@matrix it looks worse than Doom 2016. Bethesda should just give up at this point.

@newt It's not reasonable to compare a linear static game and a open world game with a day and night cycle

@matrix @newt just pre-bake 4-16 lighting setups for the day and night cycle and blend between them, it's not rocket science and perfectly doable. starfield looks like something that should run on gtx 700 series cards at 60fps, so there should be headroom for lighting

@ic3l9 @newt yeah, but that massively bloats the install size afaik
while I agree starfield is extremly heavy on the gpu, I disagree that it looks bad

@matrix @newt the assets look great, but the shading is not modern. or, perhaps it is and they intentionally went for an "old school" look. it looks like an old game modded to have significantly higher resolution textures, and judging from prior bethesda games it probably is. idk why you can either have "triple a game where every asset is a sculpture worth an award but rendered in source engine" or "indie game with low poly unity asset store assets rendered with realtime raytracing" and very little in between.
Follow

@ic3l9 @newt yeah i get your point, it's not the unreal engine, it's clearly iteration of their creation engine, but at least on video it looks modern even in terms of shading imo

· · Web · 1 · 0 · 1
Sign in to participate in the conversation
Game Liberty Mastodon

Mainly gaming/nerd instance for people who value free speech. Everyone is welcome.