• Vaquedoso@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    40
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    1 year ago

    Well I think the whole performance thing have been blown waaaay out of proportion by a vocal few. I have a relatively old pc with an rx580 8gb vram and the game’s been running fine for me. Obviously it needs some patches, but people have been saying it’s the second coming of ksp2, and that’s simply bullshit

    • Scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.tech
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Agree. I’m several hours in and I’m honestly loving it. Face it gamers, y’all just like to hate things, it’s fun to be in the “in crowd” who knows better than everyone else to not buy something. Misery loves company.

      Meanwhile, imma keep playing.

    • verysoft@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      26
      arrow-down
      22
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Don’t downplay peoples valid concerns, we should strive for better performance in any game. Just because some people can put up with low framerates doesn’t mean others should have to. I think 120fps at 1080p should be absolute minimum performance we should accept out of a game given the power of PCs these days.

          • Scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.tech
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            and the heart of the problem. Gamers have forgotten that games are tradeoffs. Counter Strike has high FPS and the expense is lower detail. Cities opts for higher detail and fidelity over having higher FPS. Of course studios would love to give every game 120FPS at 4K ultra, they didn’t just decide not to do that. Optimization and squeezing a few more frames per second is tedious work. It’s not some switch in the engine they forgot to flip. It requires pouring over millions of lines of code, deciding to create this class instance later, to move this memory allocation to another place, to deciding what to cut out to make it just a smidge faster.

            I stand by my other comments. Gamers have become entitled that their systems should run brand new games at perfect ultra settings. That’s not how it ever worked. Brand new systems are out of date the moment you buy it. The only way to guarantee anything to run at perfect ultra for every game is to wait 5 years after it released on hardware that just came out.

        • PixxlMan@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Our computers are more powerful than ever, but our games run worse than ever before. I love the future

          • verysoft@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            Both are valid, I don’t know why people want low framerates when we can have silky smooth ones.

            • Honytawk@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              It is not like we want low framerates, it is just that we don’t want to pay for the hardware to run those when regular framerate is more than enough.

              60 fps is plenty for every game genre. You only need more if you are a professional gamer, or can splash the cash because you play all night every night.

              • verysoft@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                60fps is not plenty. You have never used higher have you? Low-end hardware these days is ridiculously powerful compared to what it used to be. Don’t let poor optimisation in games condition you to thinking otherwise, they could all be running a lot better.

                Anything with lots of camera panning is an objectively nicer experience at 120fps or higher.

      • Vaquedoso@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        20
        ·
        1 year ago

        Don’t get me wrong. I wouldn’t want to downplay people’s experiences and performance issues ARE concerning, and I personally hold the belief that a company is responsible for the quality of the product they bring to market and ultimately a fault in their own processes if they couldn’t. BUT it doesn’t take away that the issue has been overblown. It simply, given the game’s circumstances, shouldn’t be getting the hate it’s currently harbouring. It seems to me that the internet’s found the new shiny thing to hate on, and the human psyche simply can’t resist just a smidge more of rage

        • verysoft@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Perhaps that is the case, but it also swings in the opposite direction of games being overpraised when there are glaring issues - see BG3. Bad press usually causes change a lot faster though and I find it refreshing when people actually leave negative reviews with their concerns. Although I agree there are the people who take it too far and just jump on a hate bandwagon, which ruins actual criticisms.

    • SuperSpruce@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      I think the performance issue is not at all overblown, but the complaints about stripped features are overblown. The game is more complex than the original, but it does run like dogcrap right now.