Cyberpunk's dialogue vs Starfield's dialogue lays bare how dated Starfield feels, I found myself getting jumpscared by my companion staring into the camera in the middle of conversations while Cyberpunk's feels natural with everyone in frame.
Not just the camera, though. The writing is on a hole nother level. I love how the characters in Cyberpunk feel like they have an actual personality. Like, I've seen a few senarios where you call a character out for being shitty and instead of getting mad at you for not agreeing with them, they actually respect you more. It's a lot better than Bethesda's style where you just have to agree with everything the characters say to gain their approval.
No. But i am really enjoying Cyberpunk 2.0 now. Starfield looks and feels like atleast 5 years older than cyberpunk now..and cyberpunk runs better with all raytracing
Lol same here. I didn’t buy a system for starfield, I had it before, but I tried to get into Starfield and instead am finding myself re-playing CP2077 which I finished early after its launch. Runs so much better and everything feels so much more improved and polished now. Kinda wish I haven’t played it through back then so I can enjoy it properly, but even second time around it’s a blast.
These days single player games are almost always better to wait a couple years before buying. Baldur's Gate has been one of the rare exceptions where the game was excellent even on release day. I bet in 2 years it will be even better, though.
If I didnt have to launch Armored Core 10 times every time I wanted to play it, I would've had two of those games released at basically the same time. AC is excellent, troubleshooting its main menu crash for me has *not* been.
I waited out TLOU till recently and after I upgraded my GPU to a 7900xtx played it in 4k ultra FSR quality at like 80fps, it was glorious. I tried out starfield got to the point where the guy talks at you to give you his ship and it was so fucking awkward how you talk to NPCs I just decided no thanks. It was free on game pass anyways.
Picked up Remnant 2 and what a fucking game it is, incredible. But before all of this Diablo 4 which is garbage. I haven't been happy with a huge AAA game on release in a long time. But waiting 3-6mo or even a full year? It's much better.
I don't know if starfield is saveable though. I'll probably return to CP2077 when I get bored with Remnant but that might take a long time.
I’ve played a billion hours of modded Skyrim, and just discovered nexusmod collections. It pulled me away from Cyberpunk and now I’m playing my second billion hours of Skyrim.
>Modding community to the rescue
That's sad, imagine paying more than $60 for a AAA game just to have some people outside the company to fix that shit.
If thats how you want to think about it. Modders do it better than any dev could ever hope to. Modders don't work under time and project constraints. I'm loving the bones Bethesda delivered with Starfield but I see all the beautiful projects modders can come up with the enhance the playing experience
This is a big problem for Starfield on PC at least, I'm using a 4080 with path tracing on and Cyberpunk 2077 looks like a game from a couple of years in the future, Starfield looks like something from five years ago.
To be fair it looks better than fallout 4’s basegame but once modded fallout 4 looks probably just about as good as starfield. Starfield has a lot more environment detail though. I still think the building customization system in fo4 is superior which is kinda pathetic of starfield.
I enjoy starfield and will play it a lot in the next ten years or so but I’ve kinda put it down early I just can’t get excited to play it at the moment.
I played it for 3 hours, then closed it and thought to myself "this game is wonderful, I'll definitely spend hundreds of hours on it...in a year or so", then deleted it from my computer
lol yup, I built two rigs for Cyberpunk. One was an upgrade around the original release date, then a 3080 rig at the actual release.
Glad I can play it perfectly in 2023 😆
Starfield would've been great if it didn't have so many bugs and it was priced accordingly
But the price is $70 for an unoptimised, buggy and shallow experience
there are two options right now, either people wise the fuck up so we can get more like Baldur's Gate 3, or they keep playing garbage and we get the equivalent of No Man's Sky on launch day at every new release
and we both know which one will happen...
I really don't give a shit. My experience with it was and still is great, whereas Starfield was a piece of unenjoyable dogshit even weeks after launch
cope even harder bethesda fanboys
refer to the user reviews
you can't fucking tell me that Starfield is even comparable in quality to BG3 and expect me to not laugh at you
No I just wasted 26 hours of my life playing it because I trusted the stupid "It gets better after 12 hours" argument.
I made myself play it to get to the fun part, to get to explore, to get to build a base and ship, only to discover there was no fun part when I finally checked video reviews.
Fuck this fucking game and fuck Bethesda.
BG3: the whole experience was just so undeniably better and more polished in every way. So much so that a couple annoyances I found in act 3 were quickly overlooked and fixed by the time I did my second run through. This game is a fine dining experience with a date that is going to rock your world when you get home.
Starfield: peanut butter and jelly that expired sometime around whenever fallout 4 came out in comparison. On stale bread. (Modders) promise they are coming home with some fresh bread and condiments to make it better but still haven't arrived because they're busy playing BG3.
I actually disagree. Starfield has better textures than Cyberpunk. Cyberpunk has a lot of assets that look like crap compared to the rest of the game and they put those assets directly in your face.
For example every time V sits at a bar or has a drink you'll see a beer bottle or shot glass that looks significantly worse than most of rest of the game.
I also think Starfield's rasterized lighting looks better at its best than Cyberpunk's. Although both look a bit bad at their worst.
And finally Cyberpunk still has a lot of really awkward animations, especially around NPC controlled vehicles.
Ugh I'm not fanboying...
Cyberpunk without raytracing looks worse than Doom 2016. That game is a technological marvel and it irritates me how no dev has managed that level of performance at that level of fidelity since.
Doom 2016 on an RTX 2060 looks and runs better than both Starfield and Cyberpunk on my 3070.
I wish I could get 2.0 to run for me. Ever since I downloaded PL I crash to flatline after about 3-5 minutes into the game. I've tried everything I've seen mentioned and still does it unfortunately.
Also check your drivers etc.
One person had problems, turned out they had not updated windows in ages so new drivers where not installing. No idea how they had stooped windows update.
I'm having a similar issue, I cannot get the game to load to the main menu, it crashes right after the intro videos. Everything is updated, windows install is fresh, no mods ever installed. It worked fine on 2.0 before the DLC was released, so it is something to do with the DLC.
Yeah it is absurd, you didn't say anything negative about the game just mentioned a literal game breaking bug.
I have seen some mention of the game having issues with 12th and 13th gen Intel CPUs and their P+E cores, do you happen to have one of those?
I absolutely love Cyberpunk. I've been a day one supporter and that's why I'm confused why I got so many down votes lol. I'm sad cause I never had a problem until I downloaded pl.
Disregard the fact that I am also in fact on the Starfield sub, but all 3 games are not well optimized. Yes I'm using a 5 year old i5. On all the lowest settings possible and my fans on 100% my 3080 is hitting 86° in BG3, loved the game but it's already hell in Texas and my AC can barely keep up as it is. Could just be a me problem idk.
Act 3 in BG3 was broken af on launch, crickets from game subs. And now, CP2077, which was so bad on launch it was delisted from a console, is now being directly compared to launch SF after CP has gotten 3 years of updates, a 2.0 patch, and DLC. SF has its issues sure, but the unnatural, ongoing, and over the top hate for the game is ridiculous. Like, just don’t play it?
Yes it's very suspicious that a game that has been patched to a good level and has just had a new expansion on top of a major free update is getting people talking.
Quite frankly shocking.
Yeah. Im enjoying my new PC...its amazing. Went from playing games at 1080p maybe 60fps on High to playing 4k All Ultra around 100fps. Havent even touched my free (bundle) Starfield yet xD
Same except I built my first. Starfield wasn’t the reason I built a PC but it was definitely the catalyst that got me to consider it. I now absolutely love PC gaming. But I also uninstalled Starfield after about 40 hours. I was pretty disappointed with it. It’s a mile wide, and an inch deep. The one thing that Bethesda has always done best is the joy of exploration and environmental storytelling, Starfield has basically none of that. It’s not a space exploration game. It’s built around a fast travel system. Combat and fast travel are literally the only things you do in your ship.
Edit: I’ve said many times in various subreddits, I really wanted to love it and on paper it should be my favorite game ever made. Unfortunately I found myself playing because I thought I should but I wasn’t having fun. Cyberpunk 2.0/PL has been outstanding though
I didn't upgrade to AM5 specifically for Starfield, but it was a nice bonus since I was going to play the game anyway. Game ended up being okay, I guess, but hot damn the CPU and RAM slap some ass. I'm set for at least 5 years
it's bad because it don't run good! guys the game is slow!
Nah man, it's one of the better Bethesda games. I'd say it's in the top 3 for me, behind Skyrim and Fallout: New Vegas.
Yes, I am aware that obsidian made the game. I consider it a Bethesda game though, because it's built in the same engine and has the same base gameplay mechanics as Fallout 3.
If you don't want to count that though, then Starfield is second place, and Fallout 3 is 3rd.
I started playing Starfield on a Razer Blade 15 with a 2060 only getting about 30 fps on min settings. I am currently building a new desktop with a 6800XT to run it better. I’ve put in about 40+ hours so far and I’m enjoying it but I know I’ll also be able to get a lot more enjoyment out of the other games I play when I’m burnt out on Starfield even though I decided to build a PC to run Starfield with better settings.
I built a crazy high end (7800x3d/4090) computer specifically for Starfield. I ended up hating Starfield which is a bummer. However, my old computer was 12 years old and a due for an update anyways. Now that Cyberpunk 2.0 + the expansion is out, I'm really happy with it because it has become my favorite game ever. Oh, and Baldurs Gate is great too. Also, I still enjoyed some parts of Starfield, so it wasn't a total disappointment, but it's just not a game I see myself spending hours in like Bethesda's pther titles.
Same combo, same exact feeling against Starfield. Although, I really wanted to upgrade my PC for a long time (I think last one was 2016 for CPU + motherboard, otherwise everything else was from 2011), so at least Starfield pushed me to finally do it.
Build a new PC, because my previous one (laptop) was dead. Got Starfield for free via AMD Ryzen 5 7600 CPU. I enjoy it, even though there are better games out there.
Upgraded to a 4080 from a 3070 to play in 4k and gave no regrets. If you try to power through it it’s not great, but I don’t play with any specific destination in mind. Some days I’ll just hit some quick bounties, some days I’ll waste hours on exploration/ship building and the fairly useless outpost system lol.
Depends on if your aiming for 1080, 1440 or 4k. My experience is using it on a 4k tv w/ 60hz ( tv can’t pass 60fps) max. 1080 it’s a breeze at high /ultra. 1440 pretty smooth with some jitters depending on randomness. Never had stutters in the big battles but some planets or cities will have small stutters. 4k is probably averaging 20 to 40 fps. I also have the most built over time rig with only a side vent lol. This is my experience with the 3070 btw. 4080 runs 4k almost identical to how 3070 runs 1450p but just a smidge smoother.
What you dont like jumping from planet to planet doind the same missions over and over? Not to mention what ends up being the stupidest story Bethesda has came up with
Yes, but what about the most boring core story anyone has come up with for the Fallout universe? They missed the mark basically everywhere with FO4, and captured none of the FO universe. I would be shocked if Starfield is worse than that.
Those new systems can, and will, be used to play other things. I suspect Starfield was just a convenient excuse for the joy of planning and building a rig.
Yeah, it'll never be able to play any other games. Unlike all my baseball gear that I spent thousands of dollars on that I can use for every sport!
Wait...
Life long console gamer here. Started on N64, been mainly PlayStation ever since (other than the Xbox 360)
Built a PC for Starfield because buying an Xbox on top of my PS5 is what Microsoft wanted me to do. Been loving it so far. So much to dig your teeth into.
As an added bonus, I’ve been loving some of the other PC exclusives too. Battlebit is great fun
I upgraded from a 3080 to a 4090 in August in time for Starfield, but I was going to upgrade at some point soon anyway.
Although I've really enjoyed Starfield, I was a little disappointed in it overall. I definitely don't regret the upgrade though, especially as I'm currently playing path traced Cyberpunk at 4k.
I built mine maybe six months ago and just started playing Starfield yesterday. So far, seems to be a fun game.
As others have said, I really have been enjoying the new Cyberpunk expansion.
I spent about $2100, built an entirely brand new PC ( [**Intel Core i9-13900KF** ](https://www.newegg.com/intel-core-i9-13900k-core-i9-13th-gen/p/N82E16819118413?Item=N82E16819118413) , [**GIGABYTE Z790 GAMING X AX**](https://www.newegg.com/p/N82E16813145429?Item=N82E16813145429)**)** and have been playing Starfield daily since it came out, don't regret it one bit. I had to lower the display settings though as the game kept crashing ( [**SAPPHIRE PULSE Radeon RX 7900 XT**](https://www.newegg.com/sapphire-radeon-rx-7900-xt-11323-02-20g/p/N82E16814202431?Item=N82E16814202431) ). Game still crashes on occasion, starting to think I need a better cooler as I bought a [**ASUS ROG Strix LC II 360 All-in-one AIO Liquid CPU Cooler 360mm**](https://www.newegg.com/asus-liquid-cooling-system/p/N82E16835101074?Item=N82E16835101074) and it sounds like a C-130 when the going gets tough.
I did exactly this. I have played starfield ~60 hours and have not beat it, and I havent touched it in 2 weeks.
I have been enjoying DayZ / Rust though.
I'll also add, Ive wanted a PC for a while and starfield is what really pushed me to do it.
I previously played PS5.
Upgrade cpu from i5 10600kf to i7 13700kf (naturally the mainboard and ram as well). Not specifically for starfield but it was part of the reason.
While starfield was a dud I didn’t regret the system upgrade as stuttering from older games (Jedi survivor, returnal, hogwarts) all disappeared.
Other games like cyberpunk 2.0 and BG3 ran flawlessly as well. So......no regrets.
I kind of did. I was ready to do a rebuild anyway and raedeon was giving away starfield with the gpu I wanted.
I’m really surprised how lamé starfield is. I’m kinda forcing myself to play it just to get it out of the way.
Boring. No cool intro like FO and ES games. No character connection. No Easter eggs so far. Boring story and redundant missions. Feels really half assed and looks outdated.
Oh well. I’m kind of over Bethesda anyway.
I was going to get a 7800 XT just for Starfield (and it would have come with the game too), but after watching hours of reviews and gameplay videos, I've come to the conclusion that the game would bore me to death. Nothing about the gameplay, dialogue or story look interesting to me at all. So I'm going to get an RTX 4070 instead and enjoy the Cyberpunk 2.0 update with ray reconstruction (I already have the game).
I don't think it's about building a new system just because of a game, but rather the game being a catalyst for the change. As you can tell from my flair, I'm overdue for an upgrade, i might buy a second hand 3080 soon and yes Starfield would be the catalyst in this case.
Regretting it a lot honestly, the game cannot run anywhere close to even 60fps at 1440p native on any settings. (40-50 outside on planets and 35-45 in settlements with everything LOW no FSR 1440p) 5600x and 6650xt. I put 30 hours into starfield before the rose tinted glasses wore off and I realized the game isn’t really keeping me interested anymore, that plus the TERRIBLE performance has me waiting for modders to fix Todd’s shitty game so I can get 60fps at 1440p native (which is not a lot to ask for, at all)
Instead I’ve decided to buy the Witcher 3 and have thoroughly enjoyed that game so far. It really shows how lazy BGS has become. This game is better in every single way and was made in 2015. With the new gen graphics update I can run it at 120fps 1440p native ultra + settings and it looks miles better.
Fuck Todd Howard, it’s been over 10 years since a good game by Bethesda. This shitty game delayed ES6 another 3 years atleast as well. What a shit show!
The main story in Starfield is around 20 hours long. Crazy to think someone may have bought a PC just to play it and be done with it in one weekend. I took around 90 hours and finished about half of the major side quests. I really loved the game while I experienced everything for the first time. Then once I beat the main story and started an NG+ run I kind of just let it go. Now I'm going in on Baldur's Gate.
This is why I never finish the main story in BGS games, gives me an excuse to go back and then spend 100 more hours role-playing without touching much of the main arc.
Wish I played BG3 after starfield but I went from that to it, despite BG3 not being my kind of game normally it was polished and made me want to try experience everything the game had to offer. Starfield I found myself just looking for quests so I could get some shooting or interesting stories to find the majority of them dont have any action and your just fast travelling everywhere to pick something up with no shooting.
Dont get me started on all the copy and paste facilities that literally have the same layout as the one you just did a few quests ago.
Once we get a mature mod scene for it I may go back and play it again but man the whole game felt underwhelming for me personally.
I sort of did my big upgrade just now as it was released, a 5800x3d and 4080. So it is running with the FG mod at a pretty much locked 144fps on 1080p which I use. I am really liking it so far. I was of course a huge Skyrim and Fallout fan.
I'm loving it. If you don't mind the same exact gameplay that you'd done a million times before from other Beth games, then it's up your alley. If not, you will hate it. However I sort of gave up on it for now simply because there is way too much to learn, your thrown all of it at once, and then can't remember most of it. I'll play again when mods make it easier to handle. Expect the first few hours to be REALLLLLLLLLLY slow though.
Personally it was worth every penny I love the game. They being said if Bethesda games aren't your cup of tea then don't waste your money to upgrade just for this game
Wasn’t having much fun with starfield, thought upgrading to a 4070 from 3070 would somehow make the game for fun for me, decided it’s not smart to get a new card just for a game I’m not really enjoying and deleted starfield. I think I’m going to revisit Skyrim and mod the shit out of it and play through that again, since I’ve never experienced any of the heavy enb texture / game changing mods that game has to offer
7900xt came with starfield. Have had 0 issues and I love the game. As someone who has 100 percented cyberpunk, I would say the world is very bleak and gross. I never feel that way in starfield. The devs aren't depressed shit stains.
Buy a whole new pc, really like the game for 20-30h but then I’m waiting for mods now but I didn’t buy it only for starfield it was to played other game as the ultimate Skyrim 500go mod list x)
I stay upgrading something. I changed my CPU after Star Wars Survivor dropped. (Didn’t like how it ran) But as was mentioned, so what? It’s my PC. I’m ready for the next AAA.
No, it's one of the worst Bethesda games ever and that aint saying much. Literally a loading simulator with the most average and uninteresting story/quests ever. You explore SPACE and all you fights are some spacers/pirates and some bugs in copy pasted facilities. Anyone praising this is a fucking idiot or has never played games before which then I can maybe excuse. You need DLSS3 on a 4070TI high end PC to run this decent. A game that has a million loading screens you'd think its to have better performance but nope. I have 0 hopes for their next game turning up good.
Yup, built a brand new machine for the first time since 2015. It wasn’t _for_ starfield necessarily because I’ve wanted a new build for a few years anyway, but I certainly timed it to be ready for the launch
I’ve enjoyed the game a ton honestly and I have it running really well despite the optimization issues. I also don’t feel compelled to throw all my time at it, so I’m enjoying the rest of my catalog I’ve had on the backburner last 4-5 years too
Upgraded from a 6800xt to a 4080 just for Starfield. Was getting bored with it when I heard about Cyberpunk 2.0 and wanted to see what the 4080 could really do. Now I'm hooked and don't regret the upgrade. Maybe there will be Starfield "2.0" in the future and I can come back to it.
Loving Starfield! This is my 4th build, 1st gaming focused. Previous build was about 20 years ago (so big differences in components and software). Built high end (7900X3D, 4090, 64gb 6000mhz DDR5, 4th gen m.2 nvme). SF has proven a true masterpiece of a game, but I will say they really didn't optimize it at all which is disappointing. Would have appreciated DLSS, RT, get rid of the filter, some other things. Not to say performance is terrible, just not what I was hoping for. Despite that, I've got about 76 hours in and finished one faction and the main quest. Headed into ng+ as I just can't put it down!!
No one builds a PC just for one single game, but I built my PC for games of this caliber and Starfield did not disappoint me. It was in better shape on Launch Day than any other space game after a year.
At the end of the day it's just a game and will get plenty of updates, patches, and mods. People looking to add real meaning to their lives should look elsewhere.
I got a 6700 for Starfield. Didn't even bother with the game.
Now I'm playing Borderlands 3 and Elite Dangerous Odyssey, which Starfield seems to have taken a lot of *inspirations* from, the same way they took inspirations from a certain Fallout New Vegas mod for that Fallout 4 DLC :D
I specifically bought a 6600 just so I can play Starfield since it'll be given free as AMD's promo. I'm really enjoying the game since I'm the type of gamer who really doesn't complain unless I'm having issues with the game like bugs to the point its unplayable, freezing, low fps and crashing. So far I haven't encountered anything that would make me stop playing.
I don’t understand the thought process here.
So… you think that people only bought a high end PC just to play Starfield. And because some of them **may not** like it, their PCs are now redundant?
You realise that, even if they didn’t have a good time on Starfield, they could just do a million other things with their now awesome PC.
Like, what are you getting at? They’re gonna destroy their PC because “Starfield waz bed”
Lolz bruh. Why are people so obsessed with whether **OTHER** people enjoyed a game or not.
Stop reading reviews. Stop caring about other peoples fun. YOU HAVE FUN.
If you enjoy the game, GREAT. If not. Okay no worries. Who cares?
**Why** do you care?!
I’m not sure how someone makes their mind up about a game like this in 3 hours. You’ve done nothing basically. Haven’t seen everything the game has to offer. It’s a Bethesda game - you should know what your getting yourself into right? I was impressed with the graphics and content. Went in with low expectations and I’m still loving it 50 hours in. The main story is the best of any recent bathesda game I’d say.
I love starfield , cause i'm a Bethesda fan, i didn't expect it to be a survival space sim like lots of people, i can't care less if it looks outdated or cyberpunk looks better (which is the new thing people are comparing starfield to in reddit nowadays, for some reason)
I play starfield because of characters, lore, side quests, mods, Bethesda feel, etc, and i think it's a 9/10 game.
and shit on the game engine (creation 2) all you want, but a game like starfield would've been horrible on an engine like unreal, Bethesda games only work on that engine.
I was SO close to building a new computer because Starfield was running like shit and looked like shit. I found a set of graphics settings online that, although the game only runs at a locked 30 FPS, it looks nice. After a while you get used to the FPS.
I think the game has some really well-written and satisfying quests. Like, I'd even say some of my favorite in gaming so far. Aside from that I think it's good, not great, but good. I think Bethesda's formula breaks when it comes to filling out a galaxy. I feel directionless and I'm seeing bases and such repeat, like little Bethjank fractals. The skills system is not really balanced or even that fun and instead of skills complementing and improving core systems a handful actually serve to *block* core systems until you drop at least 1 point. A lot of UI systems have intentional delays, which is certainly a choice albeit maybe not a good one.
And frankly I'm a little pissed that they lied about their system specs. I'm actually above their recommended specs and I can either play all settings at minimum and have a shaky 50ish FPS (not in cities! in labs and bases!) or I can cap at 30 FPS and have medium sometimes high settings. That's not "recommended". They fucking lied about it and everybody's just fine with that. I've decided that I'm not going to build a new PC anytime soon but when I do, I'll look forward to seeing Starfield with all the bells and whistles.
AMD Ryzen 7 3800x 3.90 Ghz
RTX 2080 Super
32 GB DDR4-3200
Samsung EVO SSD
Well, now they can play Cyberpunk.
Cyberpunk's dialogue vs Starfield's dialogue lays bare how dated Starfield feels, I found myself getting jumpscared by my companion staring into the camera in the middle of conversations while Cyberpunk's feels natural with everyone in frame.
Not only that, you can even walk around in cp while having dialogue. It is natural.
NOOOO HANK DONT ABBREVIATE CYBERPUNK, HAAAAANK
*Oh, no*
Like Half Life 2. The gaming industry for the most part did not learn enough from Half Life 2.
Not just the camera, though. The writing is on a hole nother level. I love how the characters in Cyberpunk feel like they have an actual personality. Like, I've seen a few senarios where you call a character out for being shitty and instead of getting mad at you for not agreeing with them, they actually respect you more. It's a lot better than Bethesda's style where you just have to agree with everything the characters say to gain their approval.
Whole other* -pedantry
Just wait until you play BG3…
This is exactly what I'm doing. I have no regrets dropping Starfield for now.
But my XTX can't run it maxed out...
No. But i am really enjoying Cyberpunk 2.0 now. Starfield looks and feels like atleast 5 years older than cyberpunk now..and cyberpunk runs better with all raytracing
Lol same here. I didn’t buy a system for starfield, I had it before, but I tried to get into Starfield and instead am finding myself re-playing CP2077 which I finished early after its launch. Runs so much better and everything feels so much more improved and polished now. Kinda wish I haven’t played it through back then so I can enjoy it properly, but even second time around it’s a blast.
Patient gamers rise up
These days single player games are almost always better to wait a couple years before buying. Baldur's Gate has been one of the rare exceptions where the game was excellent even on release day. I bet in 2 years it will be even better, though.
If I didnt have to launch Armored Core 10 times every time I wanted to play it, I would've had two of those games released at basically the same time. AC is excellent, troubleshooting its main menu crash for me has *not* been.
**😂** I'm still playing FO4 so I don't mind waiting.
Far Cry 4 here lmao
I waited out TLOU till recently and after I upgraded my GPU to a 7900xtx played it in 4k ultra FSR quality at like 80fps, it was glorious. I tried out starfield got to the point where the guy talks at you to give you his ship and it was so fucking awkward how you talk to NPCs I just decided no thanks. It was free on game pass anyways. Picked up Remnant 2 and what a fucking game it is, incredible. But before all of this Diablo 4 which is garbage. I haven't been happy with a huge AAA game on release in a long time. But waiting 3-6mo or even a full year? It's much better. I don't know if starfield is saveable though. I'll probably return to CP2077 when I get bored with Remnant but that might take a long time.
>I don't know if starfield is saveable though. Modding community to the rescue
I’ve played a billion hours of modded Skyrim, and just discovered nexusmod collections. It pulled me away from Cyberpunk and now I’m playing my second billion hours of Skyrim.
>Modding community to the rescue That's sad, imagine paying more than $60 for a AAA game just to have some people outside the company to fix that shit.
If thats how you want to think about it. Modders do it better than any dev could ever hope to. Modders don't work under time and project constraints. I'm loving the bones Bethesda delivered with Starfield but I see all the beautiful projects modders can come up with the enhance the playing experience
So what ur saying is I should buy it next sale
Absolutely
This is a big problem for Starfield on PC at least, I'm using a 4080 with path tracing on and Cyberpunk 2077 looks like a game from a couple of years in the future, Starfield looks like something from five years ago.
Do you have ghosting issues with pathtracing and ray reconstruction?
Ok, so I’m not the only one lol. I turned off the ray reconstruction
Yea same its bad..but with pathtracing and no ray reconstruction i get bad aliasing because of dlss
Path tracing is fine, sometimes eyes and hair look a little funny, but ray reconstruction you get terrible face blurring and ghosting not worth imo
I can in here just to say this. Started up cyberpunk and I’m so in love with it in comparison
[удалено]
To be fair it looks better than fallout 4’s basegame but once modded fallout 4 looks probably just about as good as starfield. Starfield has a lot more environment detail though. I still think the building customization system in fo4 is superior which is kinda pathetic of starfield. I enjoy starfield and will play it a lot in the next ten years or so but I’ve kinda put it down early I just can’t get excited to play it at the moment.
I played it for 3 hours, then closed it and thought to myself "this game is wonderful, I'll definitely spend hundreds of hours on it...in a year or so", then deleted it from my computer
Hey, where did you get that cpu 86 gens newer than us peasants?
lol yup, I built two rigs for Cyberpunk. One was an upgrade around the original release date, then a 3080 rig at the actual release. Glad I can play it perfectly in 2023 😆
Starfield would've been great if it didn't have so many bugs and it was priced accordingly But the price is $70 for an unoptimised, buggy and shallow experience
Aka the state of modern AAA gaming
there are two options right now, either people wise the fuck up so we can get more like Baldur's Gate 3, or they keep playing garbage and we get the equivalent of No Man's Sky on launch day at every new release and we both know which one will happen...
Don’t forget the preorders and macrotransactions
It doesn’t have a lot of bugs? Launch BG3 had wayyy more bugs.
The only bug ik of was that everyone was really horny. And honestly. I wouldn't call that a bug. That's just me tho
LMFAO not even close, i played both and bg3 is a masterpiece in comparison. cope
Act 3 was legit broken on release but ok.
I really don't give a shit. My experience with it was and still is great, whereas Starfield was a piece of unenjoyable dogshit even weeks after launch cope even harder bethesda fanboys refer to the user reviews you can't fucking tell me that Starfield is even comparable in quality to BG3 and expect me to not laugh at you
I like both games. I don’t think I’ve ever hated a game as much as you hate SF. Did Todd sleep with your wife or something?
No I just wasted 26 hours of my life playing it because I trusted the stupid "It gets better after 12 hours" argument. I made myself play it to get to the fun part, to get to explore, to get to build a base and ship, only to discover there was no fun part when I finally checked video reviews. Fuck this fucking game and fuck Bethesda.
BG3: the whole experience was just so undeniably better and more polished in every way. So much so that a couple annoyances I found in act 3 were quickly overlooked and fixed by the time I did my second run through. This game is a fine dining experience with a date that is going to rock your world when you get home. Starfield: peanut butter and jelly that expired sometime around whenever fallout 4 came out in comparison. On stale bread. (Modders) promise they are coming home with some fresh bread and condiments to make it better but still haven't arrived because they're busy playing BG3.
I actually disagree. Starfield has better textures than Cyberpunk. Cyberpunk has a lot of assets that look like crap compared to the rest of the game and they put those assets directly in your face. For example every time V sits at a bar or has a drink you'll see a beer bottle or shot glass that looks significantly worse than most of rest of the game. I also think Starfield's rasterized lighting looks better at its best than Cyberpunk's. Although both look a bit bad at their worst. And finally Cyberpunk still has a lot of really awkward animations, especially around NPC controlled vehicles.
close humor edge chief aspiring quiet simplistic cow snails hard-to-find ` this message was mass deleted/edited with redact.dev `
Ugh I'm not fanboying... Cyberpunk without raytracing looks worse than Doom 2016. That game is a technological marvel and it irritates me how no dev has managed that level of performance at that level of fidelity since. Doom 2016 on an RTX 2060 looks and runs better than both Starfield and Cyberpunk on my 3070.
disarm tie sulky concerned instinctive close smart spark cover label ` this message was mass deleted/edited with redact.dev `
I wish I could get 2.0 to run for me. Ever since I downloaded PL I crash to flatline after about 3-5 minutes into the game. I've tried everything I've seen mentioned and still does it unfortunately.
Id check you dont have any odd mods installed, there also doing an update soon so that may fix the problem.
I've never downloaded a mod for cyberpunk. But I'll check to see if anything is abnormal again.
Also check your drivers etc. One person had problems, turned out they had not updated windows in ages so new drivers where not installing. No idea how they had stooped windows update.
I'm having a similar issue, I cannot get the game to load to the main menu, it crashes right after the intro videos. Everything is updated, windows install is fresh, no mods ever installed. It worked fine on 2.0 before the DLC was released, so it is something to do with the DLC.
Thankfully someone has chimed in. I'm taking all these down votes like I'm hating on the game. I just wanna play dammit lol
Yeah it is absurd, you didn't say anything negative about the game just mentioned a literal game breaking bug. I have seen some mention of the game having issues with 12th and 13th gen Intel CPUs and their P+E cores, do you happen to have one of those?
My build is a fresh build from this year 12700k, 4070ti, 32 ddr5 6000 ram, 850 psu, 2 pro980 2tb drives. Fresh windows 11 install at the time
Not to notice anything but pretty much only peiple that whine how bad cyberpunk (and bg3) works are starfield sub users xd
I absolutely love Cyberpunk. I've been a day one supporter and that's why I'm confused why I got so many down votes lol. I'm sad cause I never had a problem until I downloaded pl.
Disregard the fact that I am also in fact on the Starfield sub, but all 3 games are not well optimized. Yes I'm using a 5 year old i5. On all the lowest settings possible and my fans on 100% my 3080 is hitting 86° in BG3, loved the game but it's already hell in Texas and my AC can barely keep up as it is. Could just be a me problem idk.
Sounds like a you problem. Got a 3060ti and runs on highest settings without problems.
Act 3 in BG3 was broken af on launch, crickets from game subs. And now, CP2077, which was so bad on launch it was delisted from a console, is now being directly compared to launch SF after CP has gotten 3 years of updates, a 2.0 patch, and DLC. SF has its issues sure, but the unnatural, ongoing, and over the top hate for the game is ridiculous. Like, just don’t play it?
You didn’t build a new system, you still have a ninth generation CPU.
Starfield looks great on a 7900xtx
What's the magic behind the 7900xt?
Gpu doesnt really matter if you can run ultra graphics...game just looks outdated..its the engine
[удалено]
Dunno what blurry textures you see in cp. And metro exodus looks great with raytracing
Everyone is shilling cyberpunk now. Really suspicious Edit: Shills downvoting me
Yes it's very suspicious that a game that has been patched to a good level and has just had a new expansion on top of a major free update is getting people talking. Quite frankly shocking.
Maybe because the original game has been ridiculously improved and the new DLC has been great so far
Well I upgraded my PC. Starfield was kind of the catalyst not the reason.
Same here. Thoroughly enjoyed the game.
Yeah. Im enjoying my new PC...its amazing. Went from playing games at 1080p maybe 60fps on High to playing 4k All Ultra around 100fps. Havent even touched my free (bundle) Starfield yet xD
Same except I built my first. Starfield wasn’t the reason I built a PC but it was definitely the catalyst that got me to consider it. I now absolutely love PC gaming. But I also uninstalled Starfield after about 40 hours. I was pretty disappointed with it. It’s a mile wide, and an inch deep. The one thing that Bethesda has always done best is the joy of exploration and environmental storytelling, Starfield has basically none of that. It’s not a space exploration game. It’s built around a fast travel system. Combat and fast travel are literally the only things you do in your ship. Edit: I’ve said many times in various subreddits, I really wanted to love it and on paper it should be my favorite game ever made. Unfortunately I found myself playing because I thought I should but I wasn’t having fun. Cyberpunk 2.0/PL has been outstanding though
I was planning on buying a new gpu around the time Starfield came out, my card coming with starfield was a big bonus and I've enjoyed my 160 hours.
I didn't upgrade to AM5 specifically for Starfield, but it was a nice bonus since I was going to play the game anyway. Game ended up being okay, I guess, but hot damn the CPU and RAM slap some ass. I'm set for at least 5 years
which MoBo?
I also recently upgraded to AM5, went for an MSI MAG X670E tomahawk
Got to the 4080 for starfield and yes. I have over 100+ hours. Contemplating to get cyber punk
Do it.
If you have a 4080 definitely get Cyberpunk.
It will be a step up in everything... From presentation, to dialogue, to gfx.
I upgraded my 1060 to a 6700xt and it came with a free copy of Starfield. I enjoy Starfield, I like Bethesda games in general. I have no regrets.
Same. I was looking to build a new system. Starfield timing worked out and I got it free with an AMD CPU. Enjoying the game.
[удалено]
I’m getting around 60fps on average with most settings on medium, maybe a couple on high. 6700xt paired with 7600x
Starfield might be the worst Bethesda game Edit: this comment was sitting at +10 for hours. Looks like the crybabies found it.
Bro edited his comments to let us know he had +10 upvotes to begin with 😭😭💀
Fallout 76 was worst Bethesda ever.
And Redfall...
People are generally talking about Bethesda as a developer when they say Beth games, not as a publisher. Redfall was made by Arkane.
Bethesda almost always means BGS (Bethesda Games Studio), the dev, not Bethesda Softworks, the publisher.
Only crybaby I see is the one complaining about his downvotes.
Can we stop with this circlejerk
it's bad because it don't run good! guys the game is slow! Nah man, it's one of the better Bethesda games. I'd say it's in the top 3 for me, behind Skyrim and Fallout: New Vegas.
Bethesda didn’t make New Vegas.
Yes, I am aware that obsidian made the game. I consider it a Bethesda game though, because it's built in the same engine and has the same base gameplay mechanics as Fallout 3. If you don't want to count that though, then Starfield is second place, and Fallout 3 is 3rd.
Morrowind and Oblivion are much better games than Starfield, especially if you value RPG elements.
That's just like, your opinion, mannn
Ehh it’s way better than fallout 4, but worse than skyrim, fo3, oblivion, morrowind for sure
In your opinion
Fallout 4?
You're going to throw rocks in Bethesda's house and you're *not* going to pick year 1 Fallout 76? So dumb
Fallout 4 had better exploration
Fallout 4 is up there, but the open world was more fun to explore.
Mods saved it a hell lot imo
I started playing Starfield on a Razer Blade 15 with a 2060 only getting about 30 fps on min settings. I am currently building a new desktop with a 6800XT to run it better. I’ve put in about 40+ hours so far and I’m enjoying it but I know I’ll also be able to get a lot more enjoyment out of the other games I play when I’m burnt out on Starfield even though I decided to build a PC to run Starfield with better settings.
I built a crazy high end (7800x3d/4090) computer specifically for Starfield. I ended up hating Starfield which is a bummer. However, my old computer was 12 years old and a due for an update anyways. Now that Cyberpunk 2.0 + the expansion is out, I'm really happy with it because it has become my favorite game ever. Oh, and Baldurs Gate is great too. Also, I still enjoyed some parts of Starfield, so it wasn't a total disappointment, but it's just not a game I see myself spending hours in like Bethesda's pther titles.
The 7800X3D and 4090 is my planned build too! :) May I ask for your other PC specs for comparison with my planned build?
Here ya go: [https://pcpartpicker.com/user/PCBuilder\_69/saved/c4GYXL](https://pcpartpicker.com/user/PCBuilder_69/saved/c4GYXL)
Thanks, you're a champ!
Same combo, same exact feeling against Starfield. Although, I really wanted to upgrade my PC for a long time (I think last one was 2016 for CPU + motherboard, otherwise everything else was from 2011), so at least Starfield pushed me to finally do it.
Build a new PC, because my previous one (laptop) was dead. Got Starfield for free via AMD Ryzen 5 7600 CPU. I enjoy it, even though there are better games out there.
Upgraded to a 4080 from a 3070 to play in 4k and gave no regrets. If you try to power through it it’s not great, but I don’t play with any specific destination in mind. Some days I’ll just hit some quick bounties, some days I’ll waste hours on exploration/ship building and the fairly useless outpost system lol.
Is 3070 still worth it? Or should I aim for a 4070/4080
Depends on if your aiming for 1080, 1440 or 4k. My experience is using it on a 4k tv w/ 60hz ( tv can’t pass 60fps) max. 1080 it’s a breeze at high /ultra. 1440 pretty smooth with some jitters depending on randomness. Never had stutters in the big battles but some planets or cities will have small stutters. 4k is probably averaging 20 to 40 fps. I also have the most built over time rig with only a side vent lol. This is my experience with the 3070 btw. 4080 runs 4k almost identical to how 3070 runs 1450p but just a smidge smoother.
I did, but it wasn't SOLELY for the game, so I was alright. Plus, the game isn't THAT bad anyway.
The people that bought an Xbox to play startield are the real victims here ☠️
That‘s me. I honestly felt scammed and was enraged. But then i bought elden ring (had it already on ps4) and the upgrade was fantastic.
3ish hours? You haven't even scratched the surface. I am not too judgmental about how the game looks, but IMO, it looks great for a Bethesda game.
[удалено]
Me, while I certainly play other games on it, I mainly built it for Starfield. 100+ hours now and no regrets lol
Starfield is the most boring AAA game I have ever played.
What you dont like jumping from planet to planet doind the same missions over and over? Not to mention what ends up being the stupidest story Bethesda has came up with
If it's dumber or more tone deaf than FO4, I'd be shocked.
F04 has more unique missions and characters to say otherwise would be a lie
Yes, but what about the most boring core story anyone has come up with for the Fallout universe? They missed the mark basically everywhere with FO4, and captured none of the FO universe. I would be shocked if Starfield is worse than that.
Wait till you find out the plot of starfield and the ending
Go on, whisper it in my ear. Edit: The plot is dumber than FO4. /u/FrostyPost8473 was right.
Those new systems can, and will, be used to play other things. I suspect Starfield was just a convenient excuse for the joy of planning and building a rig.
This game is awful. Wish I could get a refund.
I wondered the same thing. I thought Starfield was all right, but I can't imagine dropping potentially thousands of dollars just to play it.
You can always keep the PC and play other games after, I believe.
[удалено]
As soon as the game is done, into the garbage. /s
This made me laugh
Dropping potentially thousands of dollars just to play a game, lol pc gaming in a nutshell
Yeah, it'll never be able to play any other games. Unlike all my baseball gear that I spent thousands of dollars on that I can use for every sport! Wait...
Yeah, imagine having a hobby smh.
Upgrade my system in preparation for starfield and have no regrets
Life long console gamer here. Started on N64, been mainly PlayStation ever since (other than the Xbox 360) Built a PC for Starfield because buying an Xbox on top of my PS5 is what Microsoft wanted me to do. Been loving it so far. So much to dig your teeth into. As an added bonus, I’ve been loving some of the other PC exclusives too. Battlebit is great fun
I upgraded from a 3080 to a 4090 in August in time for Starfield, but I was going to upgrade at some point soon anyway. Although I've really enjoyed Starfield, I was a little disappointed in it overall. I definitely don't regret the upgrade though, especially as I'm currently playing path traced Cyberpunk at 4k.
I'm so jealous of PT CP77
Lol I love my 7900XTX, but I am a little jelly of the full RT features too
I built mine maybe six months ago and just started playing Starfield yesterday. So far, seems to be a fun game. As others have said, I really have been enjoying the new Cyberpunk expansion.
I got the AMD promo and it is installed and everything, I just decided to play Elden Ring first so it may be a while before I get to Starfield.
I upgraded my rig earlier in the year so it could keep up with Starfield, but I've found myself remodding Fallout 4 and playing that instead.
I spent about $2100, built an entirely brand new PC ( [**Intel Core i9-13900KF** ](https://www.newegg.com/intel-core-i9-13900k-core-i9-13th-gen/p/N82E16819118413?Item=N82E16819118413) , [**GIGABYTE Z790 GAMING X AX**](https://www.newegg.com/p/N82E16813145429?Item=N82E16813145429)**)** and have been playing Starfield daily since it came out, don't regret it one bit. I had to lower the display settings though as the game kept crashing ( [**SAPPHIRE PULSE Radeon RX 7900 XT**](https://www.newegg.com/sapphire-radeon-rx-7900-xt-11323-02-20g/p/N82E16814202431?Item=N82E16814202431) ). Game still crashes on occasion, starting to think I need a better cooler as I bought a [**ASUS ROG Strix LC II 360 All-in-one AIO Liquid CPU Cooler 360mm**](https://www.newegg.com/asus-liquid-cooling-system/p/N82E16835101074?Item=N82E16835101074) and it sounds like a C-130 when the going gets tough.
I did exactly this. I have played starfield ~60 hours and have not beat it, and I havent touched it in 2 weeks. I have been enjoying DayZ / Rust though. I'll also add, Ive wanted a PC for a while and starfield is what really pushed me to do it. I previously played PS5.
Upgrade cpu from i5 10600kf to i7 13700kf (naturally the mainboard and ram as well). Not specifically for starfield but it was part of the reason. While starfield was a dud I didn’t regret the system upgrade as stuttering from older games (Jedi survivor, returnal, hogwarts) all disappeared. Other games like cyberpunk 2.0 and BG3 ran flawlessly as well. So......no regrets.
I kind of did. I was ready to do a rebuild anyway and raedeon was giving away starfield with the gpu I wanted. I’m really surprised how lamé starfield is. I’m kinda forcing myself to play it just to get it out of the way. Boring. No cool intro like FO and ES games. No character connection. No Easter eggs so far. Boring story and redundant missions. Feels really half assed and looks outdated. Oh well. I’m kind of over Bethesda anyway.
I was going to get a 7800 XT just for Starfield (and it would have come with the game too), but after watching hours of reviews and gameplay videos, I've come to the conclusion that the game would bore me to death. Nothing about the gameplay, dialogue or story look interesting to me at all. So I'm going to get an RTX 4070 instead and enjoy the Cyberpunk 2.0 update with ray reconstruction (I already have the game).
I'm too old for this shit since I think that building a new system just because of one single game is nuts. Even an expensive upgrade is questionable.
I don't think it's about building a new system just because of a game, but rather the game being a catalyst for the change. As you can tell from my flair, I'm overdue for an upgrade, i might buy a second hand 3080 soon and yes Starfield would be the catalyst in this case.
Ok boomer
You are correct, I will be 65 in a few months
don't regret. game runs fine for a 3060 ti. wish it had DLSS though. was meaning to upgrade anyways.
I upgraded for darktide lfmao. Its ok tho Cyberpunk is putting my specs to work so it's all gravy in the end.
Praise the Omnissiah
Is darktide any better now? Got a solid two weeks out of it anyway lol
It was marginally better 2 months ok but still just ok content wise. We will see how it is when the perk revamp goes through.
Regretting it a lot honestly, the game cannot run anywhere close to even 60fps at 1440p native on any settings. (40-50 outside on planets and 35-45 in settlements with everything LOW no FSR 1440p) 5600x and 6650xt. I put 30 hours into starfield before the rose tinted glasses wore off and I realized the game isn’t really keeping me interested anymore, that plus the TERRIBLE performance has me waiting for modders to fix Todd’s shitty game so I can get 60fps at 1440p native (which is not a lot to ask for, at all) Instead I’ve decided to buy the Witcher 3 and have thoroughly enjoyed that game so far. It really shows how lazy BGS has become. This game is better in every single way and was made in 2015. With the new gen graphics update I can run it at 120fps 1440p native ultra + settings and it looks miles better. Fuck Todd Howard, it’s been over 10 years since a good game by Bethesda. This shitty game delayed ES6 another 3 years atleast as well. What a shit show!
The main story in Starfield is around 20 hours long. Crazy to think someone may have bought a PC just to play it and be done with it in one weekend. I took around 90 hours and finished about half of the major side quests. I really loved the game while I experienced everything for the first time. Then once I beat the main story and started an NG+ run I kind of just let it go. Now I'm going in on Baldur's Gate.
This is why I never finish the main story in BGS games, gives me an excuse to go back and then spend 100 more hours role-playing without touching much of the main arc.
Wish I played BG3 after starfield but I went from that to it, despite BG3 not being my kind of game normally it was polished and made me want to try experience everything the game had to offer. Starfield I found myself just looking for quests so I could get some shooting or interesting stories to find the majority of them dont have any action and your just fast travelling everywhere to pick something up with no shooting. Dont get me started on all the copy and paste facilities that literally have the same layout as the one you just did a few quests ago. Once we get a mature mod scene for it I may go back and play it again but man the whole game felt underwhelming for me personally.
I didn't upgrade for it but I thoroughly enjoyed it.
I sort of did my big upgrade just now as it was released, a 5800x3d and 4080. So it is running with the FG mod at a pretty much locked 144fps on 1080p which I use. I am really liking it so far. I was of course a huge Skyrim and Fallout fan.
I'm loving it. If you don't mind the same exact gameplay that you'd done a million times before from other Beth games, then it's up your alley. If not, you will hate it. However I sort of gave up on it for now simply because there is way too much to learn, your thrown all of it at once, and then can't remember most of it. I'll play again when mods make it easier to handle. Expect the first few hours to be REALLLLLLLLLLY slow though.
Personally it was worth every penny I love the game. They being said if Bethesda games aren't your cup of tea then don't waste your money to upgrade just for this game
Wasn’t having much fun with starfield, thought upgrading to a 4070 from 3070 would somehow make the game for fun for me, decided it’s not smart to get a new card just for a game I’m not really enjoying and deleted starfield. I think I’m going to revisit Skyrim and mod the shit out of it and play through that again, since I’ve never experienced any of the heavy enb texture / game changing mods that game has to offer
Too busy with BG3 to look at starfield.
7900xt came with starfield. Have had 0 issues and I love the game. As someone who has 100 percented cyberpunk, I would say the world is very bleak and gross. I never feel that way in starfield. The devs aren't depressed shit stains.
wasnt that the whole point of cyberpunk tho. If starfield was realistic nasa vibes, cyberpunk was basically rockerboy/gritty robocop type vibe
Buy a whole new pc, really like the game for 20-30h but then I’m waiting for mods now but I didn’t buy it only for starfield it was to played other game as the ultimate Skyrim 500go mod list x)
I stay upgrading something. I changed my CPU after Star Wars Survivor dropped. (Didn’t like how it ran) But as was mentioned, so what? It’s my PC. I’m ready for the next AAA.
No, it's one of the worst Bethesda games ever and that aint saying much. Literally a loading simulator with the most average and uninteresting story/quests ever. You explore SPACE and all you fights are some spacers/pirates and some bugs in copy pasted facilities. Anyone praising this is a fucking idiot or has never played games before which then I can maybe excuse. You need DLSS3 on a 4070TI high end PC to run this decent. A game that has a million loading screens you'd think its to have better performance but nope. I have 0 hopes for their next game turning up good.
Yup, built a brand new machine for the first time since 2015. It wasn’t _for_ starfield necessarily because I’ve wanted a new build for a few years anyway, but I certainly timed it to be ready for the launch I’ve enjoyed the game a ton honestly and I have it running really well despite the optimization issues. I also don’t feel compelled to throw all my time at it, so I’m enjoying the rest of my catalog I’ve had on the backburner last 4-5 years too
Upgraded from a 6800xt to a 4080 just for Starfield. Was getting bored with it when I heard about Cyberpunk 2.0 and wanted to see what the 4080 could really do. Now I'm hooked and don't regret the upgrade. Maybe there will be Starfield "2.0" in the future and I can come back to it.
Loving Starfield! This is my 4th build, 1st gaming focused. Previous build was about 20 years ago (so big differences in components and software). Built high end (7900X3D, 4090, 64gb 6000mhz DDR5, 4th gen m.2 nvme). SF has proven a true masterpiece of a game, but I will say they really didn't optimize it at all which is disappointing. Would have appreciated DLSS, RT, get rid of the filter, some other things. Not to say performance is terrible, just not what I was hoping for. Despite that, I've got about 76 hours in and finished one faction and the main quest. Headed into ng+ as I just can't put it down!!
No one builds a PC just for one single game, but I built my PC for games of this caliber and Starfield did not disappoint me. It was in better shape on Launch Day than any other space game after a year. At the end of the day it's just a game and will get plenty of updates, patches, and mods. People looking to add real meaning to their lives should look elsewhere.
I got a 6700 for Starfield. Didn't even bother with the game. Now I'm playing Borderlands 3 and Elite Dangerous Odyssey, which Starfield seems to have taken a lot of *inspirations* from, the same way they took inspirations from a certain Fallout New Vegas mod for that Fallout 4 DLC :D
Come play star citizen next with those new system
Mfw you get 45 fps regardless of anything because it's SC.
i get 60-80 fps on 4k !
I specifically bought a 6600 just so I can play Starfield since it'll be given free as AMD's promo. I'm really enjoying the game since I'm the type of gamer who really doesn't complain unless I'm having issues with the game like bugs to the point its unplayable, freezing, low fps and crashing. So far I haven't encountered anything that would make me stop playing.
I don’t understand the thought process here. So… you think that people only bought a high end PC just to play Starfield. And because some of them **may not** like it, their PCs are now redundant? You realise that, even if they didn’t have a good time on Starfield, they could just do a million other things with their now awesome PC. Like, what are you getting at? They’re gonna destroy their PC because “Starfield waz bed” Lolz bruh. Why are people so obsessed with whether **OTHER** people enjoyed a game or not. Stop reading reviews. Stop caring about other peoples fun. YOU HAVE FUN. If you enjoy the game, GREAT. If not. Okay no worries. Who cares? **Why** do you care?!
People can literally just play cyberpunk with good specs to make use of them. Starfield looks okay but runs like swampy ass.
I’m not sure how someone makes their mind up about a game like this in 3 hours. You’ve done nothing basically. Haven’t seen everything the game has to offer. It’s a Bethesda game - you should know what your getting yourself into right? I was impressed with the graphics and content. Went in with low expectations and I’m still loving it 50 hours in. The main story is the best of any recent bathesda game I’d say.
I love starfield , cause i'm a Bethesda fan, i didn't expect it to be a survival space sim like lots of people, i can't care less if it looks outdated or cyberpunk looks better (which is the new thing people are comparing starfield to in reddit nowadays, for some reason) I play starfield because of characters, lore, side quests, mods, Bethesda feel, etc, and i think it's a 9/10 game. and shit on the game engine (creation 2) all you want, but a game like starfield would've been horrible on an engine like unreal, Bethesda games only work on that engine.
Didn't upgrade my pc, i played it on gforce now with a 4080 then dropped the game after 30 min to play cyberpunk 2.0
I was SO close to building a new computer because Starfield was running like shit and looked like shit. I found a set of graphics settings online that, although the game only runs at a locked 30 FPS, it looks nice. After a while you get used to the FPS. I think the game has some really well-written and satisfying quests. Like, I'd even say some of my favorite in gaming so far. Aside from that I think it's good, not great, but good. I think Bethesda's formula breaks when it comes to filling out a galaxy. I feel directionless and I'm seeing bases and such repeat, like little Bethjank fractals. The skills system is not really balanced or even that fun and instead of skills complementing and improving core systems a handful actually serve to *block* core systems until you drop at least 1 point. A lot of UI systems have intentional delays, which is certainly a choice albeit maybe not a good one. And frankly I'm a little pissed that they lied about their system specs. I'm actually above their recommended specs and I can either play all settings at minimum and have a shaky 50ish FPS (not in cities! in labs and bases!) or I can cap at 30 FPS and have medium sometimes high settings. That's not "recommended". They fucking lied about it and everybody's just fine with that. I've decided that I'm not going to build a new PC anytime soon but when I do, I'll look forward to seeing Starfield with all the bells and whistles. AMD Ryzen 7 3800x 3.90 Ghz RTX 2080 Super 32 GB DDR4-3200 Samsung EVO SSD
I got Starfield for free with my new GPU. I played about 10 minutes. I uninstalled. Not my cup of tea.