Bethesda claims that the Intel ARC GPUs do not meet Starfield's PC minimum requirements
Bethesda claims that the Intel ARC GPUs do not meet Starfield's PC minimum requirements
According to Bethesda Support, even the Intel Arc A770 GPU does not meet Starfield's PC minimum requirements.
Translation: “we didn’t bother making this work with arc because the third party tool we used to port it from console to PC didn’t support it and we don’t give a fuck.
"they'll be a mod made later"
The mod will make the game free to play for everyone!
"Wait a minute..."
"We are not actually very good at this how have you not figured this out yet?"
Also, we're going to the game run like crap on every API except Nvidia's. You know . . . "The Way It's Meant to be Played " * Ka-Ching! *
Isn't SF sponsored by AMD?
I claim Bethesda's games do not meet the minimum requirement for me to pay for them instead of plundering
Are pirates the vegans of pc gaming?
No, we don't cost you money and won't judge you as harshly for paying for the game.
We will however tuck you in bed at night and give you a little smooch on your forehead if you stay seeding.
Yeah they're based
Yes
Hah, that is a good comparison. Definitely more noticeable on here than in Reddit but there seems to be at least one person on every post talking about how they pirated the game due to some perceived slight with the Dev or publisher.
Leave that term for Linux gamers.
This must be one of the worst-developed games in the last ten years. If a high-end PC can't run it, they did a shitty job designing it, and the graphics are not great. They spent zero time optimizing it.
So, another Bethesda game?
Pretty much
But we're a decade past where that's good enough. "Another Bethesda game" at that same Bethesda quality level now is a trash game.
I'm playing on Xbox gamepass and am pretty disappointed with the graphics (glad I didn't bother buying it on PC). The faces during dialogue look like they just upscaled obsidian slightly and slapped it in there.
They already told us that their optimisations consist of them telling us to buy better hardware.
Idk if arc was a thing when they were developing this one after FO4 at the time. Not defending, just saying that might’ve been more of a factor combined with Intel not having much of a market share at the current moment. Willing to bet they’ll get it working following release after a few months. Speculating though!
I have a 3070 and it runs great. The graphics look good on ultra/high settings too. I don’t even think the 3070 is considered high end anymore
This feels like the discussion then Fallout 4 was released. People were getting 15fps in the locations like the outdoor cities and Bethesda blamed it on the PC.
The game runs flawlessly on our dev* and testing** computers
(Dev computers are $4000 top of the line systems)
(Testing computers are the $4000 top of the line systems that they used last year)
The answer is likely just that Bethesda coders are bad at optimization. They don't have to put out a quality product, so they never learn how to make one.
Yeah, when fallout 4 released I was getting sub-30 fps in city areas. It was atrocious. I haven’t had anything like that with starfield tho. Seems hardware specific
How did that end up then? Did they put patches and optimize it or what?
Fixed it but it took a few months—maybe even a year. It was a wild time. Lots of conspiracies about console version vs PC.
Can't fix their middleware? My Arc a750 runs Cyberpunk & most other games much better than my brother's 3060.
Bethesda support saying the Intel Arc doesn't meet the minimum requirements doesn't mean they don't actually mean to support it. It means that support looked at the product requirements and didn't see Intel Arc listed or that the person confused it with the integrated graphics chip.
Haven't bought it yet - how does it work on the Xbox S? (I'm reluctant to shell out for a X just for one game)
If you are OK with 30fps its fine.
In fact, I feel like the series S is the proof that the PC port is quite poorly optimized. Its fishy that is runs fine there and at 40fps lowest settings on my 3060.
Series S is also only rendering 900p and using FSR to hit “1440p”
I mean the series X is also 30 fps.
Isn't the architecture of the Series S better designed for game optimization over a PC? HD wired straight to the GPU and the like?
Ok what did I miss?
Poorly optimized console to pc port that runs horribly on even a high end pc.
Bethesda thinks it's the next Crysis. As the game struggles on current PC hardware like Crysis did when it came out, except there is no huge leap in graphic quality over existing, smoothly performing games.
It just looks so generic, from the footage I've seen color isn't even really there, just the regular old brown and gray landscape everywhere.
If it were even graphically interesting in any way, I might be more understanding, but this really isn't it.
runs fine on my windows install. 80-120 fps at ultra with a 3080. even has gold status for steam deck. dunno if poorly optimized or if you have too much installed on your pc
When Bethesda simps keep buying this crap over and again, why waste additional coin on optimisation and testing when these clowns will pay them to do it.
I'll probably buy it eventually, whenever the ultra mega turbo deluxe edition is on sale. Rushing out to buy a single player game from Bethesda is a rookie mistake and I hate to see it.
If these issues only occur on Arc GPUs, it sounds much more like a hardware or driver issue than a problem with the game.
That is not how computer graphics or programming work at all.
Arc GPUs do something weird with the way they allocate memory, such that arc GPUs need special motherboards to run properly.
When there are texture problems that are unique to the Arc GPUs, it points to there being an issue in the way the arc GPUs handle their graphics memory.
Starfield does nothing new in terms of rendering. Starfield is using old tech in an old engine. If intel cards can't handle it it's probably a them problem.
“How dare this dirt-cheap piece of entertainment software not run flawlessly on a million different hardware configurations?!”
$70 is dirt cheap? So far it runs kinda like shit on both Nvidia and Intel GPUs, and it runs slightly better on AMD cards for some reason.
Honestly this is Bethesda's standard move, they make a poorly optimized game that runs like shit and just let the modders fix it for them. They've been doing it for decades now, I don't know why anyone is surprised.
It runs better on AMD cards because they and Bethesda entered into an exclusive partnership for the game. FSR is AMD tech; it's why DSLL isn't an included option.
Thankfully, it's quite simple to replace FSR with DSLL using a mod. I get 45-60 FPS on High @ 3440x1440 with a 2070S after doing so.
I know free to play games better optimised than Bethesda games. This ain't no dirt cheap game this is 70€ that is full-price not dirt cheap.
Not sure which part is satire
