While many of these would-be spacers have been left to speculate about everything from the game’s potential mods and DLCs, to the exact number of hairstyles it’ll offer, yesterday’s massive Starfield Direct offered a chance to get plenty of fresh answers regarding what it’ll offer.
Though the show has left people with lots to get hyped up about, including the possibility of building giant mech ships, stealing sandwiches, and pushing an Adoring Fan into a black hole, the main talking point coming out of it seems to be Todd Howard’s comments about the game’s performance on console.
How do you feel about Starfield being locked to 30 FPS on consoles?
In a live-streamed interview with IGN, the Bethesda Game Studios Director and Executive Producer confirmed that the game will be locked to 30 FPS on console, in order to ensure that it retains a uniform level of performance, rather than potentially risking not delivering on some of the detail and spontaneity the studio’s games are known for.
During an interview with Giant Bomb, Xbox Game Studios CEO Phil Spencer called the FPS cap a “creative choice”, claiming that it isn’t a limitation based on the capabilities of Xbox consoles.
Naturally, this has proven a polarising decision, with many potential players on platforms like Twitter and Reddit being left unhappy, while others don’t believe their enjoyment of the game will be affected.
“I just want the option to let me lower [the] quality [in order to] have [a] better frame rate,” said user Casiteal in a megathread about the issue on the Starfield subreddit, which has already garnered close to 800 comments, while Ravenorse argued “having the most anticipated new exclusive locked to [a last generation] frame rate is a bad look.”
On the other hand, user giulianosse suggested: “Starfield will be perfectly fine. Tears of the Kingdom is living proof [that] you don't need cutting edge graphics or performance if you manage to deliver a bombshell of a game,” and BrodoFraggens declaring: “This is just the reality of modern gaming.”