@@datruth4766 The footage runs at 30fps. The video is encoded to 2160p 60fps to take advantage of the best bitrate RU-vid can offer. But the game runs at 30fps and that is clear in the video as well.
@@UlyssesM I tried to get into it a few times, but the lack of true narrative made the whole experience feel a little empty for me. The exploration was great though!
Starfield has better exploration than Mass Effect. It just lacks ground vehicles. Also Starfield's writing is more about dramatic set pieces than actual sci-fi philosophical concepts or historical backgrounds of alien species such as in Mass Effect. Very different games.
Just a note regarding space travel which a lot of people don't seem to know about, if you are flying your ship and open your scanner (F on pc, don't know the button on console), you can point your ship at a planet/nearby system and select it with E, then hold R to travel there and it does a little cutscene of the ship flying/grav jumping. You can also do this with landing on planets, so if you are looking at Jemison and open the scanner you can point the reticle at new atlantis which will appear as like a white marker on the surface and then hold R to land there. The game doesn't explain any of this for some reason though.
It would've been so much more immersive if that had simply replaced the often black loading screen with an animation of warping to the destination,. The takeoff and landing animations are cool but I wish the were stitched together into one long animation hiding the loading in the background
@@TheManHank It would've been so much more immersive if we could just fly there, can you imagine being able to take off and land on planets, all while being in total control, with no loading or cinemetics? That would be NUTS-it's not like any other games have done this yet! Nope, not a single one!
That middle ground John talked about for space travel; my idea would be if they allowed an AI speedily travel to your destination for you, meanwhile you can get out of your cockpit and do whatever while you in real time are being taken to your destination (albeit in an expedited timeframe). You could use this time to craft things or do whatever hijinks the game allows in your ship. I think it would be nice for immersion
That would be really cool yeah, plus if you could set the navigation in first person from the helm and then hit "go" (warp speed/hyper speed etc etc) that would be really cool. Then the animation of the stars whizzing by while it loads the next environment in the background and you can get up and walk around the ship and do stuff would be ideal I think. That way its effectively a similar thing, just way more immersive.
Star Citizen does something like that, so like you could be travelling to another planet and can do other things on the ship, and if you have a big ship, that's opens up a lot of options that travel time because less of an issue. With all that said, I don't think many of us want long travel times, so a middle ground is probably a better option to keep the fun factor going.
I think that making the player have to point to their destination to activate fast travel, and if the cutscene was in first person, it could have been a nice way to keep the ilusion of a space journey.
And also if you were able to set the navigation just using the ships systems and displays, which it doesn't look like is possible? Imo that would really add to the immersion.
Thanks for the comments on HDR and blacks. I thought I was going crazy cranking up the settings on my new monitor and wondering what was happening. Hopefully this is something they can add settings for in the future for those who want custom settings.
It's an issue, a massive issue. The Black-level is so high on my OLED (LG C1) that's it's not remotely funny. Enabling Win11 AutoHDR via hacks doesn't fix the ridiculous black level (well grey level) and just makes the HUD so searingly bright I'm be too afraid of burn-in to use the hack. The xbox version has the same HDR issues at Windows :(
@@thingi Yeah, Im on an Xbox+monitor and I had to bump up contract and black enhancer. Also went warm color temp and different gamma mode to get a somewhat consistent image. But day scenes are sometimes a little too blown out in so many ways 😂
16:48 - I'm amazed that in 2023, Bethesda still hasn't figured out how to do water in a video game. This problem exists in every version of Skyrim, and they somehow made it even worse Starfield
21:14 It’s nice that the game keeps track of items this way, and this perfectly illustrates that. Still, doesn’t that hotel have a cleaning crew? If those soap bottles had disappeared, I wouldn’t be mad. 😂
Also, it's absolutely certain there's a limit to the number of persistent objects. It makes no sense whatsoever to think this is an excuse to the poor framerate. Also, soap bottles don't need to be updated per frame. Quite disappointing from DF to excuse this.
@@jonny5143every time someone has something to say about a game, they're a sony fan boy ? you sound like a prepubescent teenager, not everyone is a console fanboy
Thank you John for mentioning the washed-out HDR. This is also a problem in Fallout 76 and I wish they would provide HDR calibration or adjustment options as I don't like the washed-out blacks and shadows.
It's not an issue that Bethesda can fix. Because they been using the same outdated engine since skyrim.... You really would have thought Bethesda would make a new engine by now.... Its been literally well over 12 years of this overused old and buggy engine.
HDR is so inconsistent I don't even enable it now. Some games looks great with it, like both Horizon games, but then you load another game up and it looks terrible or requires a bunch of tweaking. Not to mention the handshaking not being completely reliable. HDR needs some streamlining still.
@@m.b2948 They've been using this engine since Morrowind. Just because it's called Creation Engine doesn't mean it's not Gamebryo under the surface. Oblivion and Skyrim were basically just Morrowind with Havok physics and shit game design.
Yeah I was looking forward to playing on an oled and it doesn't look good. The first planet looked pretty good when I was outdoors. But I think I'm the only one that thinks just doesn't look great. Everyone keeps saying it looks great and it has its moments but I thought new Atlantis looked pretty bad.
@rgs7341 I made the picture look damn good by just changing the setting on my LG OLED. Assuming that you have game optimizer enabled, first enable HDR Tone Mapping in the advanced picture settings (instead of HGIG), then tweak the black point and white point levels in the game optimizer. Black point level down to 5 or so seemed to fix the grey wash. I know it's not 'true' hdr implemented by the game engine, but it has made the game playable and looks damn good on my setup. Give it a shot.
After seem how many load screens in between maps, we definitely need to give more praise to No Man's Sky, such small team and they are able to developed they own ingame engine, you can board your ship at the space station or your freighter and you can literally explore the entire solar system from there 100% seamlessly, including landing on any planet of the solar system in any spot you want and the game still manage to run at 4k 60fps on current gen consoles with really good graphics, and the base building is insane currently.
I think a real time atmospheric entrance could have worked. I do think it would still be scripted and out of the players control, due to the specific landing location. So essentially a hidden loading screen, which is still more immersive than seeing the screen fade to black.
It was very impressive that they did that as an Indie Studio, but there was little depth to exploration, the planets get boring looking. The art style is very simplistic and when traveling the graphics would often look playdough like. Not to knock it I liked NMS years back, but its not THAT impressive considering it's the only impressive thing they do in my opinion
@@MVPMTKINGdoes that imply that Starfields exploration has more depth? Because I'd say they're both on about the same boring level, maybe Starfield being a little bit worse than No Man's Sky
Thank you for touching on HDR! This is an area I’d love to see more DF content focus on as I feel it is one of the most important visual features in games.
@@thespeedtapper4 I’m but a mere mortal 😂 It’s all the same to me, even when others talk about colour accuracy it’s all the same. 8 bit colour, 10 bit colour, it’s all the same. I was watching comparisons of 4k, QHD, ultra high med it’s all the same can’t see a difference. The only thing I noticed was on low settings was decrease in vegetation and shadows disappearing
@@christinaedwards5084 That's understandable. With 1080p to 4K it's not a monumental difference when you're looking from a distance. So you would have to get closer to the screen to notice the differences. The closer you are, the more immediately noticable the differences are, especially on a large 4K screen. Playing 1080p content on a 55" or larger 4K screen will make it a lot easier to see the differences.
40fps is probably doable on consoles, seeing as it's very consistent at 30fps, but 60fps might be pushing it a little, after all, pushing the frame rate higher will push the cpu harder and that's probably too much to get to 60fps even with some major cut backs on visuals, but 40fps, who knows, it depends on how tapped out the cpu is.
I was eagerly waiting for the full DF Starfield review - As usual the production quality, content and overall effort are top notch. Thank you for sharing.
You are saying 'All footage captured on Xbox Series X' but I can clearly see some 60fps footage there, how is this possible since both Xbox versions are locked to 30fps?
Still lame. You cant fly in open space from planet to planet like Elite Dangerous, you dont manually land or take-off either..... You're constantly stuck in an invisible wall arena no matter if your in space or on land. Point and click fast travel simulator.
Thank you bro. I’ve been saying this,because with this game. A lotta of the complaints ,that people make. can be worked around by just learning the game mechanics.
@@advanceddarkness3 Your not wrong, however Elite Dangerous is a Space Sim, Starfield is a RPG in Space. Bethesda however did misrepresent that for the last 16 months.
I'm actually amazed at how this game looks like it came out of 2017. Not even screenspace reflections on bodies of water? The water at 9:00 looks like a joke. Also the tress and overall lighting is bad. Looks like it's lacking ambient occlusion.
Just so I understand- No ray tracing No seamless worlds or travel Long, frequent loading screens No space simulation No npc routines or radiant ai Basic graphics and rendering techniques What 'simulation' is the reason for 30fps???? What makes this a next gen only experience?
@lum26akua28 in not questioning whether its a good game or not. In fact I want to buy an xbox just to try it. I'm just asking why it needs to be 30fps.
When surveying a planet, and points of interest are 1000m apart... and running is severely restricted, it seems like vehicles must've been cut content. There's no way they expected players to run around 1000m+ of wasteland with nothing to do but tap an occasional mining node inbetween (if your inventory isn't already full, which it probably is).
It kills planet exploration for me. It is just a bore just aimlessly running towards points of interest. Managing the stamina is so annoying too and just makes the whole thing even more tedious.
I think that the whole space travel aspect was severely cut back during development. There is a lot of missed opportunity there. At one point Bethesda likely decided to focus almost entirely on the planet ground content. Sure there are missions in space, exploring derelict ships and the like, but it feels like so much more was planned but ultimately scrapped because the scope was proving way too big to tackle.
@@ProsecutorToddShaw If you're on foot and scan the location, like a cave for example, then you can use your ship to re-land closer, rather than walk all them meters.
That would look to familiar 😂 they had to show the old decade comparison.. DF guys are mates with phill and Bethesda team they don’t want to make them look bad
8:22 It's concrete, not cement! Cement is an ingredient in concrete like flour is an ingredient in cake. Portland cement is mixed with water and aggregates like sand and gravel and cures to create concrete.
I hate the excuse of “hey this company is known for buggy unplayable launches, and this is a playable buggy mess, therefore this is a great game bordering on a masterpiece”. What? Why the special treatment? Why the excuses? The game shouldn’t have the technical shortcomings period. They should’ve switched to an entirely new engine. They should be upheld to modern expectations and standards (no I don’t mean battle passes and battle royale) instead of being treated like this is a AA dev that has only made 2 games and has only existed for 8 years. This is a vet company that should be breaking new boundaries and they don’t.
He's getting paid by bethesda, I think its obvious after watching this review. The new strategy publishers choose nowadays - you pay the reviewers more, than you spend on development, as a result you get positive reviews and wash the brains of normies who can't handle critical thinking, and you win. Just look at the critics review on metacritic, thats hurrendous.
On the topic of having a space travel middle ground: The way I imagine it should work is if you wanted to travel somewhere normally it literally takes 30 years, but the fast travel/grav jump system takes 30 seconds. You ship actively takes the course you see when you fast travel, and the game simulates you going to route you would if you were to/could travel there manually. That way it can then dynamically take you out of travelling to surprise with different events like a pirate attack or distress beacon etc. You could even happen upon derelict ships and choose if you want to go explore them or not. Maybe even some side quests could start by randomly finding something. You could also still use the power allocation system where putting power into grav jump lets you get there quicker but putting power into shields makes you safer if combat does start. With this idea you could also move around your ship while fast travelling and magange your inventory. I think overall this should feel like you are exploring/moving through space while also not wasting your time. Personally I think they really messed up letting you just fast travel everywhere instantly.
Thanks for sharing this i really like it. Overal there are some things like this they can do to improve space travel or improve the illusion basiaclly. I mean yea flying into the planet and all is not going to happen but thats not the most important thing i think. I never really felt like ''oh planets are fake bladiebla'' when playing mass effect. But so far from what i see of starfield.. first off all people don't know you can also travel fromout the cockpit without using a map. And the second thing i notice is that the flying animation can be a lot better. As in in mass effect you see your ship ''flying'' before it lands on a new planet. In starfield i just drops off and you see the last two seconds. Thats a little bad haha. Makes you feel even more that its just a map being loaded.
@@jameswayton2340 Yeah heard about this 2 changes which would help with the illusion but definitely wouldn't immediately change my mind unfortunately :/ A lot of it seems quite core to the experience the lack of exploration in space and the lack of needing to actually fly in space. I fear even modders will have a tough time changing it. I suppose DLC might give me hope?
@@techknow9237 Then you give people options, if you want to avoid pirates maybe you could have a specific ship or part that let's you avoid them. Or if you want to find more places out there you can improve your radar etc
@@scalpingsnake If it is we need to put this in, put that in, give this option, give these options or players demanding I want this, I want that, it should be like this or that...etc.. we will never have a game like Starfiekd, Skyrim, Red Dead Redemption 2..etc
One thing everyone misses is you don't need to travel directly to your ship to fast travel between planets, you can access the galaxy map menu directly from the menu screen and travel anywhere from any world. That saves several minutes of steps every time...
@@SixSiouxnobody is forcing you to fast travel to your ship... You can still walk to it if you'd rather waste your time than actually do the interesting bits?
@@SixSioux did you miss the point where it's just an OPTION? you can still manually walk to your ship, sit on the cockpit, and liftoff, then punch the coordinates to jump, if you did not have the option to fast travel like that you would be complaining about that lol
its pretty awesome but im struggling to motivate myself to play it, the beginning hours are so boring but i know that will change, but it is missing that element of ''do you see that in the distance, you can go there'', its a big deal because when i see a moon in the sky in no mans sky i can jump on my ship and manually travel there and its super cool, that sense that the planet or moon is rendered in and i can go there (ofcourse its not actually rendered in), its just missing in starfield with nothing but hubs you can fast travel to.
I understand that it's not Star Citizen or No Man's Sky, but it seems completely immersion breaking and pointless for space to exist at all in this game. Why travel from the planet into orbit just so you can load into another planet's orbit, then load into the planet? Like, just skip the intermediary step of orbit lol
24:55 that floor shimmering and Bethesda having awefull AA is not something worth mentioning for a channel focused on graphics and performance? Like at all? Some locations and scenes are literally ruined by insane shimmering how come no ones talking about this?
I like mass effect but when playing through the LE without any prior experience to the genre I felt like it was robbed of a lot of opportunity between ME1 and ME2. ME2 and 3 were waay more linear than the first installement.
Hearing a lot of excuses for bad game design which felt a bit off brand for john and digital foundry... although the game may not have delivered what i personally was hoping for it still looks pretty fun.
I kept myself totally spoiler free before playing and I was let down too. I was hoping for a game with the intuitive exploration from NMS, the sense of distance and awe from Elite Dangerous, all wrapped up with Bethesda’s attention to detail and set dressing. Instead this is Outer Worlds++ and I refunded it.
not accusing them of accepting any bribes or anything but I thought the same exact thing... DF usually is relentless in pursuit of excellence on these tech reviews and this series of DF vids on starfield is EXTREMELY forgiving
I feel like this game would’ve been served better had they made it smaller and then made the few planets more detailed and you can fly to them instead of using loading screens
I don't know if it's the depth of field effect, but so many shots in this video make the game assets look miniature. It's like a collection of model replica of space stations.
Bethesda missed a golden opportunity here by not adding horses in space suits. Another wind-breaking opportunity missed by a truly great studio. Why can't we ever get a space game with friggin rideable horses in space suits!!!
More confirmation this game has lots of very serious core gameplay issues, many can't ever be fixed without putting the game back into pre-alpha. Thanks. I'll continue with BG3
i will say visually this game is very pleasing. i think its the consistent frame rates and high quality textures. you dont get alot of frames but it is consistent
Exactly. Empty open world with shallow gameplay, poorly written, and with a lot of bugs. Overhyped to hell and back because see that mountain? You can climb it. Or rather see that planet? You can go through 5 loading screens to teleport there.
@@konverznyExcept this game has good writing and characters, a shit ton of things to do with more depth than their previous work, and isn't particularly buggy. But I guess it's easier to lie about a game you haven't played. Seethe harder, nerd
Re: the detergent bottles, this is a case where greater realism would support lesser game sophistication, since in any real restroom those bottles would have been cleared up by now.
Man every Starfield video has Mass Effect music in the background and it makes me wish that some day Bethesda and Bioware would collab and make a super game. Star Effect. This game but higher sci Fi is exactly what I feel they were going for in ME1, so it would be such a perfect combination.
@@Michael-jj8gzUnless Microsoft buys EA. Or Bioware. EA is known to close studios once they're not successful and Bioware hasnt had a hit in a generation. So Bioware could be closed/sold soon.
For those who don't know, part of Andromeda's pitch was to use procedurally generated planets to give players the feeling of exploring a frontier. They dropped that part because they couldn't get the planets to look right, even after spending almost two years on it. In the end, they crammed on a more traditional mass effect experience
Absolutely love that you have some Mass Effect Music in the background. 14:50 for example. Even seem to have matched locations somewhat. Music from the citadel for new atlantis, and Eden prime for the train station.
I don’t like the sentiment that because it’s less buggy than previous Bethesda games, then it gets a pass. Compared to current games - load times, frame rate, writing, etc, should be looked at with more scrutiny and criticism. Comparing this game to Skyrim or Fallout 4 just does nothing for me, as someone that played neither. How is this game actually good and how does it set itself apart from any other big game released this year?
This has been xbox last hope for awhile now. It was always going to get a Nintendo type pass with performance. Why they didn't include even a 1080p 60 mode is strange
I heard the Mass Effect music and instantly was reminded of great times in gaming. I told myself I’d at least push through for several hours at the beginning of Starfield and I’m glad I did. I’m 25 hours in now and this game is a masterpiece that I’m falling in love with more each day. I think a game of this scope really requires a great deal of your time as a gamer in order to really comprehend and good of a game it is and just how much work Bethesda put into it. Thanks DF for the awesome video. ❤
To my eyes, this game is shockingly inconsistent. The area of new Atlantis looks unbelievably bland, like there's no ambient occlusion and depth of field at all.
Yeah I’d preferred an optional getting in/out of stasis sequence for space jumps as well as proper landing into planets with fire and what not when entering the atmosphere
SAME. I’m so tired of magic holograms and pointless transparent displays and overall style over substance that is unfortunately prevalent in sci-fi so seeing a world that in many ways resembles our own, just 300 years into the future is so, so refreshing
@@crispybottomLike if any of us would have a minimum idea how the tech would be in 300 freaking years considering how fast tech evolves and how this evolution is accelerating.
@@Z3t487 of course, but it’s just my pet peeve. We KNOW transparent displays are useless shit - we’ve tried it, we know that spaceships are utilitarian tools, so they’re not going to be packed with high tech flatscreens and luxuries like Xzibit had a field day with them etc.
He can’t help himself being biased in favor of Bethesda. This is why you can’t trust people who rely on access to the devs review codes and access to the devs themselves for exclusive interviews. The only person you can trust is someone who truly is not beholden to the devs. If it’s not a space exploration game, then why did they hype it as such? Why not just come out and say it. “Hey, this game is just Skyrim or Fallout in space, it’s not a space exploration game. You can’t fly your craft from one planet to another.” I think that would have hurt their bottom line. That’s why.
Outstanding journalism, stunning visuals, in-depth analysis, and engaging commentary. Honestly, it felt more like watching National Geographic than a game review. This is precisely why we all love the DF. Keep up the amazing job!
Not sure about outstanding journalism, the loading question should be risen to the dev and designers, and not just assuming it's a decision rather than an engine limitation.
This is a quibble but I could have done without the number of times he said words to the effect of "this is the best that we've seen from this studio" ... surely it's a given that we were going to see a technical stride forward from Fallout 4, which at this point is eight years old?
Funny... why didn't you make such a big fuss about the item persistence in BG3 for example? BG3 also has persistent item locations, levers, light sources, etc. What I try to say, is why only mention it for some games but omit it for others?
Really nice review, a fair assessment of what it does well and not considering the engine and scope. But that use of the Mass Effect soundtrack to play my feelings was sneaky!!
thats really good to hear, I was expecting more space sim but honestly that sounds even better (if my picture didn't give it away lol) so excited for Wednesday!
@@shiny460 I think the problem is that object persistance is nice (and a Bethesda staple) but usually not necessary for any game mechanics to work, so the tradeoff isn't fully justified. Coupled with the old engine, which already had problems when Skyrim was relased, it's not disingenuous to say that the game simply doesn't make proper usage of modern technology in many instances and the good but not stellar graphics are one indicator of that.
All this game does is truly show how INCREDIBLE no mans sky is , no loading screens ,actual full planet exploration, true space to planet landing , planet to planet travel, multitude of vehicles to use on planets for traversing long distances , the mining is waaaaaay more intuative, SWIMING 😂 , Its art style in my opinion is cooler without being based as much on reality like this game. God i could only imagine what a no mas sky 2 would look like if sony bought the studio gave them full control of team hireing and basically secured a ps5 exclusive gave them more money for a engine rehaul for this gen graphics it would be the best game of all time of they made the galaxy smaller so it would be even more detailed instead of spreading it thinner .... i could only imagine. Yet no mans sky period is better then this game just not in story mode .
@@william8217 havent played that game. Yea no mans sky isnt perfect by no means the story being the weakest part even tho ive gotten into it but its alot of reading and isnt rpg at all but its the best space exploration game so far from a small staff studio and there first real aaa game they have so much potential. Sadly theyve already said there next game isnt no mans sky 2 😔 i just pray theg keep the same ceo and remember how to make it i can see nms 2 on ps6 or ps5 pro a true masterpiece industry game changing as much as nms is since studios followed making a procedual generated space game which now theres like 3 from major studios much bigger then hello games.
I'm enjoying the game so far, but some typical Bethesda bugs still exist. The first bug was an NPC randomly floating away into the sky. The Adoring Fan spoke to me while he was sleeping. He didn't get up. He just laid there in bed with eyes closed and talking. I encountered this bug in older games like Oblivion, Skyrim, and Fallout 3 & 4. Another bug was when I killed an alien creature with the cutter and the creature was hilariously launched extremely high into the air. This reminded me of the Skyrim bug where giants launched victims upon killing them... including dragons.
Btw, I really HATE increased black levels... Once you have an OLED and have become accustomed to "black black", it kinda stands out... Been trying it on PC for a little and I have to say I'm kinda impressed. There are bugs and missing things etc. but nowhere near other Bethesda launches. Which is nice.
You said that 30fps didn't matter on Series X and that it was a "Design Decision". What is this talk about "Performance Mode" and "60fps"? Either it's a "Design Decision" or it's a failure on Bethesda's part. It can't be both, stop defending 30fps. Citation: DF Direct Special: Starfield Tech Breakdown - 30FPS, Visuals, Rendering Tech + Game Impressions - &t=138s / 2:18.
@@EpicConspiracy Then "modern consoles" are a waste of money. The literal biggest promise made by both Sony and Microsoft was 4k60fps which was later dropped to 4k30fps or a shitty performance mode in 1080p60fps which didn't even hold up. Stop defending this bullshit. Once Cyberpunk 2077 couldn't even keep up with the PC version or Ratchet and Clank's claims behind their "PS5 exclusivity due to technologies that cannot be done on PC" horseshit got completely demolished, it only continued to prove that NO, these consoles can't handle what they were marketed to handle. (Even after patches Cyberpunk 2077 doesn't compare to PC, we all know this. There are tons of other examples that have been pointed out.) This was a selling point to a LOT of consumers, actually, people were already tired of the shitty performance of the previous gen, if you can't even give us a consistent experience, what's the point of this downgrade? It's another generation, same shit. Stay on PC/Switch. I pointed out John Linneman's hypocrisy, that was intention behind the post. The fact that he defended the 30fps as a "design decision" was a total joke, the fact that people are just "accepting this" makes me question the validity of their arguments. So if the game was dogshit, would this have mattered? You are damn sure it would have mattered a LOT more to people. It's STILL bethesda jank, it STILL has systems that were in Fallout 4, literally ripped from that game, hell, even the AI moves the EXACT SAME WAY, the animations aren't even improved. It's prettier, but overall, a lot of it just still looks like another "Bethesda game".
You are one the few sane people on here commenting… they are literally comparing Bethesda to Bethesda… imagine if they did that with every studio… instead of comparing what the standards should be this gen… DF are a holes for this analysis… paid by Microsoft
The graphics of this game would impress me, if Star Citizen didn't exist. Star Citizen proves, that there is no reason to "tile the world" like they did. The huge world of Starfield, feels like a collection of maps stiched together, not like a Space Exploration game.
@@Episode_13 there is literally passage where he goes from city to ship to space with 4 loadinge and timer during loadings. In 5 minutes of playing (or even less) they have 30 seconds of loading. You can defend this in 2023 how you want, but its 2023 and not 2003 and this is not Morrowind but game which want to compete with likes of Elden Ring or RDR2 (massive worlds with minimum loading screens) or space sims where seamless landing on planets is implemented like last 10 years or so? Using Morrowind engine for modern game with its 2003 limitations in 2023 is embarssing. No excuses there.
If they are not going to give us full HDR due to artistic vision they should fine tune it to work better on OLEDs. Do hope they fix some issues, like water and shadowed areas. And disguise loading better. Game is gorgeous otherwise.
Artistic vision my ass. They couldn't even be bothered to add an FOV slider, despite even Fallout 76 having one. SpecialK just did the developer's job btw, and finally added HDR.
Seriously? "Artistic vision"? The blackness of space contrasted with sun beating on no-atmosphere planets is the sort of scene that HDR was "born" to depict in its full glory.
I assumed HDR was not supported, because there are no in game options to indicate that its on. Couple this with the poor black levels, and it seemed almost certainly disabled. Thanks for confirming that it at least "works" :)
I may be mistaken, but in my opinion, using photo mode to analyze texture quality and details doesn't provide a fair representation of the game's visual quality, the variation is vast. Compare the hutch texture and level of detail in 5'16" and 18'18", even though they are not the exact same hutches, it is the same texture and asset.
@@danielallen7384 Here you have ALL the options in photo mode, it is not the same: Camera options Camera options (identified by a camera icon) do what it says on the tin. These options allow you to set options specific to the in-game camera, including whether you have free reign over your camera angles and how close to your subject the camera is. Here’s a breakdown of the available camera options: Camera type There are three options here: free, orbital, or selfie. Free allows you to move the camera as you please, orbital fixes in one position, while selfie allows you to take, well, a selfie. Field of view This is a scale. The higher you set your field of view, the more of an area you can see, the lower the field of view, the closer the camera, reducing the visible area. Camera roll This is also a scale and tilts your camera left or right. Lower on the scale tilts you left, higher tilts you right. Depth of field This can be toggled on or off and controls the focus of your image. This is helpful if you want to take a close-up image but focus on a particular aspect of it, blurring the background. If you turn this on then you can also control the strength and how much it is near start or near plane (which lets you blur parts of your image) Character options These options let you control whether your character is in the photo and, if they are, what pose they’re doing. Here are all the options: Show player This option allows you to either have your character in the photo or not. You can toggle this off or on. Pose category From what I’ve seen, this is set to standard and can’t be changed. Pose If you choose to keep your character in the shot, then you can choose the pose they do in the photo (but you can opt to not do a pose at all). Here are the available poses: Boxer Cower Hands on hips Jump Kneeling Sit on ground Sneak Wave What’s up? None Brightness and contrast options These options allow you to change the brightness, saturation, and contrast of your photo. Here’s a breakdown: Brightness Fairly straightforward. This slider allows you to set how bright the image is overall. Saturation The saturation slider lets you set the depth and intensity of the colors in your image. Contrast This slider lets you set how obvious the differences in luminance are in the image. Higher makes your image darker and lower makes it lighter. Filter options You don’t have to set a filter on your images, but these options do let you get more creative with your photography. Here are the options: Filter A filter adds a layer over your photo that changes its overall look or color, imagine you put a special lens over your camera. There are several filters available under this option but none include dog face: None Mercury Era Gemini Era Apollo Era 1 Apollo Era 2 Dusty Binary Astral Bloodshot Dystopia Grunge Bleach Bypass Abandoned Swamp Black & White Film Noir Vintage Night Vision Negative Filter intensity This slider allows you to set how prominent your filter is. Higher means your filter is more prominent and lower makes it less. Vignette intensity This slider lets you set how dark the corners of your photo are. Texture Category This is set as standard and can’t be changed from what I’ve seen so far. Texture Texture in photography focuses on the micro-depth of areas, rather than the overall picture. This is a great way to make your images look that bit more interesting. There are a couple of options here: None Reseau Grid 1 Reseau Grid 2 Reticle 1 Reticle 2 Texture Intensity This slider sets just how prominent the above texture is in the image. Frame options Now, frames aren’t for everyone and you may not want to add them if you’re looking for a more natural, professional look. There are, however, some great options available. Frame category There are three frame category options: themed, factions, or branded. The themed category offers a number of novel options, like your image on the front of a magazine. Factions allows you to add faction-specific frames to your image. Branded frames are all Starfield-specific. Related Limits on joining factions in Starfield: Can you join them all? Explained Should you join the United Colonies (UC) in Starfield? Frame Frame options depend on which frame category you choose, but here are all the available frames for each category. Themed frames None Classic cover Flight manual Vintage poster Field notebook NASA punk Letterbox Field scope Viewfinder 1 Viewfinder 2 Danger Chronomark Faction frames None Constellation 1 Constellation 2 Constellation 3 Constellation 4 United colonies Freestar Crimson fleet Ryujin Vanguard Branded frames None Blue livery White livery Logo Grav wave logo Grav waves Bracketed logo H stripes V stripes Launch Adventure Starfield Wanderers
16x faster loading though. Loading screens that take 2 seconds aren't really any worse than moving through empty space for several minutes like NMS or Elite.
Empty wastelands aren't to explore mate, just to grab materials and build outposts for resources. You have to explore the stuff Bethesda has done for decades: towns, cities, secret bases, bandit hideouts etc. Have fun in the starfield!
Skyrim has more variety in terms of actual numbers of models for flora, trees, shrubs. Which to me was rather shocking after looking at the files. It's one region, this is 1000 planets, it should have way more variety than it has. 400 more people worked on this, it took longer to make - what were all those extra 400 people doing? Grasses doesn't even bend as you walk onto it, it just clips through you, this was OK like 15 years ago. For Morrowind we modded this in AGES ago.
@@PhyrexJand you can't even mention exactly what i'm "not understanding"? Please make me laugh and go at it. If you mean i'm not understanding models or files? i've made some of the most successful mods for Skyrim, Morrowind and many other games from Bethesda, with many millions of downloads, i'll gladly link them.
While I appreciate the review of the game's graphics, I feel like a lot of John's arguments about game design aren't valid. "You can't run around the planet, it would be boring anyway" yet in No Man's Sky you can. "You can fly to a planet you see" but in No Man's Sky you can. "You can't take off or land without a loading screen" once again, in No Man's Sky there are zero loading screens in a star system. It is baffling that the biggest RPG studio, backed by the Microsoft juggernaut and powered by exclusivity deal with AMD cannot recreate what a tiny indie studio did back in 2016, a whole generation ago. The big selling point of Starfield was the space part: many planets, spaceships, space travel, exploration, but in the end all we get is a bunch of chopped up locations and empty wastelands. The game might as well be placed on a single planet with no space travel at all.
@@janvarga4023 it was advertised as having advanced space sim elements which it ultimately failed to deliver. It's not fallout in space. It's just fallout without world map.
The biggest issue with the graphics is how washed out everything is. Anything that is slightly dark is just grey. If they could add some decent HDR the game would look twice as good. I doubt Bethesda will bother so I'll have to wait for the reshade mods to fix the colors like previous Bethesda games.
@@thanksbetotapthey help a lot, but also, there are mods that get rid of the washed out thing which is really a filter affect easily removed. I mean, on PC, of course - but I mean, if you are on console, then that is your choice and you know what to expect - the devs tell you how you like it 99% of the time, with 99% of the game.
Every 5 years ago there comes a game that makes me upgrade my system. The last game that did that was KC: Deliverance. Went from a GTX 980 to an RTX 2080ti. I didnt think the game would be this but I just picked up an RTX 4080. Its glorious!!
All of the other videos feel rushed in order to get them out for views. This is by far the absolute best in terms of editing and information. Thank you so much.
