• No Man’s Sky runs at a very stable 60fps, I personally know people who have wrangled it up to 120fps. I know they don’t have the same underlying tech, but they’re very similar in terms of gameplay (from what we’ve seen)

    • Havoc8154@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      1 year ago

      They’re a wildly different level of detail though. The NMS physics engine is pretty simplistic, mostly effecting NPCs and a very few physics objects. Starfield is like other Bethesda games, tons of little items and junk that all have their own physics and interactions.

      • Gert@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Ya, they just talked about this on Digital Foundry. Starfield (as with most Bethesda games) has a bunch of persistent objects and NPCs to track, which makes is most likely CPU limited. They showed a city section in Star Citizen which was getting like 20fps, which would be a better comparison than No Mans Sky.