The long-awaited PlayStation release of Starfield It turns out to be a double-edged sword. While the PS5 Pro boasts exclusive graphics options, severe crashes and an overwhelming number of performance modes dampen the fun.
After almost three years of exclusivity, "Starfield" has finally arrived on PlayStation 5 and PS5 Pro, but its technical state at launch is causing concern among experts and fans alike. While the port offers unprecedented freedom in settings, it suffers from instabilities that one wouldn't expect from a first-party title (even one from Microsoft).
The bare facts: PS5 vs. Xbox Series X
According to Digital Foundry, Bethesda achieves perfect parity on the standard PS5. In performance mode, the game runs internally at 1080p, just like on the Xbox Series X. Interestingly, Bethesda seems to have slightly tweaked the Series X version since launch, as it was previously measured at 900p. The result on the PS5 is solid: 60 FPS in the vastness of space and indoors, while CPU-intensive cities like New Atlantis continue to dip into the 30s and 40s.
Visuals mode offers the usual 1440p (internal) at a stable 30 FPS. Users with a 120 Hz display and VRR can unlock the frame limiter, but the Xbox still has a slight edge here due to its more robust VRR system.
PS5 Pro: A paradise for controller fans?
The PS5 Pro version is a curiosity. It offers a staggering 24 different combinations of graphics presets, frame targets, and system settings.
- The new “Enhanced Mode”: This one offers an internal resolution of 1800p, better shadows, more vegetation, and higher-quality reflections (cube maps). It looks fantastic, but is capped at 30 FPS.
- PSSR chaos: The Pro uses first-generation PSSR by default, which often results in image noise and flickering. Manually activating the newer PSSR version via the system menu does sharpen the image, but introduces significant artifacts in vegetation and occlusions. Particularly curious: In Performance mode, the Pro's internal resolution even drops to 900p (instead of 1080p on the base PS5), presumably to make room for upscaling.
The biggest problem: Stability
Let's be clear: the current state is critical for a console game. During Digital Foundry's testing, there were five total crashes in just a few hours. The game freezes completely and has to be restarted – a bug that, according to community reports, is not an isolated incident. In addition, there are bugs with the VSync setting, which simply doesn't seem to work.
The fact that Bethesda gives players so much freedom almost seems like a capitulation to optimization. Instead of delivering three perfectly tuned modes (30, 40, 60 FPS), they're throwing players a buffet of switches, many combinations of which (like Performance Mode with a 30 FPS target) are completely pointless. This aligns with Bethesda's recent statements that at launch... 95% of the errors are known, some of which are not fixed even after years.
The port is technically average, with some low points. However, the crash rate is the deal-breaker that Bethesda urgently needs to fix with a patch. Those who want to experience "Starfield" on PlayStation will get the complete package, but currently have to live with an "early access" stability level.
How important is clear curation to you? Do you prefer a game with two perfectly optimized modes, or do you want to have complete control over every graphics setting on the console itself?
Bethesda role-playing games are best played on PC.
Unfortunately, I had some really bad experiences with that on the PS3 back then.
Such behavior is irresponsible and should be punished with severe penalties.
Where some engage in post-launch damage control and optimization par excellence, others sabotage the process out of negligence and ignorance, and as we know at Bethesda, intentionally.
It's well known that everything in life and in the world revolves around money, and the pressure from investors to meet agreed-upon release dates is one consequence. With Bethesda, I'm not so sure that's the whole story. There's more to it; it's a phenomenon. In any case, Starfield should never have been released on the PlayStation market in this state.
How one can let such an opportunity slip by to build a new community and trample such a chance to prove oneself is still a mystery to me.
Fortunately, I wasn't stupid enough to let myself be talked into buying it.
Unfortunately, it's becoming increasingly clear that it's best not to jump straight into a new game. Developers usually need a few weeks to iron out the worst bugs.
Individual settings in games are nice, but please only for gameplay and not for graphics. Then I might as well just play on a PC.
I only had one crash on the PS5 base, but when you jump in an asteroid field, there are glitches or NPS objects running backwards—typical GTA bugs from the PS2 generation. I uninstalled it, not because of the bugs, but because I found it boring. Everyone complains about Ubisoft games, saying they hold your hand everywhere, but Stafield is the complete opposite. After the prologue, you can do practically everything and yet not everything at the same time. You're bombarded with game mechanics, but they're never explained, so it doesn't matter how smoothly the game runs.
Wasted €50 testing a game 😀 ouch
I tested it on Game Pass back then and was incredibly bored. The gunplay is good, but that menu-loading screen simulator was awful. I could have tolerated quite a bit, but the loop of going to the menu - loading screen - menu - loading screen, etc., was just terrible.
Yes, that's true, but still cheaper than Last of Us Part 2 ;)
Well, what can you do? If you could return the games, the damage wouldn't have been done. I also think Desert Storm, or whatever it's called, would be just as much of a flop for me. What others like, I don't like so much, or vice versa, that's fine. I can imagine that Starfield is a game of the year for some people, but it's not for me. Mass Effect 2 did a better job decades ago when it came to space simulation; just look at the score when you scan planets.
I love sci-fi RPGs and Mass Effect 2 is a 10. I was hoping Starfield would reach that level, but it is what it is. Bethesda only exists on paper now; TES6 unfortunately won't be good.
Crimson Desert is amazing, I love it, that's how I wish TES6 had been, but they won't even come close to implementing it.
So Starfield isn't benefiting from anything yet.
PSSR 2.0?
PSSR, as a system-level AI upscaler, works quite well in the PS5 Pro version of Starfield, with limitations in the rendering of vegetation and other edges (which shouldn't actually be the case, which is why the upscaler exists in the first place), in order to display a sharply rendered image (high image quality) at an ideally low calculated internal resolution, in order to focus more performance on a higher & more stable frame rate.
What ultimately proves fatal for the PS5 version of Starfield is the fact that Bethesda failed to optimize around the PS5's (including the Pro's) insufficient CPU performance (CPU bottleneck), while simultaneously displaying an excessively high internal resolution, which in turn leads to performance losses in the frame rate. This results in plummeting performance in "busy" larger cities and in battles with multiple NPCs (which always require sufficient CPU performance), or even the game crashing completely.
It proves once again, contrary to the developers of, for example, Cyberpunk 2077 or Assassin's Creed Shadows, that Bethesda is still unable to get a handle on their antiquated Creation Engine (which does have its advantages, no question!).
Whether it ultimately comes down to ignorance or simply incompetence is another matter; the fact is that Starfield should never have been released on the PS5 in this state after all this time.
That doesn't sound good at all. Why such a poor port if it's been on the market for years?
I had my first crash today while fast traveling, otherwise the game is running fine.
Maxim Neumann already experienced four crashes in the first six hours on his PS5 Pro. I played on the Xbox Series X back then, and that wasn't the case. The Pro definitely has more power, and you can tell. I'm a bit annoyed, but a good patch should fix everything. We'll see…