Poll: Do You Think Starfield Will Contain A 'Performance Mode' On Xbox Series X|S?

I'm just hoping its bug free. MS cant have another fallout 76 delivered here, it needs to be as special as we all want it to be.

I'm pretty certain this will be 30fps - I'm not a big fan of their engine performance and I think its unlikely they can deliver a game of this scope at 60fps. I hope I'm wrong, but I'm just not seeing it...

I'll take 30fps on this title if its a relatively bug free experience!

Knowing Bethesda we'll be lucky if it runs at all.
And if it does run at 60fps it will be because of a bug lol.

30FPS is fine for Starfield as it's the same standard to which their older games like Fallout and Skyrim have traditionally run at. As people have said, the bigger question is just how many Bethesda bugs will remain?
I'm much more patient with Starfield as the game does seem to have genuine scope, epicness and a push forward for Bethesda Studios.
Redfall on the other hand....

At this point I’m a little concerned about what state Starfield will be released in.

Starfield is likely far more demanding on the console than Redfall so I don’t see it running at 60fps at this point. One disappointment after another.

I'm not sure a game the size and scope of Starfield will hit 60fps on xbox, but I could be wrong

After the Redfall debacle I wouldn’t be surprised that Starfield is only 30fps but I think it will have an inconsistent 60fps performance mode that will require multiple patches.

I won’t lie. I’ll be gutted if Starfield doesn’t at least have the option to run at 60fps and at this point I don’t think it’s going to.

I could see it not having 60fps at launch but it will at some point.

After the manufactured Redfall crisis of yesterday, this, inevitably will be the next one (I've seen this coming miles off😁)
If a game like the Witcher 3 is not a perfect 60fps, than how can people expect that from Starfield, a vastly more complex game and systems. I would like a performance mode but I'm also realistic about those prospects.

I have high doubts it will be able to maintain 60fps after the stuff Todd has said in the past combined with this Redfall news. Obviously Bethesda seems to think 30fps only is acceptable…

@Mauzuri Generally Nintendo multiplayer games run at 60fps (like the Splatoon series for example)

That leaves us with the inevitable question: will Starfield manage 60FPS on Xbox Series X|S?

Absolutely. We'll just have to wait for the Starfield Aniversary Edition on the 24TF next generation consoles, yep it will release on PS6 as well..... I'll see myself out 😉.

All I can really say is that it better have a performance mode. If not I won't be playing or buying whatever deluxe edition exists. (I had planned to do that no matter it's game pass status.)

It pains me to say that but I just can't do 30 FPS anymore so if that is the only option the game is DOA to me.

On a bright note Bethesda have put native 60 FPS on Skyrim and Fallout 4 (& 76) can run 60 FPS too. So at least Bethesda know folks want the option so it's still a possibility despite what previous commenters are saying.

Bases off their past history, I am pretty confident Starfield will launch at 30fps only for the console.
I would love to be proven wrong but I just don’t see it happening.

There'd be no excuse at this point if Starfield didn't have both modes given how long it's been in development and the delays there have been. I'm not excusing them for Redfall really, but at least that hasn't been in development for so long or have as many delays as Starfield. I know this is a really ambitious game, but there are plenty of other games that release with both modes at launch.

Technically this wouldn't be on Microsoft, except for the decision to not delay them in order to have them finished, as these are both Bethesda games that were in development before they were bought. Still, it would be a bad look for the start of their supposed big turnaround with exclusives.

I haven't believed for a second that Starfield would be 60fps on consoles. I suspect it'll be about 20fps on Series S. People were worried MS would buy Bethesda and ruin them. Well, from the looks of things, Bethesda hasn't changed one bit.

@Sol4ris they pair down the shiny stuff so it still looks decent and can maintain 60 FPS. I would take 1080p 60 FPS over 4k 30 FPS every time.

If they can get better resolution and shiny stuff & still maintain 60 FPS great but always always have a 60 FPS option even if it means visuals are downgraded.

For some reason devs get stuck witb maxing resolution at the expense of everything else. I have always thought that's been the wrong approach but it sadly seem to be industry standard these days.

@pip_muzz it's not fine whatsoever 60 is the standard now won't be 60 I very much doubt I doubt the series s will be able handle it on 60 but the series x should do no excuses there

I think if it wasn’t planning to it is now!

Thing is, starfield has only been shown running 30fps. It’s also not an online fps. It also doesn’t look last gen running on unreal 4. I think all these things are important in building up expectations.

We know starfield is going to be vast…far bigger more open game with far more mechanics going on than redfall. We know it’s going to be heavier on stats that will effect gameplay. As well as an over all slower paced play. These things have an affect on expectations.

I think gamers would be more forgiving in starfield being 30fps. I think the option should be there. But they’ll be less of a ‘we’ve been hoodwinked’ mentality if it isn’t…as it’s easier to see where the benefits of the consoles power are being spent in starfield.
I don’t expect hellblade 2 to be 60fps either. And wouldn’t complain about it not being for similar reasons.

The real shame is that gamers have set themselves up this gen for these quality/performance mode compromises rather than wanting games to simply be optimised to the best of the console’s capabilities from the start. So of course we’ll see more short cuts taken, why wouldn’t we?

I doubt it’ll even be a polished product, let alone have a performance mode at launch.

60fps is NOT the standard - it may well be for Cross Gen games designed to run at 30fps on XB1/PS4 era hardware and so the 'next' gen Hardware has 'enough' additional resources/speed to deliver twice the Frame Rate - hence you get 60fps on XSX/PS5 but that doesn't mean its the 'Standard'.

Most games have Quality modes at 30fps at launch too and 'numerous' games don't offer a 'locked' 60fps Performance mode (Elden Ring for example) so I really don't understand why suddenly '30fps', which has been more than adequate and 'most' Game of the Year games were only 30fps, that its 'now' unplayable..

I do like the 'option' to choose for myself and I often select Quality over Performance because the 'compromises' to hit 60fps are more 'distracting' to me than the game-play at 30fps.

@Kaloudz I have to disagree. Options are always good. I think it started on console at least when the PS4 pro and One X came along? Since then it’s become pretty standard to have a quality or performance option, at least in the bigger releases but also a lot of smaller ones too. I think that’s good, I’ll always choose performance but if others want to go with quality that’s their choice also. My fingers are now crossed Starfield will have a choice 😅

I don't see it happening knowing Bethesda. Honestly if Starfield just comes out and doesn't break that would be a step up for them. All of their previous RPGs always felt like they were being held together with duck tape.

Starfield isn't primarily only a shooter though so 30 fps might be a bit more forgivable there. Plus it just looks really ambitious. Redfall on the other hand looks like it will lean on its combat for most of the game so no 60 fps option hurts it much more.

Shooters, racing, beat-em-ups and fighting games are the four genres that require 60 fps. Everything else for the most part can somewhat get away with it.

People always jumping to conclusions. Redfall so far is the only Xbox first party game that's launching with 30fps only and Arkane have already stated a performance mode will be coming. I'm not defending Redfall but this game is being made by a different developer.

Starfield gameplay reveal showed the fps dropping a bit but then again we dont know if that was an older build of the game. I do reckon Starfield will have a performance mode.

I'm fairly certain starfield will only be a 30fps game on series X, although I'd love to be proven wrong. There was an ign unfiltered podcast interview last year with Todd Howard (director and executive producer Bethesda studios) where he was asked about 60fps or 4k visual fidelity, especially in respect to starfield. Todd replies that he'd rather have better visuals and resolution at 30fps in Bethesda's games.

Here's a link to the podcast and timestamp of 25 minutes for the information:

https://youtu.be/LUOZsjTwbLU

@BAMozzy I do agree for some types of game, I'm not expecting Starfield to have a 60fps mode but it'll be nice if it did. What I would say is that it's a bit disingenuous showcasing gameplay at 60fps and using Xbox influencers to do so, if the option isn't there at launch

As much as I like Bethesda’s games, they’re not exactly known for their polished day one releases. It will contain a performance mode but at a stable 60 fps is just wishful thinking.

@Kaloudz I like the simplicity too, that’s why I game on console and not PC after all 😜 I have gotten used to having a couple of different modes now though.

My profile pic is from Aliens!

@BAMozzy Correct me if I’m wrong but I’m 99% sure ER was locked at 60 on PS5 and would only dip into low 50s occasionally on X?

@carlos82 I haven't seen ANY Starfield Game-play by Influencers definitely playing on a Series S/X that definitively holds a 'stable' 60fps or anything to 'indicate' that the devs have been targeting a 60fps option specifically - same with Redfall.

From what I had seen of 'early' game-play on both these, neither had a 'locked' frame rate - although to some degree, that is acceptable from a game that's still in 'development'. Even if its 'somewhere' between 40-50fps, I'd still rather they 'capped' to 30fps at launch and then 'optimise' further to try and offer a 60fps mode than push out a game with 'unstable' frame rates - even if they were targeting 60fps and all 'game-play' was previously shown at above 30fps.

Until it's 'released', I wouldn't take anything as 'definite' - things can change. Whether that's adding 'performance' modes, adding RT, adding NG+ or Photo Modes, changing 'Puddles', removing 'something' that was in a Preview/trailer etc.

At 'some point', you just have to get the Product out rather than keep polishing, refining etc etc. Most 3rd Party Publishers push products out too soon (Cyberpunk, Gotham Knights) as it brings in revenue rather than keep spending money to keep 'developing' and then 'refine' and add features post launch.

As I said in the Redfall discussion, MS would probably have a 'bigger' PR disaster by 'delaying' Redfall yet again (after already delayed it and Starfield, Forza etc too) and with so many 'announced' games without release windows, people are already questioning whether MS can get games out. Another 'delay' seems more 'harmful' than releasing a game with only a 'Quality' 30fps option - especially as 30fps is perfectly playable and hasn't 'negatively' impacted any Critical review or GotY award nominations.

Of course I'd 'prefer' it to be 'fully' polished and with ALL options available from Launch, but I don't think it needs to be 'delayed' again until they get 60fps locked in...

@Titntin 0% chance the game is bug free, that's the nature of big systems driven games like this. Every Elder Scrolls game are among the best games of all time and they were all riddled with bugs. This is not a simple linear cinematic game, people expect a polished up sony game when those have relatively nothing going on in the background.

I'll check it out at 30, 60, or any number in between. I don't really care about frame rates.

@FatalBubbles Definitely not. Performance on PS5 and XSX was so rocky at launch that Digital Foundry was recommending PS5 owners to install the PS4 version to get a solid 60fps if that was super important to them. The Quality mode wasn't capped at 30 and it fluttered all over creation too. The PS5 version was more stable overall than the XSX version, but they were both just all over the place.

@SplooshDmg Thanks, maybe I played it after it was patched then. It wasn’t a day one game for me.

@BAMozzy I will say I was referring to Redfall specifically and they have been showing it at 60fps (albeit on PC) but also inviting Xbox centric influencers to try it out and effectively advertise it at 60 on their channels just 3 weeks ago. That's my main concern and they should be a bit more open with what they're showing to people amd the aims of the console versions

@FatalBubbles From what I recall, the PS5 hovers at around 58-59 fps in general traversal but can drop to 45fps in Combat - at least at launch - and Series X was worse.

I'd still rather have a 'locked' 30fps (with perfect Frame pacing) than a game that's not 'stable' and often below 60fps as I find that is more distracting, feels worse to play than 30fps to me.

The problem with Elden Ring - like ALL FromSoftware games - is that their 30fps mode doesn't have consistent Frame pacing which I hate even more than 45-60fps inconsistent frame rates so it wasn't necessarily a 'good' example - but was an 'example' of a 'poor' Performance mode at launch that couldn't deliver a consistent 60fps despite it being a 'cross-gen' designed game targeting 30fps on Last Gen hardware.

The point I was trying to make is that '60fps' is not the Standard and most games that 'launched' with 60fps 'Performance' modes on Series consoles were 'cross-gen', designed around hitting 30fps on XB1 hardware so have sufficient 'headroom' on Series to push for 60fps - even if they can't hit it 'consistently' - as we see in Witcher 3, Elden Ring etc initially at least.

Early indications seemed to suggest that UE5 Lumin/Nanite games may not be targeting 60fps on Consoles either so I wouldn't say 60fps was 'Standard' at all...

@carlos82 Sony ONLY releases games on PS5 day/date so their 'best' (and ONLY) version due for release is ALWAYS the Console so they 'Showcase' the Playstation version. With Xbox, the 'highest' tier is a Windows PC and as games are built on PC's, can easily capture any content etc before its 'ported' and/or 'optimised' specifically for Consoles.

As I said, they don't have to show off 'XSX' game-play specifically when its likely to be the 'least' played version - more Series S and PC gamers. The game will be 'scaled' down to Cloud stream, scaled 'down' for Series S etc so should they show 'those' also to cater to 'every' version? Also, as I said, the ONLY thing consistent about the Frame Rate in any 'previous' video's and even some of those that played 'early' remarked on the fact that the Frame Rate was 'below' 60fps consistently - not an 'issue' in a Beta.

I would rather they launched with a LOCKED 30fps Quality mode and spent time 'optimising', tweaking etc until they can lock to 60fps on Console - especially as I don't yet own a VRR display.

All I said was that ANY build prior to release is NOT Final and is Subject to Change. If its Struggling on PC to hit 60fps consistently at 4k, then chances are it will struggle on Consoles. They 'NEVER' stated their plans for Console until recently when we know it will be 4k/30 on Series X at launch, potentially 'still' online ONLY (even in Single Player) with 'plans' to add a Performance mode and/or remove the ALWAYS 'online' requirement post launch - as well as bring 2 new characters and other 'updates'.

That was them 'setting' expectations prior to release - instead of you 'assuming' something 'incorrectly'. I hope for a Performance mode at launch in 'every' game so I can CHOOSE which I prefer - but 30fps has NEVER stopped me playing ANY game and most of the 'best' games in the last 20yrs or so have been '30fps' - even if 'new' gen Hardware can boost them to 60fps now, it didn't stop them being 'playable'.

We don't know anything about the game. There's not even any gameplay footage yet. I don't think we can speculate on the finer points of performance when we know almost nothing about it.

I, as usual, will not play this unless there is 60fps as an option. Simple as that!

That 60fps is not a requirement for games this generation is a shame.

I don't know if the game was planned to have a 60fps mode, but I do know that after the...ahem....fallout....from Redfall, it's going to now.

Because it's built on the oldest engine in the industry, the Creation Engine. I will be happy if it runs at 30 fps consistently

@ZuneTattooGuy I mean, it's running at 60fps in Skyrim. The engine can do it, it just depends how much vfx they force you to use vs optimizing for performance.

@Titntin HFW needed 16 patches to come to a good polish condition and fixing all the bugs,shimmering problems and you expect from a sand box huge open world game not to have bugs? Of course it'll have bugs, the real bet here is to not having braking bugs witch will damage players progression. At the last video we show the beta tester guy Bethesda is using for years was playing Starfield on an Xbox Dev kit and the game was running very smoothly probably at 60fps, so yes i think it will have a performance mode at start with 60fps mode.

NO, Todd Howard has said himself that he prefers 30 FPS with high visual fidelity...I don't think Starfield will be 60 FPS... I hope im wrong though..

isn't starfield made with the "new" engine? how many huge delays? it better have a 60 fps mode for xbox!

It's a Bethesda game. You're lucky if it runs at 30fps at launch.

They can't stop me from trying for 60fps on PC, though. I'll crank up FSR and run on lower settings if need be.

@Bmartin001 Wrong, He said he is ok with 30fps in general, not that he prefers 30fps, not the same thing.
@rustyduck Not a new engine, it's the same gamebryo-Creation Engine from the past but updated with new features for the next gen.

@NEStalgia
Skyrim is an over decade old game, I sure hope it can push that turd at 60 fps

@Arxagelos hope your right on the 60fps, but if it were possible Id take that bet with you!

As for hfw, whos talking about that? Its got nothing to do with this conversation in the slightest....
Theres really no point in making excuses for bugs that havent happened yet. I mention it as this teams last release was famously awful for bugs, and I want this game to be undeniably excellent in every way. Of course it will have some, but Im hoping they are not significant. If you value your own money, then you should be hoping for the same.....

@ZuneTattooGuy That's true, but at least it provides confirmation that the engine itself doesn't have crazy limitations where key gameplay is tied to a 30fps timing and they've already put in any work to make the engine functional at 60. It means there shouldn't be anything limiting Starfield other than a dev forced "we refused to lower the visual standard to accomodatate this." But since FO4 and Skyrim have 60fps standards (FO4 only via fps boost though not a patch) it would be weird for them to mandate 30fps for their flagship game at this point.

Arkane is a very different, lower budget, less savvy bunch vs Todd's huge team. Not saying it might not be 30fps, but, both considering the history of the studio, the know-how, the engine having been used at 60 already, and the drama from Redfall's blunder here, I'd be SHOCKED if it had no performance mode.

Now...if performance mode holds or even approaches 60 is a different issue

@Ralizah I prefer my Bethesda RPGs to run at no less than 30 crashes per second.

@Titntin I mention HFW to empathize that open world games can't released 100% bugfree and polished, Sony's Studios have a "fame" for bug free and super polished games....we all see that their attempt for an open world game didn't come bugless and without issues! The problem imo is that the hole media system is waiting in the corner to slap every xbox 1rst party game. Not the same energy u know.

@SplooshDmg Bethesda games don't crash. If you're lucky they crash. What they do is something far worse than crashing. If it crashes, you just restart and play minus the bug. Bethesda games make you keep playing as the bugs accumulate into a Blend-tec-digital-bug-smoothie.

I love my SeriesX, I've said before I ultimately find it to be a better, more fun gaming machine than my gaming PC with 3070 (the interface, accessibility, quick resume etc). But I really hope this isn't a trend, more stuff being 30fps only.

It does seem to be a somewhat inevitable part of a console cycle, pushing graphical fidelity at the expense of framerate. I was hoping this generation would be different, the horsepower combined with the trend of having more choice (ie quality/performance modes).

If that does happen, I suppose I'll have to play most new games on PC.

@NEStalgia Obsidian made an entire RPG about bugs, and Grounded still doesn't have as many bugs as an actual Toddy Original.

"It just wokrs"
-Tood Howarrd

@Arxagelos Wrong, Todd Howard literally said for his games he is more of a 30 FPS person.. So yeah he did say that..

@Bmartin001
"We don’t have a problem with 30 frames per second as long as it looks really good and the simulation is running and all that stuff,”
this is his statement, he never said he prefers 30fps don't spread fake news.

@NEStalgia
I think Starfield will come out full of bugs, running on an old gross engine and be 30 fps at launch (if that). But it was in development before Microsoft bought the company. I am hoping anything new moving forward will use a much better engine and be more polished.

@ZuneTattooGuy of course it's full of bugs! 😆 Just to 45-55fps bugs....

The engine.... Bethesda is kind of trapped in that engine forever. They have too much existing work and tools built around it that could never be rebuilt in a reasonable time. The underlying engine is gamebryo. Yuck. But creation is the work of Bethesda incorporating some idtech into it. 8 don't see any way they can dump the engine really, it's purpose built with their games in mind and tons of tooling is built around it. I'm certain tes6 will use it too and probably fo5.

@NEStalgia
Rockstar was stuck with Renderware during the PS2 and early Xbox days. But finally used some money from their vault and moved to Rockstar Advanced Engine and Euphoria.

Just because it makes making their games easier doesn't mean they can't ditch it for sometime more advanced. Even CD Projeckt Red is using Unreal 5 for the Witcher 1 remake.

@Arxagelos I just gave you the exact statement that came directly from Todd Howards mouth where he says he likes 60 FPS for some games but for his games he likes 30 FPS because he likes the Visual fidelity and the the little details such as shiny pixels on screen.. I don't know why you're having trouble comprehending this..

@ZuneTattooGuy Bethesda is a little different because the impossible scale and scope of their games means they're always building into what they already have. Scrubbing and starting from scratch is nearly impossible for them compared to updating the existing engine in place and having id morph it over time. If they tried to switch engines the result would probably make the old buggy Bethesda look good.

@NEStalgia
Impossible scale? Skyrim is 37 square km. Fallout 4 is 43. GTA V is 80. Witcher 3 is 142. Please stop making excuses why a company now owned by a company worth $2 trillion can't invest the time and energy to ditch a dying engine for something modern.

@Bmartin001
...and he closes his statement with "I may prefer 30fps for that level of immersion but that doesn't mean is for everybody"

He acknowledge his personal opinion isn't for everybody or their games must be on 30fps because he likes a more shining assets rather than more fps. All the studios at the previous console gen where focusing on 30fps because of the weak cpu, with the new console generation all studios are focusing to 30fps/fidelity and 60fps/performance. Redfall will eventually have a 60fps/performance too same goes with Starfield.

@Arxagelos Well thanks for your explanation, I appreciate you coming back to me. I don't personally think HFW is the best example to pick as I played that for 180 hours from day1 with just one bug experienced - I'd be absolutely delighted if Starfield arrives in that kind of state! However I get your point.
May I also point you in the direction of Hogwarts, which runs just fine on Series X and PS5 and is an open world game with lots of interesting systems, and was released in a great state - I didnt have a bug completing this and haven't heard of many.

Its not an unrealistic expectation that games, even complex ones, should be delivered in a playable state with no game braking bugs. I find it baffling that anyone would want to excuse a developer from this reasonable expectation.

Questioning if it will be broken has nothing to do with MS now owning this studio, it has everything to do with how this studio have launched games in the past including their last big release . Fallout 76 used to be the poster child for broken titles, until cyberpunk took its crown and Tod Howard is a proven liar, so scepticism is based on the track record of the devs, NOT that the game is now Microsofts. We would have this same conversation even if the game remained multiplatform.

@Titntin I played HFW on my ps4 pro and the bugs and texture popin was all over the place, even collision on walls was bugged! Shimmering was awful too.
Bethesda had a financial problem and released FO76 too early hoping they may catch up later but the damage was done. FO76 was their first Multiplayer attempt and they failed. It doesn't matter if the game was on development before ms bought them, now they are under Xbox Games studios Umbrella and every failure they may have goes and will damage Xbox Brand. Failure is not an option for Xbox AAA 1rst party games...they must deliver.

@Arxagelos Sorry you had such an experience with HFW - on PS5 I loved it and didnt get any of that.

I agree with you that this will be seen as a miss for Xbox if it releases in a bad state, especially as its been delayed already.
However, I'd still see the questions being raised about it as born from their history, and not their current owners.

The question we want to know about MS is if they can effectively manage the studios they are buying. 343 suggests they cant, but there are particular issues with 343 anyway. This release, with so much attention put on it by MS themselves, will be a test of if they can ensure they launch quality product first time.
I very much hope they can, and its no question this is one of the most anticipated releases of the year for me...

Starfield needs to leave no stone unturned. It has to be so good that the only competition for this game for GOTY should be Zelda.

I hope it gets different modes but I doubt it tbh. This game needs to be top notch in as many departments as possible. Most people expect a lot from Starfield since they see it as a flagship title.
I hope Xbox delivers …

The whole idea of 60fps gaming was from PC space where every year there is shiny new GPUs each costing 3x price of a console. Consoles are always under-powered and old tech compared to state-of-the-art PC. So you always have to have a sacrifice between good graphics or good framerate and in anything that is not a competitive shooter or something, I prefer better graphics.

@ZuneTattooGuy The dimensions of the map aren't very relevant, most of that space is just empty space in all the games. But in bethesda's games almost the whole world is interactive, every object can be manipulated, and many things interact with many other things in connected , dynamic, scripted events, etc. The scope and scale comes from the amount of ojbects that can be interacted with, NPC interactions from it all, physics applied to almost everything, etc. GTAV and Witcher 3 are very static environments with a lot less going on. Cyberpunk is more comparable to a Bethesda game, and....well......there we are lol.

@BrilliantBill No the idea of 60fps gaming was the normal all the way back on 8 and 16 bit consoles in the 80's and 90s, and where Europeans hated that the PAL version was inferior to the 60fps NTSC, JP, and Arcade version of games.

The "compromise" of 30fps started with PS1/N64 when the push for 3d graphics before the hardware could do it satisfactorily meant to interlacing and cutting framerates. Then marketing realized that shinier graphics are easier to sell and it's been about pushing shiny graphics, which really comes from PC, over smooth play ever since.

How bad 30fps is depends a lot on your display and that's the problem with the mishmash of display tech out there today. OLED displays MURDER 30fps gameplay, fast overdriven IPS and TN does as well. *VA and older IPS panels with slow refresh basically act like frame boosting because they have a native blur that smooths out the frame gaps so it hides the gaps. For someone with that type of display there's not much difference between 30 and 60 because it looks smooth either way, the slow display smooths it out. For those with slow refresh, high latency displays, 30fps looks fine and the 60fps obsession seems silly. Until you upgrade display.

Before I realized that, last gen I was using an older slow IPS display and I, too, thought the push to 60fps was overblown. I remember arguing with @Banjo- on the NL XB thread that FH4 was best at 30fps while everyone was on about 60fps, because the foliage detail and all the jaggies/shines at 60fps was unbearable and it was smooth at 30 anyway.....then I upgraded my display to a fast IPS....and OMG I can not play FH at 30. At all. The jittering flicker of every edge is impossible....can't deal with it. The difference is the display changed. It went from "smooth" to literally flashing ghosts of every high contrast edge a few mm away from it like strobes. For every single edge. 30 is close to unplayable on it.

That's why performance needs to be the default, even if it allows options, because whether that looks acceptable or is unplayable isn't just about preference, it's also about the player's display tech which is more or less outside their control, and there's so many different display techs out there.

@NEStalgia
So you will praise a game that allows you to pick up a massive amount of worthless junk, but has horrible character models and animations. Meanwhile GTAV is basically empty, according to you, but instead has hundreds of cars, tons of weapons, and let's you get around it's world even in the sky. But yes let's let Bethesda keep with their old engine because you can pick up stuff

So I'm more hopeful vs believe that it will have a 60 fps mode at launch. Todd already said he prefers fidelity over frames and it's been delayed twice already (yes they delayed it from June). It's going to be a massive ***** storm if this thing is a buggy mess and 30 fps, only because MS owns them. If they were independent still it would just be expected and folks would move on.....but they have that Xbox hatred tax on them now.

@NEStalgia Yes, today's displays prioritise response time and game mode so all games should have a 60fps mode. The VRR technologies compensate the deactivation of movie modes that are not good for gaming because they increase the input lag. You get a much better response time and almost zero input lag and, at the same time, VRR helps with unstable refresh rates. The Xbox Wireless technology also helps if you use your controller wirelessly as it's faster than PS5 and Switch's Bluetooth. 30fps video modes should be completely optional.

@Banjo- VRR worries me because I know that means it'll be used as a crutch to not optimize games for stable fps when the vrr can "fix it" yet most displays and NO monitors I'm aware of out there support it, and freesync usually only supports down to 40fps not below.

@Krzzystuff Todd prefers fidelity. Looks at his last 3 games. Ok then. 😂

I really think the redfall poopstorm may have been a necessary sacrifice to ensure starfirld releases right. After this, 30 is going to be a bad look. If Phil isn't obvious it will be a mandate to Todd to get 60 working for their flagship game.

@ZuneTattooGuy I'm not praising or dismissing anything. I'm saying Bethesda has far too much tied up in their tools that are accumulated since Morrowind that are impractical to replace without introducing more bugs than normal because of the systems they design in their games. I just don't see them being better off rebooting their entire technical base platform vs working with and improving what they have in pieces.

@NEStalgia side note to 30fps I'm starting to feel like Phil needs to take a step back and let someone else come in and run things. He's the visionary that sold the dream internally and got buy in and budget for gaming....but Xbox just doesn't seem like they are managed appropriately. They are too hads off... don't be up their asses....but have your fingers rubbing their cornhole so they know you are there and expect results. And Phil just doesn't seem to like butt stuff.

30fps most likely, this isn't a linear cinematic on rails sony game. There's so much going on under the hood in an Elder Scrolls game it's baffling that the games work at all, if they release it with a 60fps mode that doesn't look like mud then Todd is a wizard.

The real joke is that people will pretend to be outraged when they find out that the game is 30fps, but then be in pure ecstasy over the absolute masterpiece that is zelda which will of course run at 30fps at 900p.

@Krzzystuff LOL I'm laughing and cringing in equal measure. That post is hilarious from any context though.

I don't necessarily disagree with that, but I think the problem is their timeline of events. Phil started "selling the dream" in 2007 or so, they started a few games. Bethesda wasn't bought until late 2000, not closed until mid 2001, and 100% of everything they're working basically hasn't involved MS at all until the last mile. almost every studio involved wasn't even involved with them until the final part of dev, and every one of them was a troubled project from a banrkupting studio/publisher, which is why they sold to MS to begin with. In comparison PS5 looks great with early years with well paced blockbusters, but those were all extensions of the work that started 10+ years ago, while MS didn't get REALLY started until 2 years ago, and even Sony's well seems to be running dry. The biggest thing they have going is Square's game they just purchased to have a big game. The whole industry spent itself into a hole last gen, and we're reaping the reward. A Microsoft building on liqudiation sale dev hell games to release, and a Sony that seems to have emptied the barrels and is now looking for powder.

So MS's position may LOOK like "they're hands off" and with Halo that absolutely was the case, but then with Forza that's also been the case and nobody's complained about either series quality, and they didn't have anything else that they didn't basically buy used in "acceptable condition" from a liquidation sale and try to give it a tuning and body job to get it off the lot in a reasonable time.

I think the real problem for MS is that X1 was a completely missing generation. They started to sell the idea of Xbox in 2007. Series X wasn't so much a "new beginning" but a placeholder starting point to build around later. and any real payoff from anything that started in 2007 and especially Bethesda that really started mid 2021, isn't going to happen for real until 2025 or beyond because it couldn't. For the first 2 years MS owned Bethesda most of the company was still fulfilling orders Sony bought years prior. Bethesda isn't truly churning out Microsoft products until years from now.

All of "gen 9" seems to be a "period of transition" for the industry rather than a proper generation while the industry figures out what they're doing and how they're supposed to pay for it, and if "just charge more" during a global depression recession perfectly fine economic period of unprecedented growth and opportunity _{approved language} will be enough to make the coffers please investors.

@Jenkinss 900p 30fps... with Skyward Sword graphics.

@NEStalgia Those imperfections also happens in 30fps games. I think that developers will try to reach 60fps when the goal is 60fps, even if sometimes it takes a few updates. VRR is just a minor assistance that not every display has but it's nice if you have it.