Games

Damn this is a pathetic response. He could've said "We've tried our best to make it as polished as possible before launch, and are working towards further optimising it to give you the best experience, wherever you play". Even if they did jackshit, it would not come out as condescending and snarky. Maybe he wasn't prepared for a tough question on the spot right at the beginning of the interview, but it does show how he thinks about his games. In his mind, the game running at all on PC is optimised enough.

I am not saying he's bad for not making Creation Engine super optimised engine on this planet, I'm saying he's bad for not acknowledging it is currently most demanding engine despite looking merely half as good as Cyberpunk 2077 or idk Arkham Knight.

The missing part is that the user with a 4090 complaining had a CPU from 2017 🥴

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uCGD9dT12C0

Get a new game engine, Todd. Bethesda owns id Software. id Tech is right where.

Do you guys not have better PCs?

I don't know what your problem is, guys. When Skyrim was released, NVIDIA had GT 5xx series. Skyrim barely run at 40 FPS on Ultra on 1080p on a GT 560. Today, according to Gamers Nexus, Starfield runs at 60 FPS average on GTX 4060.

So, Starfield is better optimised than Skyrim was. Go buy a new GPU.

I have a 3080 ti, and a 12700k, and 32 gigs of ddr5, and a 2 terabyte ssd. It runs great for me. I don’t understand the problem. /s

Yeah, we optimized. We didn't do it well, but it happened!

I'm a game developer and I'm ashamed by this.

When chip production will halt because of the climate, you will see programmers optimizing their code again.

Jeez I hope this economy crashes.

people really need to put the nostalgia googles down...back in the days nobody played Crysis with full details and a steady framerate.

You were in 1024x768 and turned everything down just to play the game with barely 30fps and you know what, it was still dope as fuck. So yeah guys get used to lower your settings or to upgrade your rig and if you don't want to do that get a xbox

Honestly, what do you expect someone to say when asked a question like that? There's no answer there.

"We optimized it for the very high end of computers. The issue is your wallet."Kek mf'ing w

With my experiences playing the game with an unsupported GPU and getting a solid 60 fps still as long as no NPCs are in the vicinity, I don't think it's the GPU side of things that needs optimization. It's whatever uses the CPU.

Their idea of optimization in console was to cap the frame rate to 30, even on the Series X. So you can wonder what that means for PC

First game to just have constant crashes on my seven year old RX480, which is great since otherwise the game runs completely fine. Support doesn't seem to want my crash reports either, I guess in Todds world, I should just throw the thing in the trash for a game that does literally nothing special in the tech department.

Since negative opinions travel fast, I'm just gonna say my GPU is actually below the minimum requirements, though admittedly I upgraded CPU last year. The game's minimum is a GTX 1070 TI, I just have a regular GTX 1070.

In my case, it's doing a LOT of dynamic resolution and object blurring nonsense to get the game to run smoothly, but it does run smoothly. I get to see the character faces during conversations, I can see what I'm doing, there's no hitching, etc. New Atlantis looks ugly, but that might change if I get a new GPU.

If there’s an Xbox One version, then there’s really no excuse for it not to load on a PC with similar or better cpu/memory/graphics specs.

It's perfectly optimized. I'm getting a rock solid 30fps. /s

Seriously though, I think it's fine. Especially indoors and in space, it performs well and looks incredible. New Atlantis is kinda ugly and janky though.

Damn, glad I didn't buy it on day 1. Got baldurs gate instead and am enjoying that

lol, no they didn't. They didn't even test adequately, more than a few GPUs that meet the requirements didn't work when early access launched.