this post was submitted on 21 Oct 2023
235 points (95.4% liked)

Games

16745 readers
951 users here now

Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)

Posts.

  1. News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
  2. Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
  3. No humor/memes etc..
  4. No affiliate links
  5. No advertising.
  6. No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
  7. No self promotion.
  8. No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
  9. No politics.

Comments.

  1. No personal attacks.
  2. Obey instance rules.
  3. No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
  4. Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.

My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.

Other communities:

Beehaw.org gaming

Lemmy.ml gaming

lemmy.ca pcgaming

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 71 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (11 children)

If 90% of gamers can't play a game, is it still worth releasing it like that?

[–] kameecoding 47 points 1 year ago (4 children)

I doubt 90%of players run the newest games at 4K/high

[–] AProfessional 33 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

It’s not the resolution:

Even with AMD FSR 1.0 at 50% resolution scale, the game cannot come close to 30fps.

[–] [email protected] 30 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Dude if someone is spending 1.8k on just a fucking CPU and GPU together (this doesn't include the cost of the motherboard, ram, storage, case, monitor, or mouse) I would fucking hope I can run my new game release at fucking 60fps 4k (minimum) natively.

[–] [email protected] 21 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Game dev companies got lazy. Instead of DLSS and FSR being really great tools for older GPUs to run newer games, it became a crutch for brand new $900 GPUs to run newer games.

Don’t get me wrong, DLSS and FSR are awesome and I use them to get games to run well at 4K with my 3070 Ti, it’s just a shame so many devs are abusing it.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I think its a bit unfair to say they got lazy. They just shifted their development to lower the priority on optimization since even though corporate Game development sucks I don't think I've seen many "lazy" game devs. Many of them work pretty hard jobs for shit pay at least compared to other programming fields (Rough crunch periods, most of their audience hates them, etc)

[–] infinitepcg 6 points 1 year ago

Absoluteley, any lazy gamedev would just quit, get a boring SWE job and work fewer hours for twice the pay.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 year ago

Oh shit, I actually missed that last part of the headline. Mea culpa.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago

I just built a 7800x3d RTX 4090 build so I'd expect to hit 4k 60fps but I'm more a 1440p 240hz guy. I guess I'll settle for whatever I can't get with this game lmao. At least it's on game pass.

[–] [email protected] 19 points 1 year ago (2 children)

at 4K/High Settings

Do you believe 90% of gamers will be playing at 4K/High settings?

[–] Spedwell 23 points 1 year ago (1 children)

... on AMD's most powerful GPU.

I mean... At the current state of the game, 0% of gamers will be playing at 4K/High settings.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I don't know what "high" refers to in this instance, but in general I kinda wish every game had their very highest settings targeted to future hardware. Not by necessity of bad optimization, but simply because it feels stupid playing older games that cap render distances, LoDs, foliage amount crowd sizes, lights, shadow qualities etc to hardware limits that were set a decade or two ago.

Just make it obvious and don't call it "Very High" or "Ultra", but directly just "Next-Gen" or something in the settings and have it target like 720p 30fps on a 4090.

[–] Anonymousllama 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

I think I'm pretty confident in saying most people aren't interested in sub 60 FPS, especially if it's at 1080p and looking the way it does (which is mostly flat and unimpressive)

That's the most shocking part, the high-end hardware needed to brute force a 1080p game at acceptable framerates

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Eh, I'm fine with it in this style of game. A shooter I will not. BG3 I accepted running around 30 and didn't even feel it. It's not a twitchy game. It's a top down city builder. As long as it's responsive, it doesn't really need to run at 60. It's probably the ideal game to target 30.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago (7 children)

That's basically what Crysis was when it released, so yeah why not?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Because Crysis for its time was breaking barriers in terms of graphics and physics. City skylines 2 doesn't even look that good (graphically). So it just comes down to poor optimization that will get fixed after half a year to a full year of patching. This isn't a great look even though they said "But we said it will perform poorly".

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (8 replies)
[–] Anonymousllama 43 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (8 children)

Really disappointed that after a solid 3-4 months of dev diaries, open communication and hype for the game, they drop this performance bombshell on us at the last moment.

They get points for at least giving everyone a weeks notice, but that's clearly a calculated move (compared to if they kept it quiet entirely and it launched with people unaware)

I'm not instead on playing sub 60 FPS games at 1080p, especially not when I've got a 4090+13900k and it crushes almost every other game in existence. The game isn't pretty enough to justify such terrible performance, it's just purely unoptimized now.

Why there's no DLSS / FSR also at launch is baffling, it helps GPU bottlenecked necked games greatly (even if boosting from a native 30 to 60 is a bit yuck)

Really disappointed

[–] [email protected] 18 points 1 year ago

Like you said, they aren't trying to hide it. I'm sure they weren't sure where performance would end up at launch though. They publicly said they aren't satisfied with the performance and will be working to improve it though. This isn't the end of it. It's disappointing it doesn't perform as well right now (for us and I'm sure even more for them), but they've earned some amount of trust. I'll give them time to get things where they should be.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago

From the couple of creators I've seen paying it, they were aware of some performance issues for sure. I think they were just unaware at how severe the impact was (since content creators normally have expensive PC's) and how quickly they'd be able to address it.

It never sounded like they were aiming for being super optimised at launch either, but it did seem like they were confident "most" would be able to play it prior to the announcement.

And having watched CityPlannerPlays performance video of it, it sounds like the article didn't really play around with things to see what different settings' impact was. Specifically regarding resolution, it was noted that anything above 1080p seems to be extremely poor in performance.

Why there's no DLSS / FSR also at launch is baffling, it helps GPU bottlenecked necked games greatly (even if boosting from a native 30 to 60 is a bit yuck)

I believe I had heard something about them having issues with getting it running, because for some reason they included their own "render scale" option that runs like ass. You can, fortunately enough, very easily add DLSS to most games even if they don't natively support it though. That's most likely what I will be doing.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] The_Cunt_of_Monte_Cristo 34 points 1 year ago

Don't worry. They'll release optimization as a DLC.

[–] [email protected] 31 points 1 year ago (3 children)

It’s known performance will be poor, but if it was that bad the ton of YouTubers doing their preview coverage would have been reporting it.

[–] Z4rK 23 points 1 year ago (2 children)

No, there was a performance embargo for reviewers that wasn’t lifted until after the developers had made their statement a few days ago.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 year ago

It was pretty funny seeing stuttery footage on 60fps YouTube videos without any acknowledgement from the player lol

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

And they thought that just ignoring such clear issue was a good approach to take? Wow that's fucking scummy on both sides

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

There is a reason for them to not report on it. They were still working on the game (and they still are even). They don't know how the performance will end up at release until it's there. Reporting on it too early just misinforms people.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Well, surely if they're playing it 2 weeks before it's due to launch and it runs like garbage, they'd think "hmm, maybe this won't be ready in time. I should probably tell people about it" rather than just being greedy and sweeping it under the rug. Also, you can be honest about issues you experience with the people watching your content. If it gets better before it's released, you just make an update video stating you've seen an improvement over time. No need to hide it

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

I've watched a good bit of the game so far. I don't think anyone hasn't discussed performance. It's not something being hidden, it just isn't where it should be or where they want it to be, and they've been clear they're going to continue working on it to get it where it should be. They just can't hit that target for launch. Delaying it wouldn't be great either because plenty of people will be able to run it, just not as well as it could be. That's OK in my opinion.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] PrinzMegahertz 12 points 1 year ago

They do. Look at city planer plays video. According to this, I can hope to get a bit more then 30fps at 1080p with medium details with my 4070 ti and 7600x. Beyond that, I‘ll get a slideshow. For most PC owners out there, the game will be unplayable in it‘s current state.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago

Most YouTubers have beefy rigs. Also, the preview build could have some kind of limitation which was never intended for the final release but which improves performance

[–] [email protected] 18 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Probably will trial it and then wait for sale. By the time it goes on sale, it should run better lol

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] SwedishFool 17 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

So, this is releasing on Playstation and Xbox aswell? How the fuck will they be able to run it -at all-, 480p and 30 fps on low?

[–] darki 18 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Maybe it is the reason that console release was pushed to next year

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 year ago (5 children)

It will run at a glorious 60fph.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] Anonymousllama 9 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Also worth noting that Skylines 2 comes out on Xbox game pass day 1. You can usually pick up a trial for a fortnight, that's a pretty perfect opportunity to try this on PC (to see how bad it runs for you)

That's what I'll be doing, trying it out and most likely skipping it for a few months while they polish it up

[–] Darkncoldbard 3 points 1 year ago

Did you just say a "fortnight"?!... hold my beer...

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago
load more comments
view more: next ›