Games

32712 readers

1516 users here now

Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.

Weekly Threads:

What Are You Playing?

The Weekly Discussion Topic

Rules:

Submissions have to be related to games
No bigotry or harassment, be civil
No excessive self-promotion
Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts
Mark Spoilers and NSFW
No linking to piracy

More information about the community rules can be found here.

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

411

Todd Howard asked on-air why Bethesda didn't optimise Starfield for PC: 'We did [...] you may need to upgrade your PC' (www.pcgamer.com)

submitted 1 year ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

198 comments fedilink hide all child comments

You heard him 4090 users, upgrade to a more powerful GPU.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 year ago

sure mister gamedev, please continue to tell more on how an engine you clearly worked on, should run...

I can easily compare between what different game companies do. Why are you acting like I need to be a developer on a game to criticise that game?

I dont say that Starfield is a well optimised game and performance will get better with upcoming patches.

Todd could have said so. He didn't. Why?

But I also don't think it's an unoptimized mess, I think it is running reasonable and people really should start review their rig, because modern games will need modern components

I never stated this. I simply said: comparing Starfield and Crysis is deliberately disingenuous, because Crysis was fundamentally meant to break boundaries, which Starfield doesn't do.

Oh and also other games did not run that well like you maybe remember ;)

Okay, what's the argument here? Do you think I say for those games "well, you're not Bethesda, so I'm fine with you not running well"?