
Todd, we are not asking for Starfield to only run @60fps, but for the OPTION ..
...
Starfield should be invalid from any Goty nominations, as its beeing shipped too early..
...
now every next gen Xbox game might only have 30fps modes on the most powerful console (Hellblade 2,.. dont see them bothering with a 60fps mode..)
@@VampireNoblesse Assuming it's a CPU bottleneck, then there is nothing they can do to get it up to a consistent 60fps on consoles. Lowering the resolution and textures and shadows would do nothing. They would have to start cutting things from the dynamic simulation itself, which destroys the entire point of the game.
You can literally turn off motion blur. I always turn it off if the option is there
top of the list now for most anticipated game for this year!
this is why i love digital foundry, very detailed information
This week Digital Foundry is back to back analysing the newer titles, 1-2hrs per video.. hats off to there super dedication towards gaming!
Almost done talking myself into getting a Series X for this game. My brother thinks I'm crazy for considering going this far for one game given I already have the competitor but as a huge all things space buff as myself, it's really tempting. Will wait to see in what state the game releases though.
Get it on pc you cant turn down the settings on console and will have a worse experience at 30fps they aren't even adding a performance mode its a total joke
I’ll sell you my XBox Series X. It is literally the most useless console I have ever owned. I don’t even know why I wanted one in the first place.
Given Bethesdas track record just wait for the game to come out first before you buy anything.
@@gameguy301 anesthesia track Trevor or Bethesda track record? Lol
@@HaplessIdiot A gaming rig is unfortunately above my budget. Where I live, I'd be paying almost as much for a good GPU alone as I would for an Xbox
without getting into the 30/60 convo, all this is very nice but what it comes down to is if the game feels good to play
Welcome to the next generation! (Of 30fps)
Once again a pleb who doesn't watch the video and just obsesses about the numbers.
This game looks so ambitious! I can’t wait to play it!
gamebyro engine looks good
The game is ambitious, but not in the “looks” department: bad human models, 3D technologies from ten years ago.
@@tatianaes3354 I think i'd take that over something generic and crappy but good looking. I don't think they can afford to make it look any better anyway
@@tatianaes3354 better than the generic ue4 looking models, so at least is not tiring to look
@@tatianaes3354 I’d take ambition, gameplay, mechanics, choice over some better graphics in a linear game any day.
DF one of the best youtube to analysis every game on FPS detail by detail
This video may piss off some forms of youtubers out there who bank on outrage and fanboyism. Great technical breakdown.
you can't call this fanboyism. the excuses they game for 30FPS don't even make sense. for example, storing object's location is not a heavy task that bogs down the system. that's only when you place ungodly amounts of objects in a single place and render them. 30 FPS in such a title is just stupid and people should be angry otherwise we return to the 30FPS only era.
DF comparing Starfield a single player game with loading screens to Star Citizen which is an MMO as to why its 30fps on Series X, and then trying to say 30fps is going to be the norm this gen. No, 60fps is the norm on other platforms, 30fps is the norm on Xbox. In fact DF were instrumental last gen in getting devs to lock games at 30fps with no toggle, then as the next gen came in all games were stuck and needed manpower to to revisit old titles.
Demand 60fps, demand better, when it releases on PC it will have an option to lower the graphics on lesser machines yet still still run at +60fps, they are talking nonsense to you.
Lowering the graphics wouldn't help the Frame Rate it's going to have a CPU Bottleneck
Guys, you forgot that TES IV: Oblivion was very impressive on release!
They talked about that in the video tho ;-)
It's not ok for Starfield to be 30fps. It's also not ok for TOTK to be 30fps (which is why I ripped my cart and play it on my PC).
Even if 60fps isn’t possible on Xbox Series… I would love to see a 40fps performance mode to reduce input lag
I would love to see 4k 60fps or 1440p 60fps. Anything else is a massive L.
It is possible just not for a game of this scale. If it was on ps5 it would have the same issue.
@@ElderSnowball Well thats the problem, they should not make games this big, if the hardware cant run it proplerly. just my opinion. They knew it from the start that they Would make it 30 fps only for xbox.
@@Amhoj1 this is like saying rockstar or every Sony exclusive on PS4 shouldn't have been made because they ran at 30 fps, dumb comment
@@Amhoj1 Yeah, that's likely the case - that they always knew it would be a 30fps title on console, that is. Bear in mind that this project started before the Microsoft acquisition, and despite the UI woes BGS titles have always been primarily best played on PC. So despite claims that the game was "built from the ground up" for Xbox, that's marketing spiel.
And perhaps just my bias speaking, as a PC player who will not be capped at 30fps, but they absolutely should make games this big and this ambitious. It's why their titles are so beloved to this day, where higher-performing games have been forgotten. Because they don't base their scope around current hardware, per se, but project vision. Why you hear Todd say "wasn't possible until now" a lot here.
Worst case scenario it'll run beautifully next generation, as with Skyrim Special Edition, although I'm sure that's not news you'd like to hear at this point, soz.
Call me crazy, but i'll choose 60fps over "sandwiches staying there" 100% of the time.
This was a really thoughtful and informative discussion. Really enjoyed this format. Keep up the great work.
I wish they just gave an option for a unlocked frame rate so those with a VRR can take advantage (or any future consoles).
Just add a disclaimer (like what some games do with a fov slider), more options the better.
I’d love 60 fps on this game but I prefer a stable experience. For single player games it’s not as big of an issue for me. A lot of multiplayer games coming out now are up to 120fps on series X which I think is more important.
i usually reject any game that runs below 60 fps nowadays, but Starfield looks so big and impressive that i can understand the decision to lock it at 30
Agreed. An option to pick higher frames for a lower resolution experience would be welcomed.
If you call frames down to 12fps stable you have low standards especially on a fps shooter but get keep on getting fucked by xbox that does it form me im done with them time to switch
@@erikwurgler If you watched the video, since it's CPU bound and not GPU bound, lowering resolution won't improve framerate.
@@erikwurgleryeah I don’t like they made the decision for the players. If people wanna play at 1080p but get 60 fps, let those people do it
What people don't realize half the time is that it's even remarkable that the consoles now a days can even run these new games for $500 give or take. Build a pc with 500 same specs as a ps5 or Xbox series x it's not as easy if even possible as it once was.
Locking a game at 30fps and the amount of motion blur that usually comes with it is bad enough but even if you have a VRR display is unacceptable. Quite a few people I know have bought a monitor for console gaming for the reduced latency as they play a lot of FPS games and FIFA, almost all mid range monitors support VRR over HDMI these days. It makes such a huge difference.
The motion blur is horrible I don't know how anyone can stomach it.
@@rinner2801 Tell me about it.
The rendering engine is called "The Forge" btw. An open source rendering engine, also used for NMS on Mac. Wolfgang Engel is one of the main devs.
I think it was also the Remedy CEO or someone that said (I think specifically about SSDs and loading times) but in general, that just because hardware gets better doesn't mean games will perform better. As the hardware gets better, good AAA devs are going to push that new hardware. They're not just going to keep graphics and scale consistent and push 1000fps. They're going to be like "Oh, we have 3X the power... alright boys let's up the physic sim, let's up the geometric detail, lets add RT, let's add particle effects, let's make our AI more advanced..." etc. There goes your frame rate.
Great point. This is also why webpages still take 5 seconds to load (on average).
Another parallel point is that games are made to target the lowest common denominator of hardware. You might have a $3k gaming PC, but you still have to play more or less the same games as little Timmy on his mom's $400 business laptop.
Imagine how great games would be if devs just said "screw it, Timmy's 8 year old laptop is out, we're only making games for PCs with 64 GB of RAM, the latest CPU and GPU, and 8TB of SSD storage.". We'd get an instant 5-10 year leap in game capability overnight.
Thanks Captain obvious
When they're done, they can sell the game to their family members and get me my copy when a mid gen console and 60fps patch releases .
I think the grass on the planets are on a grid system. Like voxels. This is really noticeable at 26:24 through 26:26 if you keep looking near the robot's feet and you'll see a "block" of grass get culled out at the bottom of the screen. The rest of the grass is in a box pattern as well. There's areas after this that show it off too.
You never played a video game?
@@questionmark9713 I have. I've worked on a couple and (foolishly) went to college for it earning a BFA. Most engines, by default, use mainly either hand placed, hand painted instances, or scatter systems. Not a hard grid. Just thought it was interesting and may give in a little behind-the-scenes look at the new generation tools in this new version of The Creation Engine.
The fact that some fanboys are comparing graphics of these massive open world games to corridors like The Last of Us really highlights the importance of videos like this.
Both had different hurdles to be as advanced as they were. Last Of Us maxed out the PS3 hardware to get where it got, Starfield probably melted so many CPU’s tracking all the objects, characters and mapping let alone the actual gameplay.
when the game comes out running at 60fps on a ryzen 5 3600 you will see who the real fanboy was
Love these deep dives, guys. Keep up the good work.
DF doing what they do best. I cannot wait for Starfield, last one i played was fallout 4. Super excited for this truly next gen game
Truly next gen..... 30fps..... 😂😂😂😂😂
Laughable to call it truly next gen when they can't hit 60fps.
@@makaiokalahama 30 because it's truly next gen. Ubisoft or CDPR can hit higher framerates because of their dead open world. Even Rdr2 was extremely disappointing in that sense. Technologically speaking Starfield is the largest leap in gaming in a looong time.
@@LeMAD22 what exactly is "truly" next-gen about it.... be specific.
Starfield NPCs somehow still look and animate like Skyrim NPCs.
I'm still gonna play the hell out of this game... I hope.
Great video as always. Explains BGS's viewpoint and why they chose 30 FPS, but it does highlight the limitations of console; both technical limitations as well as user choice. Even being able to add a 40 FPS down the line would be a notable improvement for those who use high end panels.
Consoles are physically limited, but PC players are limited by their wallets, and in many cases, MUCH more limited than console players based on the average specs by Steam userbase. People always make it seem like PC players aren't limited... sure, if you can afford the latest generation of high frequency clock speed, multi-core processors and RTX 40 Series GPUs. If you don't have that, these newer games are going to also start destroying the first couple generations of Ryzen CPUs, 12th gen intel CPUs and 30 Series Nvidia GPUs, and systems without PCIe SSDs. Star Citizen is a prime example, let alone terrible ports that run so much worse on high end PCs than consoles lol.
Limitations can be technical, but there are other limitations that are just as bad, or worse. However, I do agree that console users should have some choice, but it's also not obvious that Starfield even run well with lower resolution or lower visual settings, so sometimes developers just don't give you a choice if it's going to be sh*t and make the console or the developers look bad.
@@af4396 Money's a limit for everyone. It applies to both consoles and PC. But consoles hit their ceiling far, far sooner.
The other key limitation of consoles in this case is you're stuck with Howard's vision of the game. What settings he wants, what framerate he wants. PC provides such much more freedom to shape your experience and tailor settings based on what's important to you.
Yeah no matter how many generations we get into there's always gonna be a dev that wants to push the envelope somewhere just to force 30fps. I still think most games these days going forward will be able to play 60fps on Series X/Ps5 but yeah that's our reality as console gamers.
@@Csal92 It's better than last gen at least, where every AAA developer was pushing the envelope to the point where games were regularly seeing dips below 20. I still remember my first playthrough of The Witcher 3 on PS4 and how bad that was. If the new _minimum_ standard is a stable 30fps, I'd be totally fine with that.
The thing a lot of people (mostly people who don't watch DF lol) don't get about frame rate is that the actual frames per second number is not the most important factor of how smooth the game runs. It _is_ important, but not the _most_ important. The frame pacing is the most important factor by a long shot. A game running at 30fps with a completely flatlined 33.3ms frame pacing will always feel better to play than a game running at 60fps with frame times skipping between 10-30+ms (for reference, with 60fps you want a steady 16.6ms pacing). Whenever that frame time drops below the mean, or even just at all in many cases, it results in a noticeable stutter. Maybe not visibly, not everyone is going to notice a difference of milliseconds with their eyes, but you will definitely "feel" the sudden loss of responsiveness even if you miss the visual stutter itself. And when that is happening constantly, as it does in many poorly made games both on console and PC, any additional frames per second are basically meaningless. Even high refresh rates like 120+ still feel pretty bad when their pacing is off, just not quite as bad as 30 or 60.
That said, only time will tell with Starfield. Hopefully, since they're targetting 30fps, it's actually a _stable_ 30. If it's 30fps with bad frame pacing, then I expect to see it get torn to shreds.
I'm assuming i've missed something, but isn't FSR supposed to be implemented on consoles? Surely, these types of massive open world games should have that baked in.
Always top-tier content from you folks
Another point not mentioned in this video about the 30fps. Todd Howard said the environment was procedurally generated when you walk to new locations, then they put gameplay elements to make things interesting.
Which means CPU are potentially computing these kinds of things in the background, it may not be cheap.
Think the fact that the weaker console also targets the same frame rate is a big give away, since it's the same cpu
@@mryellow6918 I've been saying this since it was announced that to me as someone that plays a ton of games on PC and benchmarks them I can see this game being taxing on the CPU. It's like some of these people don't think. Obviously they've tried to see what a 60 fps mode would look like and came to the realization that 30fps is the only option. It sucks that you cant remove the FPS caps on consoles or use performance measuring software but it's what it is. If it was possible they would've done it but some people don't want to believe it. Oh well.
According to minimal pc requirements it shouldn't be that big of a deal, the cpu in XSX|S are more capable
It's actually what many gamers seem to forget, if a game is targeting 30fps and pushing the cpu hard, it's hard to scale that to 60fps, especially considering that higher frame rates tend to hit the cpu harder.
On the gpu front, that scales far better, they can lower the resolution, the frame rate or visual settings to get what they want, so a bump to 60fps in this case, but if the cpu is the bottleneck, lowering the resolution or visual setting will make little difference to the cpu demands, but going from 30fps to 60fps will likely hit the cpu harder.
That isn't to say it couldn't be done, but it would need some major work and cut backs to achieve that.
It's like that Matrix demo, imagine trying to get that to 60fps when it targets 30fps on consoles, dropping as low as 20fps, and if the PC part of that demo is any indicator, it's quite demanding on the cpu, basically, it would need major work to get it running at 60fps and the cuts needed might be too big to be worthwhile.
Personally, I think console gamers are getting accustomed to 60fps because most games are crossgen games, not that difficult to offer 60fps or 120fps for a game that targets the last gen consoles but on the newer consoles, but at the end of the day, gamers by the next gen consoles for next gen gaming, not last gen gaming with better visuals, after all, wasn't that the reason they were drooling over that Matrix demo? that was a clear indicator of what was to come, 30fps if you truly want next gen.
@@vandammage1747 That would be fine if the game was targeting minimal specs on the consoles, we know that isn't going to be the case, also, usually console cpu's are strip back versions of the desktop PC version to reduce cost and looking at the specs on the PC, that could be targeting 30fps for all we know at those specs, I suspect on the PC, this game could be quite demanding if it's pushing the Xbox console hard at 30fps.
I have absolutely no problem with 30FPS. I played games at that setting for years. It always allowed me to crank whatever game I have to max settings and maintain consistent framerate while also keeping GPU temperatures incredibly low and extending it's lifespan.
Or just have better cooling..
Wow this has been a good week, I love these "mini" special Directs.
Great analysis guys. Very enjoyable conversation.
Regardless of the complexity, playing a FPS @30FPS in 2023, just feels awful.
It’s not an FPS but I get your point, I wish Bethesda would improve their 3rd person camera so it would be a viable way to play.
@@pocketsand76 The combat is fps, third person combat always feels worse on Bathesda games.
@@pocketsand76 you’re right, it’s not in the FPS genre, I shoulda said first-person perspective, which I still argue feels like shit when played in 30 FPS…
Especially for someone like me that’s used to 240hz/fps esport kinda FPS. I know it’s a very different game, but 60 FPS should be a minimum target.
Would be awesome if you uploaded these talks to podcasts channels. They are great listens
I hope they add the setting to unlock FPS if we want, VRR 40-60 FPS is more appealing to me than 30 locked.
@tacituskillgore7437 Modding on consoles is not... great, to say the least ;-)
PC version will not have any FPS limits.
Totally hyped for this game. Can't wait.
Surprised that in the discussion of the framerate lock there was no mention of Beth notoriously tying their physics engine to the refresh.
Dare I say it was mildly hinted at without directly saying so?
Maybe.
I have to feel it also a case of "engine needs way more horsepower to achieve anything more."
Maybe if you have a Threadripper system with triple 4090s you can force it lol.
Bethesda games usually don't break unless you go above 60fps. Even then there are mods to fix that
They did that for fallout 4 and never before or after
@@raymondwhiting6267 that is objectively false. Skyrim and Oblivion are well known for literally having quests break to the point of even ruining saves at higher than 60hz
@@Legion849 yeah 60 is usually the threshold, which is why I'm a little concerned there might be more to that the half assed "we did it for the ARRRT" justification for a 30 lock now
I hope 30fps only does not become the main option for this next generation, 60 fps for most new releases has been a breath of fresh air since the ps4/Xbox one days. I thought DF of all outlets would be more on board with that idea but it seems they are defending its use now
Were you listening?
Most games can have a 60fps mode. Most developers worth their salt will have this. 60fps should be the minimum acceptable standard these days.
@@Akkbar21 DF didn't make this game or any other game they're just guessing like you and I and they have been wrong in the past claiming "cpu limited" when it's not. Minimum pc requirements are much lower than XSX|S and Bethesda aren't even using directstorage that would optimize cpu tasks a lot.
@positivevibe5034 most developers aren't making games like starfield. The only comparison would be rockstar. Who will also be releasing gta 6 in 30fps unless a new console releases
@@CardbanditsUK You don't know that. You have no actual info.
Why not at least 40 for 120 hz displays? It looks so much smoother
And why not automatically unlock FPS for VRR enabled setups?
Possibly they just don't think enough people have 120FPS VRR screens for it to be worth it, while they also have so many other priorities.
@@alexlyster3459PlayStation does it
@@alexlyster3459
It’ll probably happen but it will be when Starfield gets it’s huge 1 year update that these Beth games usually get.
No lie if I didn’t have a kid on the way I’d invest in a Series S just to play Starfield. I’m on PS5 but Starfield looks amazingly fun.
@@Mark-99999
Not every game but the majority of Sony studios implement both a capped 40fps mode and a VRR uncapped mode.
Thing is that Sony’s most recent games have typically been way less ambitious than Starfield is and have plenty of CPU and GPU overhead on PS5 to make those systems worthwhile.
Really should have a 40fps/120hz mode on the XSX at least.
Really Mr graphics engineer..you must know better than Bethesda. You should apply for a job with them
@@Dd-fb2tjShut up man, it’s not even like you’re defending a developer that’s known for their technical expertise
@@joeystar1043nah, it’s not the like the said developer has made any of the greatest games of all time is it with multiple GOTY awards 😂 Clearly they know nothing!
@@environm3ntalist549 he said technical expertise they’re called bugthesda for a reason
@@AntonKushnir-tc5kz you’ll be able to run at 60fps if you are CPU is very fast. If not you won’t. What is so hard to understand that games can be CPU limited on console? You can be unhappy about that but that’s the design choice that has been made. I think it’s a good choice but we will see.
Isn't the StarCitizen facial animation actually the same tech that was later bought by Epic and became Meta Human, and they just still use an "older" version of that for SC?
Yes!
@@DigitalFoundry i actually wonder if CIG can still get updates or if they can update or develop it further themselves, since they were partners before Epic bought out 3Lateral to make Meta Human for them.
I haven't been this excited for a game for years. Cannot wait.
Not even zelda tears of the kingdom? Lol but all seriousness, i cant wait to play starfield, im so excited
@@duppypixels nah, it's just BOTW again.
@@duppypixelszeldas good but it's still just a zelda, this is really something else
DF is without a doubt THE BEST channel for everything gaming, very grounded perspectives and very thorough investigations. Always exciting seeing a new upload
Grounded perspectives lol? They've been oblivious to TAA motion smearing for years.
@@Scorpwind I’m talking humility not technicality.
@@jm9523 Humility? Can you elaborate?
@@Scorpwind lol dawg they are nice
@@jm9523 I wouldn't say so. Whenever the topic of motion blur comes up, John often cannot help himself and make some kind of a comment/joke about people/the idea of disabling it. At one time, he called people that disable it 'heathens'.
Side note about FF16. The Demo is Version 1.1. The State of Play last month was running Version 1.3. You can see it on the bottom corner of the main menu (as you could when it was shown in the State of Play)
Boots up Xbox to check FF16 ver. number. Turns off Xbox in disgust.
Why wouldn’t they release the better demo? Calling cap on it being better
Maybe it's demo version 1.1 and that was the actually game version 1.3
@@thedude8128 this sounds more likely
@@Masterchief12455 How can it be cap? Updated version of games go up not down. SOP was 1.3, demo 1.1 is a fact.
so hyped for Starfield
Yea. I remember the breakdown of the specs reveal of the XBSX... Not even half of what you guys predicted performance wise vs the PS5 came true. Smh.... Now i see why people say DF is biased... 1200p @30fps is now cool and acceptable by xbox standards now
4 Df directs in week is a record
I love the last part of the video. I’m hearing a bunch of people say they’re worried about a lot of the planets being empty. Every time I hear that I’m like, but in real life most planets are empty, so it makes perfect sense 🤷🏽♂️
A game about space. So if it has empty planets, it should be that way. Water is also wet in games.
surprised both Rich & Oliver aren't here for the deep dive Starfield coverage as it would have been great to hear their opinions but still as always, great coverage to both John & Alex👌
2:00 But it's mainly a first-person game with combat in first-person. Sure, it's doesn't have Doom-like pacing, but you still shoot enemies in first-person, fly around and stuff. Doing all that at 30fps does not seem enjoyable. That said, I'm playing it on PC anyway.
No mention about the 1km cell size (up from 128m i believe) and the wrap around cells? That's a massive creation engine upgrade.
was gamebriyo what this really is? just updated?
and wasn't that updated from an even older game engine?
I can't member all the details.
@@youtubeshadowbannedmylasta2629 Morrowind used NetImmerse 3.0. The engine developer then changed the name to GameBryo (4.0), which was used for Oblivion and FO3. After that Bethesda bought the source code and developed their own branch, Creation Engine (GameBryo still exists as its own thing).
I am trying so hard not to get super excited about Starfield. It has so much potential to be a monumental game or a catastrophic failure!
The best part of any Bethesda game is the modding which takes place after the fact. I am hopeful that this game will be solid because MSFT told them to delay the game to just polish everything and not rush it out because of pressure to cash in like CP2077. You can see the improvements from last year and you can tell they didn't change the game at all they just made it look/work better. I think this is a big benefit of being own by Xbox as they have the money to delay if needed. We will see if they are lying or not in September.
Just expect Fallout/Elders scrolls level of bugs and I think you'll be fine.
It has a 0% chance of being a catastrophic failure. Even if it is a little buggy
Absolutely what John says, give us a VRR mode...
Had no idea Lester from GTA reviewed games.
what an excellent breakdown! I'm not familar with all the software technology that's described, but the detail and compliments during the breakdown make me excited to play this game when its released!
Ah, so you don't know about it, but do you think it's an excellent contribution?
Much of what is said is nonsense...
Horizion could be 40 times bigger and still run at 60 fps...
Only as much is loaded as fits into memory and everything that comes after that is reloaded anyway.
The engine is just at the end and the console is not that good either, especially with the block by the one called XSS..
@@feldartillerie1620 Video games load assets from memory. Yes. Correct. Good job. What does that have to do with anything in the video?
That is incorrect. Horizon Forbidden West is nowhere near the scale of this game and how the games play are entirely different too. For one, Alloy is not a customizable created character with a different voice and unique Rpg like dialogue. It is closer to Uncharted than it is Skyrim or Fallout. Because it is more of an action game, things like objects and unique and random encounters take a back seat. Even if it were 40X larger, it still wouldn't be as complicated as this game. Horizon also takes place in one world and so it isn't like you're going to thousands of different places. That is why it is 60fps. Sony knows how to pick talent and so the things that their teams like Naughty Dog, Santa Monica Studios, or Guerilla Games do should be impossible even going back to the Ps3 era.
I think they should up the resolution on the Series S to 4K and lock the framerate to 15FPS not to lose ThAt FiDeLiTy, AnD aLl ThAt StUfF
I don't buy their excuses for 30fps. This is simple: if your primary HW target can't run the game at 60fps even with visual quality tradeoffs (performance mode), you should take a step back OR wait for the next gen of HW to realize that vision.
What Microsoft did instead was if CP2077 made that Path-Tracing update mandatory, now the game only works in RT Overdrive mode, so framerate sucks for almost everyone (and even on a 4090 it doesn't really work well if you care for IQ in action not in static scenes or cherrypicked places).
Read more
My 4080 can run Cyberpunk's Path Tracing mode at 4k & DLSS performance mode + frame generation at a stable 60 fps in literally in scene. Sure, frame generation isn't as cool as getting real frames, but the gameplay still feels very responsive and fluid, so I'm fine with it.
Anyway, 30 fps has always been the standard on consoles. That's just the natural consequence of weak hardware.
@@faultier1158 Notice that my comment about performance contains that caveat about image quality; yes you can get 60fps but the visual quality has very clear compromises even without DLSS. DF's video about Overdrive explores this well so I'm not repeating them. It's an impressive step towards AAA-grade path tracing, but we're still one GPU generation away from doing that well.
"30 fps has always been the standard on consoles" = complete bulls*it, consoles have been supporting 60fps for decades, all the way back to the NES and maybe before. In every gen it's always a balance of FPS vs resolution vs rendering & gameplay features. Most modern AAA games do 60fps in the curr-gen consoles, some even go up to 120fps. This limit of 30fps is completely abnormal. Name one big game for PS5 or XSS that can't do 60fps.
@@opinali name one game with the CPU requirements of Starfield.
@@faultier1158 I know the problem is the CPU load for simulation. What I'm saying is that this is too ambitious for this console gen. A turn-based game or something like Factorio is OK at 30fps, but Starfield is not just that, it also features the kind of fast-paced first- or third-person combat and other game mechanics that totally suck at 30fps. They should either scale back the simulation or find a way to optimize it more. Otherwise, this is a PC exclusive game in practice if you want an acceptable experience.
Honestly I have a hard time sharing everyone’s excitement about this when the characters look like they came out of Skyrim…
Get your eyes checked
The 30 fps situation is just like the running gag from the movie Monty Python and the Holy Grail, most gamers didnt wanted to see, but it was coming.
No Man's Skyrim, regardless of whether John "likes" the comparison or not! The similarities are obvious and apparent so consumers are perfectly entitled to make them. We are not here to act like PR and marketing guys for Bethesda/Microsoft albeit I can appreciate that DF may be in a different place with its history of having previously produced content sponsored by Microsoft.
I don't understand why df always trying to normalize 30 fps on consoles instead of pushing the industry to progress forward, it's like you guys are happy games are running at 30fps so you could justify your 3000$ pcs.
you guys have a voice and your words matter in this industry, if this game needed to run at 30fps, then don't try to normalize it as the standard and the future, you should treat this as a justified anomaly ! Also you keep bringing up jedi survivor in every damn video like it's performance is justified ! It looks like last gen game for god sake, this was a matter of optimization not the visuals being complex ! And gotham knights isn't a game you should reference in every video when you already said in it's tech review that it looked bad and isn't representable of what this generation would offer.
I think the industry will move backwards with you guys trying to push 30fps as the new normal, so use your voice wisely.
60 fps over 30 isn't pushing the industry forward.
@@mikewade777 yeah right, going back to 30 is
@@mohamad-abdo There is no ..going back to.. 30 fps games will always happen, will always sell, and its been that way for decades, and will continue
To me there's no "Next-gen" experience without better framerate. If a game cannot run at 60 fps on console, give it at LEAST a 40 FPS option for those who have 120Hz screens..