While it’s great news that Bethesda is making an effort to make sure Starfield will run on Deck, I’d still like to recommend that most people wait for performance reports before buying and expecting a good experience.
Is it going to run at 30fps though? The minimum requirements for the game are pretty high, requiring 8GB of VRAM. The game just seems like it wouldn’t run at a stable frame rate at all for a lot of steam users.
going by the steam hardware survey, listing the 1650 as the most popular graphics card to use, it just doesn’t seem like many people can run it
At least for me, things like these are so impressive because of how far iGPUs have come in recent years
It’s amazing to me how you no longer need a full scale GPU for modern gaming. Making gaming cheaper, power efficient, and accessible for more people than ever. I’m excited for where the future of gaming is headed.
Btw I don’t give all the credit to Valve because it is something that companies like intel, amd, GPD, minisforum and others have been doing for years. The Steam Deck has just been the most popular one so far
I just don’t think the steam deck is going to be able to handle this game. Baldurs Gate 3 is certified playable and they did a great job making it a seamless experience but it’s obvious that the system strains in anywhere but the most sparse locations.
The steam deck just isn’t meant to play all the AAA next gen ray traced games and nobody should expect it to do so. It already goes further than any handheld on the market, I don’t need it to play starfield. I need it to play cult of the lamb really well. And it does. And I love it.
Hard disagree with this. Both of these games are large zone, systems driven games which makes them more demanding on the CPU than many games out there. Starfield will probably a little more GPU demanding than Baldur’s Gate 3 due to dynamic lighting systems and draw distance.
Baldurs Gate 3 is certified playable and they did a great job making it a seamless experience but it’s obvious that the system strains in anywhere but the most sparse locations.
Yeaaaah it's pretty rough on the steam deck in my experience.
Someone said that valve does not want to upgrade the Steamdecks cpu regularly that way it can act as a baseline for games to target.
I kind of like this approach. I think so many devs focus on making everything bleeding edge when most of us would be happy playing with low settings.
Maybe the steamdeck will lead to further optimizations to these games down the line and maybe games that are early in development will try to target the steamdeck for the minimum spec.
Starfield and bg3 were too far along in development when steamdeck game out for them to optimize for it.
"Tricks" like FSR should certainly make a single platform be able to last longer. Say what you will about the techs usefulness on top of the line hardware, low/mid level hardware like the deck/ally/switch is where it's greatest benefits lie.
FSR really shows it’s limitations when you’re running a low resolution to begin with. I want to like it, but it’s pretty noticeable and jarring with every game I’ve tried it with, including BG3.
I agree to an extent. However, they’ve also been known for releasing buggy ass games before it was popular to do so lol. They’ve also been known for not fixing those problems and just moving on to the next product. Even if the next product is the same game just being resold
I kind of agree with @doppelgangmember but yeah, Bethesda has taken a very apathetic approach to fixing bugs, or even preventing them in the first place. They used the godawful Gamebryo engine for way too long, and their Creation Engine is apparently based on it. Of course they’re on CE2 now, but I have little to no faith that they’ve made any substantial improvements since people will buy their products no matter what.
To be fair, I really enjoy almost all of Bethesda’s games, which is why I’m so disappointed that they just don’t (seem to) care. I’m definitely waiting for a super duper sale before picking up the game.
Add comment