The low performance of the game relative to other large, good-looking games definitely makes me less eager to play it.
Also I’m irked at Todd for his comments about people needing to upgrade their PC for the game. JayzTwoCents even showed that his 4090 didn’t get great frames. (comparatively that is. Like he was getting ~90fps @ 1080p which would be a pretty smooth experience, but I’d expect much more given how powerful that card is)
Honestly I’m not super far into the game. (A couple hours at most?) But it hasn’t really grabbed my attention like other games have - which probably means I’ll have to start the game a couple times before I legitimately play it through and then I could probably give a better score.
At the moment I wouldn’t recommend paying $70+ for the game - but to use game pass if possible.
Not that anyone cares, but if I feel different about it after playing some more I’ll update my comment haha
Everyone should be irked at Todd for his comments.
We shouldnt have to build super computers to get stable, playable FPS, because hes too stupid to give up this game engine they’ve been absolutely obsessed with for over 20 years, cause Creation engine is nothing more but Gambryo, and Gamebryo is nothing more than NetImmerse… They’ve just slapped a lot of ducttape and bullshit on it to make it look better, at the cost of bad optimization and performance.
Cyberpunk is a far more visually impressive game, and I get 50% more frame rate in that, than Starfield…and I’m on AMD, Which isnt facing the same issues nvidia cards are in starfield.
It’s pretty average to me. (Positive leaning)
The low performance of the game relative to other large, good-looking games definitely makes me less eager to play it.
Also I’m irked at Todd for his comments about people needing to upgrade their PC for the game. JayzTwoCents even showed that his 4090 didn’t get great frames. (comparatively that is. Like he was getting ~90fps @ 1080p which would be a pretty smooth experience, but I’d expect much more given how powerful that card is)
Honestly I’m not super far into the game. (A couple hours at most?) But it hasn’t really grabbed my attention like other games have - which probably means I’ll have to start the game a couple times before I legitimately play it through and then I could probably give a better score.
At the moment I wouldn’t recommend paying $70+ for the game - but to use game pass if possible.
Not that anyone cares, but if I feel different about it after playing some more I’ll update my comment haha
Everyone should be irked at Todd for his comments.
We shouldnt have to build super computers to get stable, playable FPS, because hes too stupid to give up this game engine they’ve been absolutely obsessed with for over 20 years, cause Creation engine is nothing more but Gambryo, and Gamebryo is nothing more than NetImmerse… They’ve just slapped a lot of ducttape and bullshit on it to make it look better, at the cost of bad optimization and performance.
Cyberpunk is a far more visually impressive game, and I get 50% more frame rate in that, than Starfield…and I’m on AMD, Which isnt facing the same issues nvidia cards are in starfield.