Xbox |OT|

[KiigelHeart]

Shaunodon said:

KiigelHeart said:

I don't know which I find more irritating, Starfield being 30fps only (even if it is somewhat understandable) or people calling out those who are disappointed. I mean this better not become a norm again. After all the hype about Velocity Architecture and power and how it's going to revolutionze game design they're taking a step back and making gaming less enjoyable? 

I started Mafia II DE yesterday to try and get used to 30fps again but fucking hell it's bad :/ 

Anyway, I just ordered a 65" LG C2 OLED evo -television to make things even a bit smoother. That's how hyped and committed I am to play Starfield but as Phil is my witness I won't stop crying and moaning  you hear me?!

.. also got a nice bargain and wanted 120fps on Halo Infinite but still.

The only way you can be disappointed is if you set yourself up for it in the first place. I gave multiple warnings well ahead of time hoping to help people measure their expectations, so I'm not gonna spare sympathy now if you chose to ignore them.

As far as the greater context of the game's reception however, the blowback from 30fps in Starfield is nowhere near what they got for Halo Infinite's first gameplay showcase looking flat and unimpressive, so I definitely feel like they've been validated. Although I think the problem with Infinite wasn't so much that they aimed for 60-120fps, but that they chose to show it off far too early. But again, they're two completely different types of games and 30fps for Starfield won't impact it's enjoyment nearly as much.

There, I highlighted some key points of my post so you can evaluate if your response made any sense. 

30fps with no performance mode is disappointing these days even if it was understandable & expected in this case. You still hope there would be a performance mode. 

Yes Starfield's reception has been good overall and for a reason. Comparison to Infinite seems unnecessary and odd.