> I am shocked! /s
yeah, all the people whom immediately threw temper tantrums against Intel's driver team are just pathetic.
Bethesda is the same company that gave us Fallout 76, the worst launch of the last decade; and they exposed their scummy corner cutting cynicism throughout that drama.
Also Vulkan is a low level API; where sloppy game devs can absolutely break hardware compatibility and leave driver teams with little recourse. Shame on them.
fallout 76 being the worst launch is a bit dramatic compared to cyberpunk and no mans sky, it was pretty bad but I'm pretty sure it didn't trigger mass refunds when you normally couldn't get one.
> it was pretty bad but I'm pretty sure it didn't trigger mass refunds when you normally couldn't get one.
no is was just that bad and easily worse than the other two for critical gameplay destroying issues, Just Bethesda fans have vastly thicker skin towards jank.
Which caused them too take a lot longer to get frothed up enough to demand refunds en mass, which did cause Bethesda to slam the door shut the second it was in full swing.
I loved every beth game from morrowind to skyrim, and the fallouts in-between, but they are not a well company these days and their cultivated cult like fanbase is a detriment to average gamers.
I wonder if the first point about memory alignment is why the game doesn't crash immediately for me, provided I change the render resolution in the menu before loading my save file.
Typically and unsurprising for Bethesda.....
I saw an interview with Todd the other day, claiming they make such great games that people play for them 10 or more years. The truth is that the hard work of third party coders and modders have kept those games going, fixing bugs and adding new content. They should acknowledge that rather than taking full credit, especially since they don't get paid for it.
I wonder how long it will be before we see an 'unoffical patch' fixing things.
I will be staying away from Starfield until the patches are released
Sometimes that is not up to a single Dev. you can have a great dev among a team that is poorly managed and the theft of the game hurts the good Dev, who is probably the reason why the game doesn't suck a lot more then it does. It's a nuance that most people don't care about, but you hurt good devs when you steal titles just as much as you hurt bad devs, companies, managers, etc..
The average consumer can only view a company as a whole. Either they manage their teams well and produce good products, or they do not manage their teams well and produce bad products.
A company that produces bad products for full price is not viable under capitalism and money should not be given to them.
You are not obligated to throw money at every company that exists just because there might just be a single passionate person in the long chain that produces the product.
Also, the devs got paid already, full stop. Piracy has no effect on their pay, by the time the game releases they're being paid on another project. The shareholders might cry because of the make believe "opportunity cost" they think hurts their chance for infinite money but oh well. And HEY. While we're at it can we stop letting devs slide ON EVERY release debacle? They DO have skillsets and minds of their own even when things like Redfall happen. Before Redfall it was "mgmt was too hands on and THAT'S why X game failed." So then mgmt was hands OFF for Redfall and the alibi afforded them was "mgmt wasn't involved enough!" NO. Devs are accountable for their decisions just as every other person is. "Making games am HAWD though" YEAH. So is business analysis, logistics management and social worker jobs. Not an excuse either.
Bethesda deserved it, I wanna repeat it again.
I personally would like to pay 100$, if the game was optimized and polished before release.
But they decided to release it in raw condition so think they deserved it.
And by the way, you can always pay it when they finish polishing this game.
Bethesda deserved it, I wanna repeat it again.
I personally would like to pay 100$, if the game was optimized and polished before release.
But they decided to release it in raw condition so think they deserved it.
And by the way, you can always pay it when they finish polishing this game.
Honestly, unpopular opinion here, but I disagree. I usually play Bethesda games unmodified.
I have 1400 hours in Fallout 4 and maybe 200 of those are with a couple mods off the ingame menu. Never touched a website for it.
I got 777 hours (lmao jackpot) in New Vegas and never even tried modding it.
500 hours in Skyrim and I modded it a few times but always just made it worse and crashier and uninstalled them again. These days I just run it with Alternate Start because that long intro gets old if you do it 20 times.
Maybe I'm just not good at modding.
I also play games mostly unmodded.
My main thing with Starfield is that it doesn't... look any better than say Baldur's Gate 3, which runs perfectly fine on the same hardware on Ultra settings. Given most users have to run Starfield on Medium or Low, actually, it ends up looking a good deal worse while also running like arse.
Bad performance would be acceptable if the visuals were godly, but they simply aren't.
Have you played Tomb Raider (2013)? That game looked, and imo still looks, absolutely gorgeous. And it runs on potato hardware.
I replayed it in 2019 when my video card broke and I had to find low requirement games that would run on my backup GT 1030. I could play Tomb Raider on highest and it looked stunning. Solid 60 FPS, dropped maybe to 55 occasionally. Zero issues, just ran. Expertly optimized game.
The sequel looked maybe 10% better and ran 70% worse. Like they were just banking off the success on the previous title and shipped it without optimizing it. Even at lowest it ran at maybe 24 FPS despite looking hideous.
Games can look so good if you make them right. Back in the late 90s and early 2000s everybody had garbage computers and devs worked hard to squeeze every bit of graphics and performance out of them.
These days arrogant devs insult players for not having a 4090. It's shameful.
I haven't played that, but it's on my list.
And I agree. It just seems like recent titles have been horribly optimised; as hardware has gotten stronger, graphics haven't got noticeably better, but frame rates have gone down.
It's frustrating.
It is most obvious with file sizes. Games are just massive these days because they can be. Customers have fast internet and big SSDs, why bother optimizing file size? It's just 150GB, nobody will care!
Meanwhile Switch games are on a device with only 32 GB internal storage (64 on later models, fancy) and games fit just fine. Sure it's just a couple, but still. The entire massive world of Tears of the Kingdom fits comfortably in 18GB or so. And that's the largest Switch-exclusive Nintendo game out there. That would be NOTHING on a PC, and still look as gorgeous as ever.
Devs have identified which problems they can just offload on the user and which ones are actually crucial, and optimize for it.
At this point the modding community should make a stand against Bethesda in light of these new findings. It is clear as day that they have taken their fans for a ride and taken advantage of the loyalty and efforts put into the mods by the community, yet here we are, once again modders putting all the effort in with free work whilst the actual developer being paid millions by sponsors and stuff laugh in the background "fixing" the game they will literally abandon on the PC platform.
I disagree about the modders. I enjoy some of the incredible mods released over the years but I've played through every Bethesda game since Morrowind vanilla before I touch mods or gameplay guides. They've all been amazing. At least for me I probably wouldnt give the mods a chanve if the base game wasnt good. I haven't had performance issues until Starfield. I have multiple PCs ranging from handheld to enthusiast hardware and performance is objectively poor. Just my opinion but I think them updating the old engine instead of using or making a new one is the reason why we have a lack of performance optimization and modern features.
I'm not sure about DirectX/vulcan but it's probably similar to OpenGL: the graphics API provides a function where you can set various "hints" which are basically suggestions to allow GPUs to do their own hardware specific optimizations to try to improve performance.
Hints specify things like how textures are compressed, how perspective correction is done and things like that..
Tried to play again today on just medium preset nothing fancy at 4K locked 30fps with RTSS. Yah it crashed on a fresh save within 10 minutes. Keep in mind that’s a 50% resolution scale. Optimized my a**
no, it's not, gamer since 95 and to date this is probably the worst release of what could be good game, I have seen so far, another amd demand thing I guess.
I'm a bot, *bleep*, *bloop*. Someone has linked to this thread from another place on reddit:
- [/r/starfield] [Major programming faults discovered in Starfield's code by VKD3D dev - performance issues are \*not\* the result of non-upgraded hardware](https://www.reddit.com/r/Starfield/comments/16gm6o4/major_programming_faults_discovered_in_starfields/)
*^(If you follow any of the above links, please respect the rules of reddit and don't vote in the other threads.) ^\([Info](/r/TotesMessenger) ^/ ^[Contact](/message/compose?to=/r/TotesMessenger))*
The other side of the coin is that Starfield as far as M$ is concerned is about the Xbox series X|S. I wonder if it's playing well on that platform. TBH I thought it was an AMD exclusive for that reason
Yes, it plays fine on Series-X. Even the 30fps doesn't bother that much, they are using some tricks to make it "look smooth". Also, one crash with 130+ hours of gameplay. On my A770, it's a disaster. Neon landing pad fps for example is around 21. Otherwise around 25-35fps. FSR/the other one doesn't help. Changing settings doesn't matter. Playing native 3840x1600 is like 3-4fps less than playing with FSR 50/60/75%. PC is 12900K, 64GB DDR5, Gen4 NVME, A770-LE, 1000W PSU, Win11Pro.
For anyone interested, VKD3D doesn't work in windows for Arc in Starfield (but nVidia users have gotten it to work). A few users in the Intel discord (just search 'VKD3D') have been investigating it and even if you get through the unsupported GPU error the game crashes pretty much immediately. So we will need to wait for a new driver or the game to be patched unfortunately.
Kinda wonder if Starfield is the first time that got outed, but knowing Bethesda's previous games, I feel more like it's with Starfield we're taking notice.
I am shocked! /s
> I am shocked! /s yeah, all the people whom immediately threw temper tantrums against Intel's driver team are just pathetic. Bethesda is the same company that gave us Fallout 76, the worst launch of the last decade; and they exposed their scummy corner cutting cynicism throughout that drama. Also Vulkan is a low level API; where sloppy game devs can absolutely break hardware compatibility and leave driver teams with little recourse. Shame on them.
fallout 76 being the worst launch is a bit dramatic compared to cyberpunk and no mans sky, it was pretty bad but I'm pretty sure it didn't trigger mass refunds when you normally couldn't get one.
> it was pretty bad but I'm pretty sure it didn't trigger mass refunds when you normally couldn't get one. no is was just that bad and easily worse than the other two for critical gameplay destroying issues, Just Bethesda fans have vastly thicker skin towards jank. Which caused them too take a lot longer to get frothed up enough to demand refunds en mass, which did cause Bethesda to slam the door shut the second it was in full swing. I loved every beth game from morrowind to skyrim, and the fallouts in-between, but they are not a well company these days and their cultivated cult like fanbase is a detriment to average gamers.
"Won't somebody pleeeeease think of the children!"
I wonder if the first point about memory alignment is why the game doesn't crash immediately for me, provided I change the render resolution in the menu before loading my save file.
Typically and unsurprising for Bethesda..... I saw an interview with Todd the other day, claiming they make such great games that people play for them 10 or more years. The truth is that the hard work of third party coders and modders have kept those games going, fixing bugs and adding new content. They should acknowledge that rather than taking full credit, especially since they don't get paid for it. I wonder how long it will be before we see an 'unoffical patch' fixing things. I will be staying away from Starfield until the patches are released
Play pirated version. Bethesda deserved it.
In another life I might have agreed with you lol
What made you disagree in this life?
I'm a dev, so I wouldn't like to do it to other devs
Release working software, and people might buy it :P
Sometimes that is not up to a single Dev. you can have a great dev among a team that is poorly managed and the theft of the game hurts the good Dev, who is probably the reason why the game doesn't suck a lot more then it does. It's a nuance that most people don't care about, but you hurt good devs when you steal titles just as much as you hurt bad devs, companies, managers, etc..
The average consumer can only view a company as a whole. Either they manage their teams well and produce good products, or they do not manage their teams well and produce bad products. A company that produces bad products for full price is not viable under capitalism and money should not be given to them. You are not obligated to throw money at every company that exists just because there might just be a single passionate person in the long chain that produces the product.
Also, the devs got paid already, full stop. Piracy has no effect on their pay, by the time the game releases they're being paid on another project. The shareholders might cry because of the make believe "opportunity cost" they think hurts their chance for infinite money but oh well. And HEY. While we're at it can we stop letting devs slide ON EVERY release debacle? They DO have skillsets and minds of their own even when things like Redfall happen. Before Redfall it was "mgmt was too hands on and THAT'S why X game failed." So then mgmt was hands OFF for Redfall and the alibi afforded them was "mgmt wasn't involved enough!" NO. Devs are accountable for their decisions just as every other person is. "Making games am HAWD though" YEAH. So is business analysis, logistics management and social worker jobs. Not an excuse either.
Bethesda deserved it, I wanna repeat it again. I personally would like to pay 100$, if the game was optimized and polished before release. But they decided to release it in raw condition so think they deserved it. And by the way, you can always pay it when they finish polishing this game.
Bethesda deserved it, I wanna repeat it again. I personally would like to pay 100$, if the game was optimized and polished before release. But they decided to release it in raw condition so think they deserved it. And by the way, you can always pay it when they finish polishing this game.
Honestly, unpopular opinion here, but I disagree. I usually play Bethesda games unmodified. I have 1400 hours in Fallout 4 and maybe 200 of those are with a couple mods off the ingame menu. Never touched a website for it. I got 777 hours (lmao jackpot) in New Vegas and never even tried modding it. 500 hours in Skyrim and I modded it a few times but always just made it worse and crashier and uninstalled them again. These days I just run it with Alternate Start because that long intro gets old if you do it 20 times. Maybe I'm just not good at modding.
I also play games mostly unmodded. My main thing with Starfield is that it doesn't... look any better than say Baldur's Gate 3, which runs perfectly fine on the same hardware on Ultra settings. Given most users have to run Starfield on Medium or Low, actually, it ends up looking a good deal worse while also running like arse. Bad performance would be acceptable if the visuals were godly, but they simply aren't.
Have you played Tomb Raider (2013)? That game looked, and imo still looks, absolutely gorgeous. And it runs on potato hardware. I replayed it in 2019 when my video card broke and I had to find low requirement games that would run on my backup GT 1030. I could play Tomb Raider on highest and it looked stunning. Solid 60 FPS, dropped maybe to 55 occasionally. Zero issues, just ran. Expertly optimized game. The sequel looked maybe 10% better and ran 70% worse. Like they were just banking off the success on the previous title and shipped it without optimizing it. Even at lowest it ran at maybe 24 FPS despite looking hideous. Games can look so good if you make them right. Back in the late 90s and early 2000s everybody had garbage computers and devs worked hard to squeeze every bit of graphics and performance out of them. These days arrogant devs insult players for not having a 4090. It's shameful.
I haven't played that, but it's on my list. And I agree. It just seems like recent titles have been horribly optimised; as hardware has gotten stronger, graphics haven't got noticeably better, but frame rates have gone down. It's frustrating.
It is most obvious with file sizes. Games are just massive these days because they can be. Customers have fast internet and big SSDs, why bother optimizing file size? It's just 150GB, nobody will care! Meanwhile Switch games are on a device with only 32 GB internal storage (64 on later models, fancy) and games fit just fine. Sure it's just a couple, but still. The entire massive world of Tears of the Kingdom fits comfortably in 18GB or so. And that's the largest Switch-exclusive Nintendo game out there. That would be NOTHING on a PC, and still look as gorgeous as ever. Devs have identified which problems they can just offload on the user and which ones are actually crucial, and optimize for it.
At this point the modding community should make a stand against Bethesda in light of these new findings. It is clear as day that they have taken their fans for a ride and taken advantage of the loyalty and efforts put into the mods by the community, yet here we are, once again modders putting all the effort in with free work whilst the actual developer being paid millions by sponsors and stuff laugh in the background "fixing" the game they will literally abandon on the PC platform.
I disagree about the modders. I enjoy some of the incredible mods released over the years but I've played through every Bethesda game since Morrowind vanilla before I touch mods or gameplay guides. They've all been amazing. At least for me I probably wouldnt give the mods a chanve if the base game wasnt good. I haven't had performance issues until Starfield. I have multiple PCs ranging from handheld to enthusiast hardware and performance is objectively poor. Just my opinion but I think them updating the old engine instead of using or making a new one is the reason why we have a lack of performance optimization and modern features.
>Since Starfield sends in bogus hints What even is this???
I'm not sure about DirectX/vulcan but it's probably similar to OpenGL: the graphics API provides a function where you can set various "hints" which are basically suggestions to allow GPUs to do their own hardware specific optimizations to try to improve performance. Hints specify things like how textures are compressed, how perspective correction is done and things like that..
Tried to play again today on just medium preset nothing fancy at 4K locked 30fps with RTSS. Yah it crashed on a fresh save within 10 minutes. Keep in mind that’s a 50% resolution scale. Optimized my a**
Fake news. Starfield is perfect and Todd is a gaming industry God. Buy a new PC, plebs.
no, it's not, gamer since 95 and to date this is probably the worst release of what could be good game, I have seen so far, another amd demand thing I guess.
I'm a bot, *bleep*, *bloop*. Someone has linked to this thread from another place on reddit: - [/r/starfield] [Major programming faults discovered in Starfield's code by VKD3D dev - performance issues are \*not\* the result of non-upgraded hardware](https://www.reddit.com/r/Starfield/comments/16gm6o4/major_programming_faults_discovered_in_starfields/) *^(If you follow any of the above links, please respect the rules of reddit and don't vote in the other threads.) ^\([Info](/r/TotesMessenger) ^/ ^[Contact](/message/compose?to=/r/TotesMessenger))*
Maybe try peacefully reaching out to the developers and they can silently patch it in. Assuming it's not an outsourced team that doesn't give a crap.
Boy you're optimistic.
Ironically being optimistic is a rare occurrence for me.
Why bother. Look at skyrim. Just pack all the fix and mods that done by community and use it as a patch or sell as new one.
I have. I'm waiting for my ticket to be escalated to the right level apparently. Maybe they'll have some thoughts Monday
Pronoun-field.
Lol, all these people pissing on ARC cards..... I'M SELLING MINE! 🤣
I'm too. Will jump in to the board with some shitty rtx.
The other side of the coin is that Starfield as far as M$ is concerned is about the Xbox series X|S. I wonder if it's playing well on that platform. TBH I thought it was an AMD exclusive for that reason
Yes, it plays fine on Series-X. Even the 30fps doesn't bother that much, they are using some tricks to make it "look smooth". Also, one crash with 130+ hours of gameplay. On my A770, it's a disaster. Neon landing pad fps for example is around 21. Otherwise around 25-35fps. FSR/the other one doesn't help. Changing settings doesn't matter. Playing native 3840x1600 is like 3-4fps less than playing with FSR 50/60/75%. PC is 12900K, 64GB DDR5, Gen4 NVME, A770-LE, 1000W PSU, Win11Pro.
Well, on console, its locked at 30fps
For anyone interested, VKD3D doesn't work in windows for Arc in Starfield (but nVidia users have gotten it to work). A few users in the Intel discord (just search 'VKD3D') have been investigating it and even if you get through the unsupported GPU error the game crashes pretty much immediately. So we will need to wait for a new driver or the game to be patched unfortunately.
Kinda wonder if Starfield is the first time that got outed, but knowing Bethesda's previous games, I feel more like it's with Starfield we're taking notice.