cThe Good, The Bad, and The Moddable
Let's cut to the chase: Starfield on PC is a mixed bag. Sure, it's the best way to experience the game, but it's far from perfect. The game shipped simultaneously on PC and Xbox consoles, and while the PC version offers a range of enhancements and superior performance, it's still a work in progress. Shader compilation stutter, a common issue in many PC games this year, is thankfully absent. But don't pop the champagne just yet; there are still stutters that need ironing out.
For a deeper dive into the technical aspects, check out this YouTube video that compares the best settings on PC with Xbox Series X.
Graphics Settings: A Maze Without a Map
The settings page offers a plethora of options but fails to guide the user on what each setting actually does. It's like being handed a toolbox without an instruction manual. You can tweak the settings, but you're essentially flying blind, unaware of how these changes impact performance and quality. This is a significant oversight, especially for newcomers who might not be familiar with terms like "anisotropic filtering" or "field of view."
Accessibility and Basic Features: Missing in Action
The lack of basic options like field of view is a glaring omission. It's 2023, people! A first-person game shipping without such a fundamental feature is baffling. And while the modding community is doing wonders to improve the PC version, it's unfair to rely on them for what should be basic 'out of the box' features.
Performance: A Tale of Two Hardwares
Starfield is a GPU-heavy game, and the performance disparity between AMD and Nvidia hardware is puzzling. AMD's Radeon RX 6800 XT outperforms Nvidia's GeForce RTX 3080 by a staggering 40% at ultra settings. This raises questions about the AMD sponsorship and how it might be affecting the game's performance on Nvidia and Intel hardware.
List of GPUs and Their Performance
AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT: Outperforms Nvidia RTX 3080 by 40%
Nvidia GeForce RTX 3080: Lags behind AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT
Intel Arc A770: Performs worse than both, even after two driver updates
CPU Utilization: Needs Fine-Tuning
The game is also taxing on the CPU. For instance, the Ryzen 5 3600 drops below 60 frames per second in certain areas. The game seems to scale well across cores, but there's room for improvement, especially on specific architectures.
DLSS and FSR 2: A Community-Powered Lifeline
One of the most glaring omissions in Starfield's PC release was the lack of DLSS (Deep Learning Super Sampling) support. This technology, developed by Nvidia, is crucial for improving game performance without sacrificing visual quality. FSR 2, AMD's answer to DLSS, was also missing. However, the modding community stepped in to fill the void, adding both DLSS and FSR 2 support. But should we really rely on modders to provide essential features in a triple-A title?
List of Vendor Upscalers and Their Importance
DLSS: Improves performance and image quality for Nvidia owners.
FSR 2: AMD's answer to DLSS, but has issues like ghosting and flickering.
XeSS: Still missing but should be relatively easy to implement.
The modded DLSS is leagues apart from the FSR 2 integration, which was said to have been added by AMD engineers. FSR 2 has issues like ghosting on all particle effect types and flickering in neon areas. These are not problems you'd expect in a game of this caliber.
VRAM Management: A Silver Lining
On the bright side, Starfield's VRAM management is commendable. Even 8GB GPUs can run the game at 4K ultra settings. This is a significant achievement, especially considering the game's demanding nature. It shows that the game has some degree of scalability and could perform well on various hardware configurations with the right optimizations.
Sponsorship Woes: A Question of Ethics
The game's performance raises questions about the role of sponsorships in game development. Starfield didn't work at all on Intel GPUs at launch, which is a red flag. Even after two driver updates, Intel's Arc A770 performance still lags behind. This situation raises ethical questions about whether sponsorships from companies like AMD are influencing the game's performance on competing hardware.
CPU Performance: More Than Just Numbers
The game's CPU performance also leaves much to be desired. For example, the Ryzen 5 3600 drops below 60 frames per second in certain stress test areas. While the game seems to scale well across cores, there's a noticeable stutter that needs addressing.
The Vault Ohio Perspective: Is Starfield Worth Your Time?
If you're a gaming enthusiast frequenting The Vault Ohio, you're probably wondering if Starfield is worth diving into. The game offers a rich experience, especially in terms of casual ESPORTS gaming and could be a fantastic addition to daily gaming tournaments. However, the technical issues can't be ignored.
The Vault Ohio: How Does Starfield Fit into the eSports Arena?
If you're a regular at The Vault Ohio, you might be wondering how Starfield fits into the world of ESPORTS Gaming. Given its current state, it's hard to see it being featured in weekly gaming tournaments anytime soon. However, its rich narrative and expansive universe could make it a popular choice for casual ESPORTS gaming.
Conclusion: A Work in Progress
Starfield on PC is like a diamond in the rough. It shines in some aspects but is marred by glaring omissions and performance issues. Bethesda has a lot of work to do to polish this gem. Until then, the game serves as a cautionary tale for what can go wrong when essential features are overlooked or left to the community to implement.
So, should you dive into the world of Starfield? If you're up for an adventure and willing to navigate through some technical hurdles, then go for it. But if you're looking for a seamless experience, you might want to wait until the game receives the polish it so desperately needs.