Reviews Digital Foundry || Starfield - Xbox Series X/ Xbox Series S - Performance & Graphics Breakdown

[ILikeFeet]

The analysis you've been waiting for. We're planning to deliver a much more in-depth technical review for Starfield but we're kicking off with answers to some of the big questions: how solid is performance? What about bugs and polish? How does Xbox Series S shape up bearing in mind we've seen nothing of the S version pre-launch? You have questions, we have answers.

Starfield launches as a polished, consistent experience on Xbox Series X and Series S

Expectations are enormous for Bethesda's latest title, Starfield. It promises a galaxy-spanning adventure with a wealth…

www.eurogamer.net

• no significant bugs in 20h
• John will do a tech review and Alex will do a PC review (will post them in these threads)
• lots of loading screens
• 30fps only, stable frame time
• similar texture work
• terrain tessellation is different on systems
• dressing seems randomize
• cubemap reflections, low res on both, but Series S is a quarter res smaller
• despite FSR2, a good bit of aliasing appears
  • not many reconstruction issues
• large cities can drop frame rate at times
• some one second pauses in cities, the worse performance can get
• cpu heavy game, so 60fps would be difficult
• Series S
  • shorter draw distance
  • less foliage
  • softer, lower res shadows
  • 1440p output, 900p internally
  • no indication of DRS
• Series X
  • better mip maps on textures
  • 2160p output, 1440p internally
  • no indication of DRS
• the most polished Bethesda Gameworks game yet
• planets are procedurally generated and not too exciting
  • you don't need to interact with these to get through the game

 

[Zellia]

Given Bethesda's history on consoles, I'm relieved that even Series S seems fine here. Still don't like the 30fps cap, but I'll live.

 

[Jahranimo]

Will watch during lunch, but good to hear for Xbox Series consoles.

 

[lattjeful]

Seems the delay really paid off. Glad to hear it. I'm hoping this means that Xbox'll be more flexible than Zenimax was. Not that Bethesda didn't have time, but I feel like with Zenimax, once the date was the date, it wouldn't change.

 

[ILikeFeet]

Oh and regarding the PC version - it's very CPU heavy, didn't ship with DLSS and lacks an FOV slider, which is a bummer. It runs well on my very powerful PC but the jury is out on less capable machines (I don't have one to test on).

knowing modders, DLSS will be in before the end of the week. we might even get frame generation from someone who's not PureDark!

EDIT:

There is a console, actually, but I couldn't find the FOV command yet and it's not the same as prior BGS games.

 

[Hosermess]

oh no, not my foliage

 

[ILikeFeet]

All footage captured on Xbox Series X. This is the Digital Foundry deep dive in Bethesda Games Studios' highly ambitious Starfield. John Linneman shares his journey through the game, discussing game design, rendering features, visuals, audio and just how free and open this new galaxy actually is. PC coverage is coming soon, along with a Starfield DF Direct Special.

• built on Creation Engine 2
• planets and space are separate areas; game is not seemless
• minute detail has been greatly increased compared to previous Bethesda games
• improved PBR materials and textures
• wider variety of biomes
• each location has a ToD
• reflections are cubemaps rather than ssr or rt reflections
  • in some areas, cubemaps aren't aligned
• water is flat and not well improved
• characters are better, but still simple
  • npcs are even more simple, unsurprisingly
• planets are pretty sparse outside of cities
• the 1000 planets are procedurally generated
• the volumetric fog help flavor the generated environments
• variable weather occurs on planets
• pop-in for smaller objects
• screen space shadows and cascade shadow maps for objects
• global illumination is comparable to other non-RT solutions
  • caves are still overly bright
• some textures aren't the best if you look too closely
• bokeh depth of field is very well done
• per pixel motion blu was co-developed with id Software
  • could use a shutter speed option
• the procedural generation can break the presentation
• some areas around the cities are poorly presented, as if they weren't meant to be seen up close
• to travel to different planets, you have to use the map system
  • there's not much exploration with space ship
• object persistence is as you'd expect from a Bethesda game, objects are tracked longed term
• there are boundaries to the areas you'd explore
• the length and frequency of loading screens might be jarring
• doesn't have the physics/framerate bug as Skyrim
• early game loading is faster than later game loading
• HDR is borked, whites are duller and blacks are brighter
• no FoV slider on any system, though PC can be changed through ini file
• sound playback varies based on the environment
• you spend more time doing things than going to places
• combat and gunplay is better than prior Bethesda games

 

[ItWasMeantToBe19]

• built on Creation Engine 2

I don't understand how this game left pre-production instead of Bethesda just doing TES6.

Space games are all about traveling through space but... the engine can't do that well so it's minimized.
Hardish sci-fi space games will have most of the planets be abandoned so you need to have either vehicles or gameplay that can work well in abandoned areas (eg, rock climbing that is compelling). Bethesda's engine cannot do this so you mostly end up walking slowly around barren areas.
Space games will have thousands of biomes, requiring hugely impressive procedural generation... Bethesda's procedural generation tools seem really bad.

The cutscene direction also is just tragic. I think this has surpassed Kingdom Hearts 3 as the worst directed game in modern gaming. That doesn't have to do with the space setting specifically, but it's weird that the company refuses to attempt to make compelling story content after The Witcher 3 ate their lunch 8 years ago. It's as bizarre as Nomura's hatred of good cutscenes in Kingdom Hearts.

 

[Scrawnton]

If you're playing on console please turn off motion blur. I had an issue with the games "blurry visuals" where every time I moved the camera and my character and then held things still, the game was blurry for a second and then it'd magically become sharp and crisp but once you moved your character or panned the camera it happened again. It was very distracting.

Once I disabled motion blur, this issue stopped and the game is always nice and crisp and great looking. There must be a bug or issue where the blur effect stays active for too long after movement which results in the sudden snap between blurred and crisp visuals.

 

[ILikeFeet]

Starfield on PC delivers the best way to play the game, assuming your hardware is capable enough - but it's clear that there's a lot of issues that Bethesda needs to address. In this PC tech review, Alex delivers optimised settings and console-equivalent settings, and also takes a look at the DLSS mod quality vs AMD's bespoke FSR 2 integration. Graphics and CPU optimisation is also under the microscope, where it's clear there's still a lot of work to be done.

Starfield on PC is the best way to play - but the game still requires a lot of work

The Digital Foundry tech review - including those all-important optimised settings.

www.eurogamer.net

• not much shader compilation stutter
• menu experience is a mixed bag. lots of basic options are missing and has to be modded in
• DLSS is better than FSR and TAA by a good deal
• loading is faster than on Xbox
• optimized settings (using a 2070 super at 1440p 59% scale)
  • foliage - medium
  • volumetrics - medium
  • reflections - medium
  • contact shadows - medium
  • shadows - medium or high if using a higher end gpu
  • variable rate shading - on
  • GTAO - medium
  • particle quality - high
  • motion blur - low
  • indirect lighting - any setting, no real difference
  • crowds - low setting, no real visual or performance difference
  • DLSS runs better than FSR at times
• dynamic resolution only works when you're below 30fps
  • causes improper frame pacing
  • use Special K
• game is gpu limited
• unusual delta between AMD and Nvidia
  • 6800XT 46% faster than 3080
  • AMD has a smoother frame time at ultra
    • using optimized settings smooths out frame times
  • ultra shadows causing frame time issues on Nvidia
  • Nvidia users will just have to wait for patches and drivers
  • Intel users are even more fucked
• the game is cpu heavy
  • has traversal stutter, better cpus reduce the size of stutter
  • the game doesn't scale between core counts all that much
  • Intel hyperthreading on performs worse than with HT off
  • AMD SMT on performs better than SMT off

 

[Imitatio]

I found DF's quasi Series X equivalent PC build test with Starfield interesting. Bethesda certainly made the right call when locking it at 30 fps, given that it otherwise fluctuates very heavily between drops to the mid to upper 20 and some rare 60 fps moments in-doors.

 

[ILikeFeet]

gpu optimizations will be quite interesting going forward, be the one thing I'm more hoping for is potential ray tracing functions. people found linkedin profiles hinting at such, and this game could make ample use of them to cover deficiencies in GI, AO, and shadows