Since when do people not care about 60 FPS?

[Turbo Soggy]

I’m seeing a large number of people claiming they have absolutely no performance issues with this game, but when pressed further will admit they’re dropping down into the 40s at times at 1080p on medium settings. Since when is that acceptable? Did I step into bizarro world?

EDIT: To everyone saying “just get a better PC moron” they need to have that reflected in their system requirements. They can’t be recommending a 2080 when even a 3080 isn’t good enough. That’s unethical.

[Sunnyeti]

Originally posted by Gigantoad:

Originally posted by TROOPER181st:

for those who dont understand the difference between 30 vs 60 vs 120 framerate here is an demo - if you dont see the difference than stop playing PC and return to consoles forever.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=e6pxeEXNelw

https://youtu.be/334D1Jax3FI?si=T-AIkDN94L4pHXty

Will this show on 60Hz monitors though?

I don't even think youtube can support any framerate over 60 fps, the only differences between 60 and 120 fps in this video are the responsiveness and clearness.

[Zalzany]

Since 30 is accaptable on console and half them claiming they gonna buy and xbox that cost as much as the part they need to play this good. They could buy one hell of nice SSD with that money or replace their out of date GPU. I mean one guys complaining he gets 40 didn't even have min required video card to run it lol.

Most them got their pc, and bios on power saving settings or default bragging they got an elite gaming PC and using slow as ♥♥♥♥ old SSDs or HDDs sigh.. Its 2923 and consoles still not only sell well by have little console wars running at 30 fps lol

I mean come on I know people who have better "numbers" then my PC we did benchmarks mine was more optiomize and had better performance lol. They had nice things but ran it all in lower percentile they didn't how to tell bios to get out of power saver mode, or that some parts are better then others. Like my Ram is crazy good BUT you got change bios to use it 100%

[Raszoar]

Originally posted by Sunday Driver:

I'm supposed to believe some guy out there got his high capacity fast NVME, high end CPU and graphics card with lots of memory but is SOMEHOW STILL USING A 60HZ MONITOR!!

dont have a 60hz monitor but i do set my monitor to 60hz when a game doesn't have fps settings. mostly when a game has issues like this one. neo G8 32"

[Raszoar]

Originally posted by Sunnyeti:

Since I got a 7900xtx 70~80 fps is not even comfortable to me anymore lol.

that's so silly

that would be like telling my wife "honey i can't drive the SRT Charger, because i have been driving the Hellcat".

[Sunnyeti]

Originally posted by Raszoar:

Originally posted by Sunnyeti:

Since I got a 7900xtx 70~80 fps is not even comfortable to me anymore lol.

that's so silly

it's true, if you have a high refresh rate monitor and change it back to 60hz it'll not be so pleasant.

[Raszoar]

Originally posted by Sunnyeti:

Originally posted by Raszoar:

that's so silly

it's true, if you have a high refresh rate monitor and change it back to 60hz it'll not be so pleasant.

yes that is a true statement: but if you let up on your gas pedal and run at a slower speed you adjust and eventually get used to that speed, sometimes it is really hard to let up though. 70-80 fps on a single player game is great. i understand your pain.

[Turbo Soggy]

Originally posted by Major_Tom:

Originally posted by Turbo Soggy:

I’m seeing a large number of people claiming they have absolutely no performance issues with this game, but when pressed further will admit they’re dropping down into the 40s at times at 1080p on medium settings. Since when is that acceptable? Did I step into bizarro world?

EDIT: To everyone saying “just get a better PC moron” they need to have that reflected in their system requirements. They can’t be recommending a 2080 when even a 3080 isn’t good enough. That’s unethical.

OP, everything you are saying is true but it's no use talking about it here. Bethesda fans are smooth brains that will defend anything the company puts out no matter the state it's in. They are the same people who play Fallout 76. They suffer from the battered woman syndrome.

I mean hell I kind of enjoy fallout 76 but that’s only because I bought it 5 years after it came out when it’s a lot better and actually runs properly. It’s not super interesting but it keeps me occupied

[Turbo Soggy]

Originally posted by ArcadeVault:

Originally posted by TROOPER181st:

these people who say " it runs fine or get a better rig " are often people with a slower rig than yours. 9 out of 10 they probably never saw their framerates go over 45-55 fps and think thats " fine & smooth "...

thats untill they find out the true power of PC gaming when they see 120/144 fps with super frametimes on a 120/144/240 Hz monitors in HDR with Gsync/ Freesync working ...

thats when they are scratching the back of their heads and thinking ... "i hate my monitor and rig "...

happend to me - ever since im investing in top of the line hardware and only want to game way way waaay above 60fps ---> 120/144 and beyond.

the complete bullsh*t... the human eye cannot even see a clear difference between those high fps numbers beyond 60<

Not this myth again. The human eye can absolutely see frame rates far beyond 60

[Salamand3r-]

Originally posted by Turbo Soggy:

Originally posted by Major_Tom:

OP, everything you are saying is true but it's no use talking about it here. Bethesda fans are smooth brains that will defend anything the company puts out no matter the state it's in. They are the same people who play Fallout 76. They suffer from the battered woman syndrome.

I mean hell I kind of enjoy fallout 76 but that’s only because I bought it 5 years after it came out when it’s a lot better and actually runs properly. It’s not super interesting but it keeps me occupied

I got it a month after launch from Best Buy - for $4.78 I got the game, a Steelbook, a keychain, and some other random swag.

Gotta love firesales stemming from abject failure.

[Raszoar]

Originally posted by Turbo Soggy:

Originally posted by ArcadeVault:

the complete bullsh*t... the human eye cannot even see a clear difference between those high fps numbers beyond 60<

Not this myth again. The human eye can absolutely see frame rates far beyond 60

your partially right. there have been studies right now the consensus is 75hz. others believe that professional gamers have trained their eyes to see faster. there was also study that had gamers see if they could tell the difference between 140hz and 240hz, they couldn't, but that doesn't mean we won't train our brains to tell further down the time hole we go.

this is a pretty good article.
https://azretina.sites.arizona.edu/node/837

basically it is what everyone is saying though, you keep playing the games or watching tv at these higher resolutions and faster frame rates, you get used to it then if you start watching on a slower tv or monitor you notice the difference( don't know if your old enough but there was a time if you watched the news and in the back ground there was a monitor, well that monitor would have waves in it the reason is because of the refresh rate, if you looked at the monitor without the camera you couldn't tell) . it is why that people who run games at a lower fps don't mind, 60hz is just fine and bleating about why a game won't run 240fps is silly.

it is really going to be funny, listening to everyone when unreal 5 games start coming out, cause in reality the industry is not ready for it and our high end computers are barely going to get 45 fps and everything will be set to 30 fps again, to get your 160-240 fps that you drool for you will have to back down to 1080p. then your privileged head will combust because you have to make a decision to run at 4k at 30-45 fps or run at 1080p at 120 fps. too silly.

[Richard]

Originally posted by Turbo Soggy:

I’m seeing a large number of people claiming they have absolutely no performance issues with this game, but when pressed further will admit they’re dropping down into the 40s at times at 1080p on medium settings. Since when is that acceptable? Did I step into bizarro world?

EDIT: To everyone saying “just get a better PC moron” they need to have that reflected in their system requirements. They can’t be recommending a 2080 when even a 3080 isn’t good enough. That’s unethical.

i mean the game performance is bad. but 30fps is fine. any game is 100% fine playing at that. 60 is just nice and normal nowaday. anything above is pointless thou.

[PocketYoda]

Originally posted by Turbo Soggy:

I’m seeing a large number of people claiming they have absolutely no performance issues with this game, but when pressed further will admit they’re dropping down into the 40s at times at 1080p on medium settings. Since when is that acceptable? Did I step into bizarro world?

EDIT: To everyone saying “just get a better PC moron” they need to have that reflected in their system requirements. They can’t be recommending a 2080 when even a 3080 isn’t good enough. That’s unethical.

When its either 30fps or nothing.. I'd love 60fps+ but there is no chance i'm gonna see it on this..

[Castle]

Originally posted by draeath:

Usually I'm quite sensitive to dips below 50.

For some reason, it feels more tolerable in this game, and I wish I knew why.

(I did eventually enable FSR and back my scale down to 75% (I'm a 4K-er) though)

ha me and you both. it seem to be pockets in certain locations that drop it down to mid 50s? but inside locations such as abandoned labs, mines etc the frames sky rocket and its running beautifully....but its tolerable and personally I normally find my mind wont accept the drops...but on starfield? not too bad, I would rather there be none but for what it is im alright.

my biggest its a glitch that prevents characters switching between indoor settings and out door setting...Had Sarah running around the surface of the moon in her Jacket hahaha or helmet not re applying so just looks like im sucking in pure vacuum

[Caffeine]

Originally posted by Turbo Soggy:

I’m seeing a large number of people claiming they have absolutely no performance issues with this game, but when pressed further will admit they’re dropping down into the 40s at times at 1080p on medium settings. Since when is that acceptable? Did I step into bizarro world?

EDIT: To everyone saying “just get a better PC moron” they need to have that reflected in their system requirements. They can’t be recommending a 2080 when even a 3080 isn’t good enough. That’s unethical.

My eyes care about 60FPS. I only get 45 tops in this game. I can get 60 FPS in Cyberpunk and it looks much, much better. Crazy how poorly optimized this game is.

[Scyris]

Originally posted by Turbo Soggy:

Originally posted by Dark Phoenix:

Running on mostly low at around 35-40, usually it picks a number for an area and stays there. I would rather a stable 30 than frame hitching 60.

But why are you ok with that? Why not demand better? The game does not look good enough to warrant the kind of performance people are seeing.

This poster does have a point here, the game honestly doesn't look good enough for how poor the performance is. Beth is not known for good optimization though, I mean remember the fallout 4 textures? they had all these extra maps that made most textures 4 times the size they should have been, and when removed there was virtually no quality difference. Just poorly made textures, and I bet thats a big part of the issue in starfield. Mods will come out that actually optimize the textures properly eventually if some don't already exist.