So now "In DF we trust"? Seriously, Xbox really need this game so why the heck they develop a game that only PC can handle higher framerate? I don't get it. >.<

They always do sales pitches..
It is not resolution..
Shading, foliage distance, ray tracing, film grain etc etc is the cpu bottlenecks and all can be dialed back.

The game will be a slide show with screen tearing just like the rest of their games.

Cool they want to throw that much into the looks, but the culprits are what I stated above and probably global illumination.

@Crows90

No.. The Series X has a more powerful GPU, the CPU is the bottleneck, if it's poor optimisation or just a demanding game, makes no difference, if it's hard on the CPU then that's what's going to cause dips in frame rate.

Pointless arguing this as most obviously don't get it.

Maybe stop trying to give Bethesda an excuse for their absolutely terrible design choice. At the end of the day it can be done, but, they chose to go another way that's the gist of it all.

And so is the PS5. How many games are
at 30? I'm running Ragnarok at 100 and Burning Shores at 80. Stop with these free passes. If you're telling me Starfield has more going on to put it at 30 (when each planet loads separately) and doesn't look as graphically intensive as BS, you're talking nonsense.

You: "The Series X is running a 2 generations older CPU than on desktop, and it runs at 3.8GHz, on PC boost is well over 5GHz on newer chips so that with the IPC on top because it's a newer chip means the game will likely run noticeably better on Intel Alder Lake 12 Gen and newer CPUs, and of course newer AMD chips."

PS5: 'Basically everything including games like Horizon Forbidden West which has an insane number of highly detailed independent objects with loads of drawcalls... running at 60FPS'

XSX running Starfield: 'Too many sandwiches to render here... 30FPS.'

Xbox's Matt Booty: 'Devs need to plan better, it's not our fault XSS is trash that can't run modern games well... Look at Starfield we forced Bethesda to target 30FPS.'

@rude-ro
"Shading, foliage distance, ray tracing, film grain etc etc is the cpu bottlenecks and all can be dialed back."

Shading is GPU related foliage alpha effectscare also GPU intensive not so much CPU intensive even though each foliage object COULD be a separate drawcall it will likely be instanced saving resources on the CPU side of things but the GPU still has to render all of it... so foliage is basically GPU intensive. The only thing CPU intensive about raytracing is setting up the bounding hierarchical volume which could be optimized by the GPU but does it even matter when we're talking about Starfield which does not look like it will have a lot in the way of RT? Filmgrain is not at all taxing (may graphically sophisticated PS3 games featured filmgrain effects like Killzone 2 and 3 and it is once again a GPU related process I thinking post-process compositing has zero to a very tiny impact on CPU compute.

The culprits will likely be bloated AI and really poor management of world systems that drive AI, the various collectibles, player activated triggers and much more all stuff you don't see directly. The GPU handles most of the stuff you see these days while the CPU sets up the world so the GPU can render it the CPU can be pretty weak in a graphically demanding game and still allow for 60FPS gameplay... see Ratchet & Clank or Jak and Daxter way back on the PS2 or even a game a I reference more and more as time keeps on ticking by Haven: Call of The King a 3rd party PS2 exclusive that basically did everything and still ran at 60FPS. Haven was the non-RPG Starfield space epic of its day 20 years ago... with the major difference being that Starfield is way less directed or linear and will likely sell significantly better.

How did Haven running on PS2 with all its stages built on spherical planets that you could travel to and from in realtime in one of only a few spaceships run at 60FPS on PS2 without any loadind screens but Starfield can't? Haven was still a much better looking game than PS2/Xbox GTA titles.

Optimization is the key and Xbox is telling devs to plan better for Series S (or skip Xbox Series entirely because releasing on S is a requirement for Xbox console releases for now), and while devs should optimize there's only so much that can be done. Clearly XSS' GPU is modern enough feature-set wise to handle anything the XSX can render including RT but because the CPU and GPU are weaker on XSS everything needs to be scaled back. The idea of releasing Xbox Series S was monumentally stupid one but MS made its bed and now PS is once again eating it's lunch. That said I see why MS is doing this... they don't have a choice. MS knows they made their bed a mess and are now trying to sleep in it, but it's difficult for them and with all the missteps they're forced to live by their marketing on this one.

Would XSS users forgive MS if they allowed XSX to get games that XSS users cannot play? Don't know.

@Number
Didnt twist anything. If resolution doesnt make a difference then there is little differenct between the series s and x in this game. That means, assuming we take your word for it and a lot of xbox fans here, there is little power difference between series x and s.

Otherwise, either the series s will struggle significantly to keep that 30fps or the x can actually do higher but the game was poorly optimized. The other scenario is the dumb down a lot of settings for the series s so that its inferior gpu AND cpu can actually handle the game...but this would fly in the face that lowering settings wouldnt do anything.

Its called common sense but maybe next time dont argue about what you dont understand.
Also uncle phil said its a creative choice...take it up with him.

scalability? They can get it to 60 no problems on X, its just the S, how far down can you go until it looks a blurry mess? 1st party parity, if its not on the S its not on the X

Horizon Forbidden West runs at 60FPS and looks far better than Starfield even if it's not rendering at 4K.

No one is saying Starfield needs to be 4K AND 60FPS, everyone is confused how PS5 is running games at 60FPS while the supposedly more powerful Xboz Series X console is stuck at 30FPS in games that look significantly uglier though.