OPINION: Red Dead Redemption 2 on PC is exactly the reason why some people still HATE gaming on PC

[Fredrik]

I agree, and I'm fortunate enough to have a good PC to run most games at high framerates. Not everyone has high end hardware though and framerates can vary a lot especially if you have an older CPU (I'm familiar with the experience, used to have an oc'ed 3570k) and not look good if you do not have a VRR display. That, and some games even fail to launch for not so obvious reasons which can be very frustrating.

Click to shrink...

There are lots of if's there.
Get a gsync screen and upgrade the hardware - fixed!

Core PC gamers rarely claims that PC gaming is cheap, those who do aren't gaming at 60+ fps on ultra.

If you can afford it I would recommend it 100% over consoles. Having the choice to increase the graphical fidelity and framerate on your own means a lot compared to being stuck with crappy framerates or framepacing issues. The only choice you have on consoles is to just deal with it or start writing hateful messages to the devs that they should release a performance patch and hope they'll listen.

 

[Deleted member 8674]

Because everyone keeps trying to crank it up to ultra and get shocked when it performs badly?

Sure it has a few bugs, and Rockstar needs to fix it, but being shocked that a game needs high-end gear for ultra is silly.

Click to shrink...

Some PC players need that self validation I guess.

 

[Deleted member 49535]

The difference is, when a console game has awful performance you're fucked. On PC there's almost always some way (via settings or mods) to make it better.

 

[Ostron]

You could argue that it's reasonable to set console performance as the baseline for recommended specs, after all that is the "intended experience" after several years in development and millions of people are happy with it.

Your rig is more than capable of reaching 30 fps at 1080p or even above, with above console settings. However with that anaemic CPU you are going to struggle pushing double frames compared to console. Try even going low settings and see if the CPU is up to snuff for 60 FPS, my guess would be "no" before benchmarks are out. This should be obvious to most. Good news however is that you should be able to upgrade the CPU substantially without changing anything else.

However if we reframe this thread as "unrealistic expectations is a reason why people HATE PC gaming", then yes, that is correct! A lot of devs will be very specific what they mean by "recommended", that will aid those who can't be bothered to put in the minimum work required.

 

[packy17]

Look, pretending that settings and menus are hard to understand only makes the complaining party look bad, not the games. I don't believe that people who go out and buy or build a PC specifically for gaming are too dumb (or too impatient) to figure out basic standardized options.

And I don't buy that people *hate* the *struggle* (lol) to hit 60 FPS when it's not even an option on console to begin with.

 

[Cup O' Tea?]

Speak for yourself.

While its annoying when releases get botched. I enjoy tinkering and have control of the visuals and my performance. And theres usually a workaround to fix things until the devs release a patch.

I only wish BB was on pc because that baby would be 60 fps and smooth due to mods and unofficial patches. Such a shame there was never a proper pro patch or update.

Click to shrink...

I'm playing through Bloodborne right now and despite being a masterpiece, it's a harsh reminder just how much of a ghetto console gaming can be. Hopefully we get a decent remaster on PS5.

 

[R1CHO]

Why would a 1060 be able to do 1080@60

Let's get real.

The game runs at 30 on consoles with better GPUs than that.

 

[Alexandros]

I think that Digital Foundry's work has been instrumental in demonstrating that the notion of perfectly performing console games is and perhaps has always been a myth. So, accepting that RDR2 on PC isn't that well optimized for the sake of argument, I don't know how it can be claimed as the reason for people to hate playing on PC. One could just as well make the same argument against console gaming using the state the PS4 version of Control launched, to cite a recent example.

 

[Deleted member 52407]

Are we even talking about the same game? Alex literally says that Insane and Ultra settings put the PC version on a pedestal far above the 1X version.


As for SSR, here you go

https://youtu.be/TaI2n6KIB-4?t=717

"This dramatically changes the way the game looks, in comparison to Xbox One X."

Click to shrink...

Dude, that's a different video from what I cited. Anyway other posters are trolling with "lol its on low-medium" when YOU just proved that it runs mostly high settings with a few items on medium.

No duh a 2080 TI (MSRP $999) can run it better than Xbox One X (MSRP $399). In your video DF even states (@ 13:40) that most PC gamers aren't running these Insane or even Ultra settings, certainly not a 1060 like the OP has. One X represents great price:performance.

As far as RDR2, we'll have to wait until the tech analysis but I bet it'll be the same where One X has a mix of mostly high and medium settings... Not "lol Low settings" To my eyes, these games don't look that much different across platforms save for PS4/XO where the IQ takes a noticeable hit.

 

[Deleted member 52407]

4K30 on the XB1X

Click to shrink...

XB1X: $399 (Fingernail)
2080Ti: $999 (Arm + Leg)

PC gamers:

Why are you bringing Gears 5? I'm clearly referring to Red Dead Redemption 2 PC version.

Click to shrink...

We dont have DF tech analysis yet, so Gears 5 across X1X and PC is what we have to compare.

Why don't you call at those saying "LOL low settings" with no proof when most multiplatform games shared between X1X and PC see the X1 version at high settings and not "lol low settings."

 

[JahIthBer]

Even more interested to see DF's video on this now & figure out what settings Consoles run, it does seem the High/Ultra settings on RDR2 are stupidly demanding like it's planned for a next gen release.
Im going to bet it's a mix of low/medium.

 

[daninthemix]

The criticisms are valid, but if you "hate" gaming on PC then don't game on PC.

What sort of shit would I get, for example, if I chose to play on PS4 but announced that I "hate" gaming on PS4?

 

[fulltimepanda]

RDR2 isn't the first PC game to launch in a shocking state and it definitely won't be the last. Give it a few months for drivers to develop and the rockstar to release some patches and you'll be swimming. There are definitely some weird quirks judging by the performance thread (i5's across the board being hobbled, AMD cards performing much better than the equivalent Nvidia cards) which will definitely get fixed. Just needs a bit of time.

Also comparing two completely different games running different engines by different devs to try and get a gauge of performance hahahahaha.

 

[JahIthBer]

The criticisms are valid, but if you "hate" gaming on PC then don't game on PC.

What sort of shit would I get, for example, if I chose to play on PS4 but announced that I "hate" gaming on PS4?

Click to shrink...

You would probably get banned lmao.

 

[dsk1210]

The game is just very intensive and will be very interested to see the digital foundry tech report.

I played over 3 hours last night at a solid 60fps at 1080p with mostly high and ultra and it looks phenomenal. Feel bad for people who can not launch it though, that's poor.

 

[Deleted member 2254]

I am planning to go back to PC gaming on top of consoles again, I have a weak laptop which kinda runs games but I don't exactly use it for anything more than indies and old titles. But yeah, shit like this (delayed, badly optimized ports) is one of the reasons I moved primarily to consoles a decade ago, along with the astonishing amount of cheaters in some online games and the fact many of the games I was interested in simply skipped PC altogether. I'm aware the situation is improved, and once I have other priorities in place and certain investments are done, I will probably buy a decent gaming PC as well to accompany my Xbox + Switch combo. But some devs sure make it hard to trust them.

 

[cowbanana]

Sure, let's judge PC gaming as a whole on a Rockstar port of all things. I play on both consoles and PC and let me tell you that I have far more performance issues on consoles overall, not to mention shitty hardware like the jet engine PS4 Pro.

OPINION: Ark: Survival Evolved on Switch is exactly the reason why some people still HATE gaming on consoles.

 

[Dictator]

You are going to regret this thread when the digital foundry analysis comes out.

Click to shrink...

I agree

 

[Kemono]

PC gaming is awesome but it isn't as refined as some of the louder pc-only users would want you to believe.

If you can't stand 30ish fps and being unable to change more than changing the volume or brightness than go buy a pc and experience some wonders you wouldn't thought possible (settings, mods, ultra graphics and fps, etc.)

On the other hand PC gaming can be outright bad if you're unlucky (even with a beefy pc). I wanted to play the Outer Worlds on my pc (9900K/2080ti) but thanks to my ultrawide gsync monitor i was fucked. The ultrawide resolutions are zoomed in, sadly the developers didn't take the time to do them right (Gears 5 and many other games are working perfectly). Even with ini changes it didn't really got much better. So i tried to play on my big ass 4K HDTV but (again) the developers couldn't get the settings right for release. In other games (gears 5, etc.) you can switch the display so that you don't have to switch cables to not play on your main monitor. Because of that the game refused to let me play in more than 1080P on my 4k TV. The game still thought i was playing on my ultrawide monitor and that can't display 4K.

After hours of searching forums i bought the ps4 Pro version instead. Sure it runs crappy in contrast and i can't change the settings but it works and so far without any bugs/glitches/etc. On reddit and even here i found plenty of people that couldn't play because the game crashed.

Even with my beefy pc i sometimes hate all of the tinkering. If every game was as "perfect" (for me) as Gears 5 i would totally understand the boasting. PC-gaming would be so much better.

 

[joeblow]

There's no thought to complete. They could not do what you said, develop for 60fps, and reach it without having to cut down anything. Like how Battlefield went from a reduced playercount 20-30fps mess on 360/PS3, to the same PC playercounts at 50-60fps with PS4 and Xbox One. 120fps is already part of Scarlett's marketing, thanks primarily to Zen 2 beating Sandy Bridge/Ivy Lake/Haswell IPC, the bear minimum 120fps processors people use today. Passing a technical threshold is a factor that many people don't always take into account, see a lot of Switch/Tegra Shield TV ports. You think the next Devolver digital Indie darling, Namco anime arena fighter, or some Eastern european AA RPG are going to push R2R2 levels of CPU technology? Most likely not. GPU could be another story, but more than likely there will be resolution vs performance options available.

Click to shrink...

I guess you still don't see it. The developer could've already made the game locked at 60fps (or even 120 fps) at launch, but they didn't because they prioritized eye candy over the frame rate.

The main point is that technology is not holding back games from hitting pristine frame rates - it always comes down in large part to a developer's choice to prioritize something else.

You don't want to see that for some reason. If you give a guy a bucket and he over fills it with water, don't be surprised that he'll do the same thing if you give him a bigger bucket.

No one is going to stop some developers from pushing hardware past what it comfortably can handle... it'll never happen.

 

[LukasHeinzel]

That's why I love the Stadia so much, none of that PC hassle configuration and still all the stuff like I have a 2000€ gaming PC.

 

[Linus815]

That's why I love the Stadia so much, none of that PC hassle configuration and still all the stuff like I have a 2000€ gaming PC.

Click to shrink...

how you got access to it? It's not out yet, is it?

 

[XR.]

PC gaming is awesome but it isn't as refined as some of the louder pc-only users would want you to believe.

If you can't stand 30ish fps and being unable to change more than changing the volume or brightness than go buy a pc and experience some wonders you wouldn't thought possible (settings, mods, ultra graphics and fps, etc.)

On the other hand PC gaming can be outright bad if you're unlucky (even with a beefy pc). I wanted to play the Outer Worlds on my pc (9900K/2080ti) but thanks to my ultrawide gsync monitor i was fucked. The ultrawide resolutions are zoomed in, sadly the developers didn't take the time to do them right (Gears 5 and many other games are working perfectly). Even with ini changes it didn't really got much better. So i tried to play on my big ass 4K HDTV but (again) the developers couldn't get the settings right for release. In other games (gears 5, etc.) you can switch the display so that you don't have to switch cables to not play on your main monitor. Because of that the game refused to let me play in more than 1080P on my 4k TV. The game still thought i was playing on my ultrawide monitor and that can't display 4K.

After hours of searching forums i bought the ps4 Pro version instead. Sure it runs crappy in contrast and i can't change the settings but it works and so far without any bugs/glitches/etc. On reddit and even here i found plenty of people that couldn't play because the game crashed.

Even with my beefy pc i sometimes hate all of the tinkering. If every game was as "perfect" (for me) as Gears 5 i would totally understand the boasting. PC-gaming would be so much better.

Click to shrink...

To be fair, you knowingly bought a fairly obscure piece of hardware and expected mainstream compatibility. It's the reason I'm not getting any non-16:9 monitor any time soon because it's just not worth the hassle. But maybe that's not fair on my part, because how will we ever change/improve standards with that mentality. 😉

Your comparison doesn't really work however, since you don't have the option to use 21:9 for any game on a console; you'd just have 16:9 video feed in the middle of your ultrawide monitor. But you don't see this as a fault of the console since it's a closed platform with set limitations.

 

[My Name is John Marston]

The game is not a mess. It's just not targeting to be limited by current hardware. It has a different graphics scale. Nobody wants to play at "low" settings but they don't realize that those "low" settings are equivalent to medium-high in other AAA games. Everyone wants to play at high and ultra. Those settings equal "extreme" settings in other games.


This is what the game looks like on the lowest possible settings (except textures on ultra but anisotropic filtering is off so they look muddy):

Are you kidding me? This is the lowest graphics settings. Draw distance, shadows, volumetric clouds and lighting,..etc. are equivalent to high settings in other games. look at the clouds and trees in the distance casting shadows! Which game has those on "LOW" settings?


Play it on low settings (some on medium to hide the clear imperfections) if you want a good performance and an incredibly good looking game. Don't think of "Ultra" as ultra in other games. "Ultra" in RDR2 == "EXTREME+"

 

[Yippiekai]

PC gaming is awesome but it isn't as refined as some of the louder pc-only users would want you to believe.

If you can't stand 30ish fps and being unable to change more than changing the volume or brightness than go buy a pc and experience some wonders you wouldn't thought possible (settings, mods, ultra graphics and fps, etc.)

On the other hand PC gaming can be outright bad if you're unlucky (even with a beefy pc). I wanted to play the Outer Worlds on my pc (9900K/2080ti) but thanks to my ultrawide gsync monitor i was fucked. The ultrawide resolutions are zoomed in, sadly the developers didn't take the time to do them right (Gears 5 and many other games are working perfectly). Even with ini changes it didn't really got much better. So i tried to play on my big ass 4K HDTV but (again) the developers couldn't get the settings right for release. In other games (gears 5, etc.) you can switch the display so that you don't have to switch cables to not play on your main monitor. Because of that the game refused to let me play in more than 1080P on my 4k TV. The game still thought i was playing on my ultrawide monitor and that can't display 4K.

After hours of searching forums i bought the ps4 Pro version instead. Sure it runs crappy in contrast and i can't change the settings but it works and so far without any bugs/glitches/etc. On reddit and even here i found plenty of people that couldn't play because the game crashed.

Even with my beefy pc i sometimes hate all of the tinkering. If every game was as "perfect" (for me) as Gears 5 i would totally understand the boasting. PC-gaming would be so much better.

Click to shrink...

Funnily enough, Gears has been one of those games praised for its awesome port, I've never been able to run it because it goes from 1 to 120 fps and back every milliseconds on my PC. Never found the reasons. Meanwhile, Red Dead 2, played it yesterday cranking it between High and Normal, never dropped below 50 fps and constantly getting around 70-80 fps during my 2 hours of gameplay.

The issue with PC gaming is consistency and it will never be resolved. No one can be prepared to the millions of configurations out in the world. A patch or two will most likely correct the issues for most of us but some people will never be able to run it correctly, because reasons.

 

[gabdeg]

If you talked about the issues with the launcher or stuttering that people have, that would have been a fine point to make, but performance? Reduce the detail to the point where the game runs well. Then try to make the argument you're not getting the performance you should. I can guarantee you the game is going to look incredible still.

Discussion about performance of next-gen titles is going to be a mess if RDR 2 is any indication.

 

[Deleted member 30077]

Why would a 1060 be able to do 1080@60

Let's get real.

The game runs at 30 on consoles with better GPUs than that.

Click to shrink...

Yeah at 4k. The X1X runs it at 4k 30fps. The GPU in the X1X is pretty much a 580, which is generally on par with a 1060.

 

[GhostTrick]

OP, its just the nature of the beast. my rtx 2080 struggles to run gears 5 at native 4k 60 fps at ultra settings. had to go down to 1800p to get 60 fps locked with a few settings set to high but it was still making my pc scream louder than my pro ever have. had to go down to 1440p and thats just depressing to say the least.

same thing happened with outer worlds. runs fine at a locked 60 fps on very high settings at native 4k but the fans are so loud they are literally making noises as if they are supposed to fall apart. no 1800p option there so straight down to 1440p.

control with all rtx effects on needed to be set to 960p upscaled by dlss to 1440p. there are definitely a lot of arguments that i should turn the settings down to high or medium to get a stable 60 fps. or i shouldve bought a better tower, added liquid cooling or something. all valid arguments. you can buy an $800 gpu and it still wont be enough because pc gaming is all about pushing tech.

i am glad that i was able to try ray tracing before it went mainstream. i am glad i got to play anthem at native 4k 60 fps though i did have to put down to 1440p to make sure it didnt kill my pc. got to play sekiro at 60 fps. and should have essentially cross gen versions of games a full year before launch. does it hurt to set the settings to medium or high? of course. is it ironic that i bought an x1x because i got sick of 1440p games on the pro only to get sick of native 4k games at 30 fps and buying a pc 3x more expensive only to play at 1440p? yep. is it upsetting that a $700-800 card didnt come with vapor chamber cooling for a quieter system like the x1x? definitely. but thats the price to pay for high tech. pro, x1x, pc gaming they all have drawbacks.

Click to shrink...

Vapor chamber cooling isn't magic. You wouldn't get dramatically better temps.

 

[Princess Bubblegum]

it sounds like the PC port has some issues for sure, but I feel like this is exactly the reason why Crysis (or was it Crysis Warhead?) put big "THIS IS FOR THE MOST INSANE FUTURE VIDEO CARDS ONLY ALERT ALERT" warnings on a lot of settings and called medium "normal" or whatever.

I would really like to know what settings in RDR2 are equivalent (more or less) to the different console versions. I'd happily play at those settings at 60fps, and then poke at adding extra bells and whistles.

Click to shrink...

It ironic how Crysis is now, and will be for a good time, a benchmark for single thread performance.

 

[Gelf]

Minimum spec inflation is probably my least favourite thing about the platform but in most cases it's pretty overstated. You'd be surprised how many titles I could run at a playable rate this gen with a first gen i7 paired with a 660 despite the spec saying I couldn't. I only upgraded early this year and didn't feel I had to miss out much before.

It can irritate me somewhat when games that need to scale down to the level of a base Xbox One require vastly more than that on PC. RDR2 may be one of those cases, but usually I found just being prepared to lock to 30fps and medium settings like your on a console fixed most ills when I'm using an older system.

 

[Deleted member 11276]

I agree

Click to shrink...

A better LOD, some sharper shadows and higher post process quality doesn't justiy the giant increased hardware hunger over the X1X at all though. This is a bad port.

 

[Dictator]

A better LOD, some sharper shadows and higher post process quality doesn't justiy the giant increased hardware hunger over the X1X at all though. This is a bad port.

Click to shrink...

You are reacting with your gut and not your mind to be honest, think of low as high and there you have it

It is not a Bad port - rather the audience is 'Bad' here and is honestly not even thinking

 

[Chairmanchuck (另一个我)]

A better LOD, some sharper shadows and higher post process quality doesn't justiy the giant increased hardware hunger over the X1X at all though. This is a bad port.

Click to shrink...

It literally runs at double the framerate...

 

[Deleted member 11276]

You are reacting with your gut and not your mind to be honest, think of low as high and there you have it

It is not a Bad port - rather the audience is 'Bad' here and is honestly not even thinking

Click to shrink...

https://www.resetera.com/threads/re...rformance-thread.151303/page-21#post-26177711

This is likely a comparison between medium (X1X) and ultra settings. I don't see much difference here to be honest. Atleast not a difference that would make it worth the stupidly increased hardware cost. This game acts like it's a next gen game in hardware hunger but still has current gen graphics. It's pretty bad.

 

[GearDraxon]

You are reacting with your gut and not your mind to be honest, think of low as high and there you have it

It is not a Bad port - rather the audience is 'Bad' here and is honestly not even thinking

Click to shrink...

Alex, if they didn't want me to run everything at Ultra, then why is my video card named GTX 6800 Ultra?! Checkmate!

 

[Chairmanchuck (另一个我)]

https://www.resetera.com/threads/re...rformance-thread.151303/page-21#post-26177711

This is likely a comparison between medium (X1X) and ultra settings. I don't see much difference here to be honest. Atleast not a difference that would make it worth the stupidly increased hardware cost. This game acts like it's a next gen game in hardware hunger but still has current gen graphics. It's pretty bad.

Click to shrink...

It runs at double or even triple framerate and could run at far higher resolutions...

 

[Dictator]

https://www.resetera.com/threads/re...rformance-thread.151303/page-21#post-26177711

This is likely a comparison between medium (X1X) and ultra settings. I don't see much difference here to be honest. Atleast not a difference that would make it worth the stupidly increased hardware cost. This game acts like it's a next gen game in hardware hunger but still has current gen graphics. It's pretty bad.

Click to shrink...

Honestly, just because you do not see a difference does not mean it is not meaningfully there at all. That is what being informed means, reading in between the lines and actually knowning where to look for differences. Also, knowing WHY something is more expensive in terms of performance.

It is not bad at all. Far from, this is the best way PC ports can be done in many ways.

 

[Deleted member 11276]

It runs at double or even triple framerate and could run at far higher resolutions...

Click to shrink...

A freaking RTX 2080TI struggles with 4K60 at balanced settings, while the X1X does already 4K30. The 2080TI is a generational leap above the X1X and should perform much, much better than that. That's just an example.

 

[Alexandros]

You are reacting with your gut and not your mind to be honest, think of low as high and there you have it

It is not a Bad port - rather the audience is 'Bad' here and is honestly not even thinking

Click to shrink...

Maybe not the audience in general but some people with an agenda to push. I think that most people appreciate games that are future proofed through advanced graphical settings. Being able to play your older games at much higher settings after an upgrade is one of the joys of PC gaming, it's essentially a free 'remastered' version. Sadly some people will latch on to any opportunity to engage in platform wars without caring much for the actual facts.

 

[Dictator]

A freaking RTX 2080TI struggles with 4K60 at balanced settings, while the X1X does already 4K30. The 2080TI is a generational leap above the X1X and should perform much, much better than that. That's just an example.

Click to shrink...

Once again, you are reacting without thinking.
Balanced settings? Those balanced settings are invariably much higher than those on X1X.

Just think about it. COmputers are not magic in this instance, we know how much better a RTX 2080 Ti fairs on settings very similar to those put out on X1X in general. I have done that testing now dozens of times to prove it. If a games ultra settings, or high settings, or even MEDIUM settings do not double X1X performance or more (as we should expect on an RTX 2080Ti) than those nominal settings are HIGHER than X1X.

This game is no exception, if you were to run it at x1x settings it is, unsurprisingly, far in excess of 4K 60.

 

[GhostTrick]

You are reacting with your gut and not your mind to be honest, think of low as high and there you have it

It is not a Bad port - rather the audience is 'Bad' here and is honestly not even thinking

Click to shrink...

This is why developpers dont make such options anymore. If the medium setting was the ultra one, people would be like "omg it's well optimized". But if people cant read "ultra" it's shit.
Because they equate high to consoles and less than high lesser than consoles.

 

[Linus815]

legit hyped for the DF videos now

 

[daninthemix]

Once again, you are reacting without thinking.
Balanced settings? Those balanced settings are invariably much higher than those on X1X.

Just think about it. COmputers are not magic in this instance, we know how much better a RTX 2080 Ti fairs on settings very similar to those put out on X1X in general. I have done that testing now dozens of times to prove it. If a games ultra settings, or high settings, or even MEDIUM settings do not double X1X performance or more (as we should expect on an RTX 2080Ti) than those nominal settings are HIGHER than X1X.

This game is no exception, if you were to run it at x1x settings it is, unsurprisingly, far in excess of 4K 60.

Click to shrink...

The world needs your recommended settings video asap.

 

[Deleted member 11276]

Once again, you are reacting without thinking.
Balanced settings? Those balanced settings are invariably much higher than those on X1X.

Just think about it. COmputers are not magic in this instance, we know how much better a RTX 2080 Ti fairs on settings very similar to those put out on X1X in general. I have done that testing now dozens of times to prove it.

This game is no exception, if you were to run it at x1x settings it is, unsurprisingly, far in excess of 4K 60.

Click to shrink...

So you are saying X1X runs the game at lower than low settings or low settings? I don't know because I haven't tested it, but you guys did I suppose. Balanced is a mix of medium and high afaik.

 

[Ryaaan14]

Yea I expected a nightmare based on the posts here but it's not bad at all

GTX 1070 i7 8700 and I have most things ultra except shadows on high and I'm around 50fps most of the time (1080p)

 

[Dictator]

The world needs your recommended settings video asap.

Click to shrink...

Going to take time since I got the game yesterday - I just hope the carnival of stupid will stop in the meantime. It is really bothersome that DF has to be a voice of reason here for the blatantly obvious. I seriously do not enjoy the pressure of time having to rush a video that needs a lot of care to nail settings downbut also have to contend with the ignorant posting I see all across the web.

So you are saying X1X runs the game at lower than low settings or low settings? I don't know because I haven't tested it, but you guys did I suppose. Balanced is a mix of medium and high afaik.

Click to shrink...

I am not done nailing settings down and I am reserving any information for the video (I have a job that relies on people actually watching our work and not just clicking through it or reading summaries). But just think logically. We know how powerful GPUs are in comarison to X1X usually... reasonable deduction makes it seem like dah dah dah.

 

[dmix90]

If game can't deliver console performance/settings on ~similar pc hardware then it's a bad port, otherwise people should just lower their damn settings. That is if there are no other stuff like random crashing, framepacing and streaming issues etc.

Though i would argue that if pushing settings beyond consoles does not give you noticeable visual difference( that you can see without zooming way in ) then it is a questionable choice to include such settings. Pushing hardware for the sake of pushing hardware is not needed... you can cripple any machine with unnecessary precision without any visual gain.

 

[daninthemix]

Going to take time since I got the game yesterday - I just hope the carnival of stupid will stop in the meantime. It is really bothersome that DF has to be a voice of reason here for the blatently obvious. I seriously do not enjoy the pressure of time having to rush a video that needs a lot of care to nail settings downbut also have to contend with the ignorant posting I see all across the web.


I am not done nailing settings down and I am reserving any information for the video, but just think logically. We know how powerful GPUs are in comarison to X1X usually... reasonable deduction makes it seem like dah dah dah.

Click to shrink...

Definitely take whatever time is needed to get it right. It's not just for now, it's for the future too. I've used your settings videos to optimise games two or more years after release.

Durante was always frustrated about this 'ultra or bust / unoptimised' mentality.

 

[Dictator]

Though i would argue that if pushing settings beyond consoles does not give you noticeable visual difference( that you can see without zooming way in ) then it is a questionable choice to include such settings. Pushing hardware for the sake of pushing hardware is not needed... you can cripple any machine with unnecessary precision without any visual gain.

Click to shrink...

SEtting names are arbitrary and it is choice of the user to cripple their own performance experience. I see no problem with including incrementally or stupidly expensive video options in games.

 

[Deleted member 56580]

So hum, if some people cant stand playing on pc, and some people cant stand playing on console, and some people cant stand playing on their phones

Wouldn't you agree that like, I don't know

Its all good, op ?