Potatoes? You mean PCs with < $1000 GPUs?
I'm not touching Starfield until I can play it at 1440p 60 fps with decent graphics (yes, actual 1440p, not "720p upscaled to 1440p" bullshit. Neither that nor 30 fps are acceptable to me).
If Bethesda can't be bothered to fix performance and I will need to wait years until I decide to upgrade so be it - I have plenty of great games in my "to play" list. By that time the will also be lots of mods to choose from to make Starfield worth it.
It's crazy to me that they make the same game for almost 20 years but still can't make it work. The ai seems to get worse every game, computers get better and better but it still runs the same.
Just from a a couple of nights playing Starfield. The combat ai does seem more interesting then with enemies jumping off ledges to get to you etc but not but a whole heck of a lot. L
That's the plan. I haven't actually properly played F4 yet either lol (tried years ago but dropped due to performance issues). Probably will do it soon after spending a month modding it.
Don't know how much free time you have, but I couldn't be bothered anymore for FO4 on nexus. I just downloaded one of the bigger/better collections and ignored/deactivated the creepier/boobier mods.
Already more than enough of a hassle to get that working, with vortex sometimes not installing stuff properly, pre-cleaning files, etc.
I just enjoy that stuff lol. I only stopped my last Skyrim playthrough because I kept updating my mods and adding new ones and at the one point it just broke all of my saves. I took it as a sign to move on to other games.
Same, but realistically once you start heading towards the 500 mods range, it's almost impossible to get it working reliably.
At one point I had 200+ mods on skyrim, and the mod cycles and before/after conflicts on vortex looked like mandelas. I did enjoy 'completing' the vortex mod manager game. That's when it's 3AM, you're fed up, you give up trying to figure what's wrong, and just click randomly and uninstall/reinstall mods until vortex shuts up, and it somehow just works. Bit like winning the lottery.
I’m wondering if this would help get a solid 60 outside of interiors/around loads of NPCs. Only my GPU doesn’t meet requirements, and it’s still playable. But is mostly 30-40’s unless I’m in a small interior or an interior with not many NPCs. The NPCs are more bound to CPU so I’m not sure if having lower res/filesize textures would help. I don’t think the VRAM is the problem.
It’s a little better. I’m pretty sure it’s gotta be the NPCs now. Video card is handling it all quite nicely, despite not having RTX or even DLSS support, but everywhere there are crowds it slows down by 20 fps. Currently just standing in the main road of Neon and it’s around 40-45, dropoing to 35 when I run, but get a solid 60 when no NPCs are visible by looking up at an animated billboard or something.
To chime in, I think a lot of this kind of discourse is just based on what you’re looking for in a game.
In American Truck Simulator, one of the DLC’s is the state of Wyoming, which is remarkably barren. It’s the least populous state in the whole country, and many of it’s “biggest cities” don’t even top out over 100,000 people. If you look at the reviews for it, it’s actually somewhat divisive. A lot of people criticize it for being “boring,” but that’s also how Wyoming is in real life, having driven across the state partially myself. I think a lot of this has to do what people come into the game expecting. Some want to enjoy the game as a truck simulator and Wyoming offers plenty of space for that. Some also want to enjoy the game via other formats, such as the scenery, and Wyoming doesn’t excel that much in those areas.
My point being, I think it’s just hard to make claims about this thing because it’s all just subjectivity. I think if you make a black-and-white claim about this then you just aren’t thinking very rationally. Some people will like it and some people won’t. Such is life.
The fact you need a 4090 to touch 120fps on 1080p in 2023 is disgusting. That should be the minimum target fps for mid range hardware at the least.
Meh, game is bland anyway.
Ok sure, 1080p low settings, I can get away with a 4080 if I have an i9 13900K. 1080p high? Yeah, not even a 4090 with a 13900K will get you near 120fps.
It's shitty code bound. Sometimes no matter how powerful your hardware is, software will perform poorly because it just doesn't scale. Writing complex software like game so that it can fully utilize current hardware AND actually run faster with better CPU/GPU can become very difficult once a certain complexity threshold is reached. It's easy enough to do for a small linear game even if it has exceptional graphics, but an open world sandbox game like ones that Bethesda makes is a completely different story.
That doesn't mean that it's impossible of course - Bethesda absolutely should have made a better job, but it's by no means an easy task.
I was able to get a consistent 70+ fps with most things set to medium, 1440p with a 3900x and a rtx 2080 with dlss2 and a mod that helps performance without any noticable dregredarion I can tell.
A Ryzen 5 is a pretty large span of processors, ranging from “old and mostly obsolete” to “modern and highly capable for gaming”. Which one exactly would be helpful for others to help judge their own.
I’ll take another look at it today after I fiddle with the settings a bit. What I saw yesterday was not impressive - occasional stuttering while barely utilizing my 2060 on low/med settings while looking worse than Skyrim did in 2011.
Holy shit that article reaks of AI generated content. If it was written by a someone that claims to be human, then that human needs a Voight-Kampff test ASAP.
This is one case where I almost posted a summary from another source that linked to it, but there seems to be a (loose?) norm here around posting the original sources.
It’s a Bethesda classic that’s also in Fallout.
Breaking news: Bethesda game made by Bethesda has classic Bethesda mechanics from pervious Bethesda games also made, you might be surprised to hear, by Bethesda employees.
Sad that the article focused on this particular mod. It’s aimed at textures for low-end systems, yes, but there are 2-3 others that are aimed at systems across the board and use stock textures with simple config file changes. They’re all tweaks with options that are in the game but unavailable on the menu, and they do vastly improve performance without a drop in quality.
A better headline could have been “Modders fix in days what Bethesda didn’t do with years”.
vg247.com
Najstarsze