You don't have to be a game dev to see that games that came out before Starfield look and perform better. If you bought the game and you enjoy it, that's all fine and I won't make fun of you for it, but let's not defend what is an obvious point of incompetence on Bethesda's side.

sure mister gamedev, please continue to tell more on how an engine you clearly worked on, should run...

I can easily compare between what different game companies do. Why are you acting like I need to be a developer on a game to criticise that game?

I dont say that Starfield is a well optimised game and performance will get better with upcoming patches.

Todd could have said so. He didn't. Why?

But I also don't think it's an unoptimized mess, I think it is running reasonable and people really should start review their rig, because modern games will need modern components

I never stated this. I simply said: comparing Starfield and Crysis is deliberately disingenuous, because Crysis was fundamentally meant to break boundaries, which Starfield doesn't do.

Oh and also other games did not run that well like you maybe remember ;)

Okay, what's the argument here? Do you think I say for those games "well, you're not Bethesda, so I'm fine with you not running well"?

you don’t have to know the internals of the engine. you just need some basic deduction powers.

does it look it look good compared to other AAA games? no

does it run fast? no

ergo. the engine is crap.

the same thing happened to cd projekt red but they ditched their engine after the cyberpunk fiasco. they will just pay epic