STARFIELD vs CYBERPUNK 2077 – Physics and Details Comparison

Read more about Cyberpunk 2077➜

Comparing the A.I, Details and Physics of Cyberpunk and Starfield. Starfield is captured on Xbox Series X and Cyberpunk 2077 is captured on PS5. I think both games are great for different reasons. I recommend both.




📷 Instagram |
📘 Facebook |
📱 TikTok |

#starfield #starfieldgame


43 thoughts on “STARFIELD vs CYBERPUNK 2077 – Physics and Details Comparison”

  1. Starfield is like a remote control car with the wire attached to the controller. Cyberpunk is like those gas powered RC cars that can be modified and are more fun. Cyberpunk is a 10/10 Starfield… I mean it’s kid friendly I think. I know old people like it. Old tech sold as new tech. SMH.

  2. Enserio? Esta comparacion es lamentable e engañosa, cyberpunk es un desastre del calibre como pocos se han visto, dia 1 de lanzamiento, no es que tuviera bugs noo.. es que era INJUGABLE. Starfield ha nivel tecnico es practicamente impecable, alomejor no tiene las caracteristicas que la gente se imagino, pero lo que hace lo hace genial. Eso sin tener en cuenta toda la campaña engañosa llena de falsas promesas de cd project en Cyberpunk ante la linea sincera que ha seguido starfield durante años. Un respeto para bethesda porfabor

  3. I also tested shooting my gun in public in star field i got immediately bothered that nobody reacted so quick saved and started shooting the people to see what would happen, apparently i was in an area with no security because i could just mow down the whole district of people and nothing happened i just racked up a huge bounty it was really boring and made the game feel even more lifeless then it already did

  4. Come on… Cyberpunk 2077 Is much more >environment< dedicated Engine… It needs to and supports surface only in a Dome… + It`s much longer polished and refined… Starfield needs to at least pretend it supports off surface events too… Even thou the lack of seemless makes it indeed much more modular in reality. But by what I am seeing on screen it needs to be much lighter than Cyberpunk 2077. Cyberpunk 2077 is partially a show off case of it`s graphical engine ment to juice even the latest of GPUs and Starfield in theory is supposed to be a game orientated for all kinds of PCs much more (at least if that is the visual fidelity they've chosen to release it with) That being said I watched most of my Starfield on a gamer/streamer with 3080 GPU 10th gen I9 whom I've watched go to some of the highest highs in Diablo IV with like no problems and in Starfield his machine was visibly so ~struggling. Than I've checked another streamer with I am not sure what rig, but both his Graphics and FPS were better… I personally haven`t tested either of those games… Cyberpunk 2077 or Starfield on my PC ~because reasons… But if I had to chose one it would have been Starfield. Now after watching the first go to Game + on mentioned streamer`s stream… My likings might have slightly decreased, but still. The fact that Cyberpunk 2077 is only "open world" playable >only< if you chose not to go trough the last mission is kind of ~meh. I were sincerely done with games that end on creator`s subtitles in like Vampire the Masquerade: Bloodlines. Admittedly I've played a few memorable games of the type afterwards… Namely Dragon Age Origins and Dragon Age Inquisition. Beginning to subtitles both, the first one a bit more, the 2nd one a bit less (because reasons, again).

  5. Lol Cyberpunk isn't even a game, though… It's a movie with button prompts. A poorly written, hackneyed, childish movie with a fake city full
    of copy pasted content and RPG systems as deep as a Kardashian. Starfield delivers exactly on it's promises, Cyberpunk delivered on NONE of it's promises. If you want an open world shooter with great physics and immersive AI dynamics, any Far Cry game, Metro, and Deus Ex are 10000000x better. If you want a systems driven RPG with a livable, breathing world, an interesting story, and mechanics that encourage player choice and theory crafting, Starfield is THE GAME. This comparison is like comparing a turd sandwich to a fine steak and declaring that the turd sandwich is better because steak isn't a sandwich. You are comparing a delicious, ripe apple to a rotten, syphilitic orange.

  6. A lot of people say that comparisons like this isn't fair because CP77 has been out for 3 years and has been patched and worked on during those 3 years. I say it's more than fair because both games are in the same genre (RPG), and Starfield is newer and priced much higher. 3 years newer games SHOULD be better, and If you're going to price your game $20 higher than most AAA games, it should be held in a higher standard and scrutinized more. Not compared to a bad 2020 launch and be content if it beats the bad 2020 launch version of another game. Besides, launch CP77 is irrelevant now because people won't be playing that version anymore. Comparisons like this just helps consumer decide whether it's worth spending their money on either games, both, or none of them.

  7. While i have no interest in starfield it is funny to me that people "compare" it to cyberpunk when starfield is just releasing but atleast the game ya know…. is playable? Unlike the abomination that cyberpunk 2077 was lol and still is on older generation. Idt ill ever be able to judge any other game as harshly as i did cyberpunk on its release. And yes its fixed but that does not justify its release and the massive disappointment it was. I do not see how it can be used as positive example against a game just releasing. Maybe in starfields case because the game isnt completly busted from the get go yall may actually see improvements earlier then 2-3 years later.


Leave a Comment