A shout out for the beta testers out there

Yeah these improvements are nice but it's still unacceptable. I guess we still wait.

yeah and pay full price for beta testing and we get really cheap working game.

And It'll be in a humble bundle probably as well

At a discount price too!

I get what you mean but at the same time this game has been released like on 3 different occasions, if they abandon it it’s not like we’re missing out on anything new lol

​@@mrniceguy7168 pc players would be missing out, there has been no port to pc previously. Also, yes it was on 3 platforms but that doesn't seem like the biggest issue. The ps4 one was a completely reasonable release, as the ps4 isn't backwards compatible with ps3 so naturally they would give you a way to play one of the most critically acclaimed games of all time on their current system, and for the ps5 it made sense to give us a more up to date version to give people who just saw the show the chance to experience the game in its best form. The problem was the ps5 version didn't add much and was overpriced.

Until the general public stops paying for these broken games, it will never change

Honestly the game is completely fucked up as a pc port, but if there's a game developer team which has always delivered the most polished games ever at release is Naughty Dog, they sure fucked up here but I'm sure if they were to release The Last of Us 3 would be as polished as the first two were at release for the first time.

@@respectpartii6302 Completely agree that this game is a shitshow on pc, but it wasn't naughty dog who did this port, it was Iron galaxy. Naughty Dog still deserves some of the blame, but the biggest issue here is iron galaxy.

don't worry, they're gonna milk this for all its worth

@@gozutheDJ they should, since the port is very… questionable on quality.

@@Siul_987right, a port is only “quality” if it can play at 100fps ultra on a fossilized potato PC

@@gozutheDJ nah, this crap now has shaders stutters while still loading worse than the console versions, a crap port is just a crap port my friend. Is great that you have an awesome non-potato pc as I do, but I will not be defending this shit… when we will play it 100% fine probably by 2024 (if they actually manage to fix everything lol).

@@gozutheDJ are you trying to say this games port was good at launch?

I believe that's how some games' texture option works already.

Yeah most games have it but somewhat hidden when you use lower texture settings. I do hope all games expose this setting in future titles.

Seriously. That’s a huge factor that users should have access to. Especially if someone has a build right on the cusp between two texture quality settings. Let people decide between the better image quality with slower texture loading or a more stable image with lower texture quality.

Any idea if I can enforce this in NvInspector or something?

Hopefully they use one of their good PC conversion support teams this time.

Supposedly according to who? The game hasn't even been formally unveiled yet you turd

I think the amount of people that want to see part 2 on PC can be counted with one hand. I think the amount of people that like part two in general to can be counted on one to two hands

​@@g33xzi11a 505 have been really good so far

Is multiplayer on pc actually confirmed ?

Just get a ps5 to play it

Runs just fine on an RX 6800. 1440p/Ultra - 70-120FPS.

@@TheBrightjay already own it on PS5, and yes unfortunately at this stage it is the vastly superior option to a 3 thousand dollar PC. Bit silly.

@@sammyflinders just crazy

Runs worst for me.

I guess I'm SOL with a 9700k with no HT.

@@Hixbot Well, you got what you payed for. Playing AAA games on or or near launch on PC is always a gamble.

@@mbsfaridi It's FOMO propaganda all these game developers love to push (but Apple is the true master of FOMO) .... You don't want to miss out or you won't get to be one of the Kewl Kids .... Which is even more ridiculous with any Sony title on a PC since they are all 3 or more years old anyway so you already missed out .... We waited 10 years already for this game what's a few more months?

@@longjohn526 Where’s fomo with AAA games? Cause you get a fully patched and most times extra included with the GOTY edition or get a cheaper game after few months.

Most don't, most go on first impression, which if a game is a bad port, most will still think it is years after release. I remember that with Batman Arkham Knight, the port was so bad that years after, I don't recall seeing if there were any re-review on it to see if it got better, so most of us are going off first impression, and that has got to hurt their sales. Anyway, in the case of Batman Arkham Knight, if it wasn't for getting the game for free on the Epic store, I doubt I would ever have played that game, and to my surprise, the game ran like a dream on my PC, but you can only go on first impression, because hardly any review sites re-review games after release, and that basically means publishers and developers are likely leaving a lot of money on the table when it comes to PC gamers and bad ports, because I know of many people that rarely buy games on release and wait for a deep sale, after all, it makes sense, the game is a lot cheaper, it's patched up and driver ready, you're basically paying a lot less for a better product.

Really hope they may fix the z-fighting issues

@@SuperOtakuKyo I thought that was poorly pixelated DLSS reconstruction...

huh? the only isssue that exists is cards that SHOULD be 1440p capable being crippled with low vram. cards intended for 1080p are just fine with 8gb.

I have a 3060 12gb and every setting is maxed out on ultra and It’s at 70 fps

@@thegreenmind464 Now I'm sure that will be my next GPU. :D

Agree. Now the game is totally playable with Ultra settings 2650x1440 on rtx 3070ti (i5 10600k)

too bad everyone has locked themselves into beleiveing they need 16gb of vram at 1080p

this is just inexcusable perforamnche for a game with this kind of graphics. i own a 2080 super and i can run The Resident evil 4 remake with most settings on high and 60 -70 fps. Even that game drops frames because of some bad optimisation in the REengine that capcom uses. But it is nowhere near as bad as The Last of us pc port. even the camera stutter when using a mouse (wich was supposedly fixed in a patch) is still not fixed. Why are some people (not you) defemding the game by stating that waiting a few month is not that bad. Maybe people should stop defending this kind of horrible practices of releasing a game in this state.

@@caleasthetic I am not sure how far 2080 is from 3070ti. But I can play Ultra setting on 2560x1440 with 60 fps.

I don't know why VRAM has become such an issue. 8GB of VRAM textures don't have to look worse than what they did 5 years ago. 16GB textures should look better, but a lot of the time they just look like how 8GB textures looked like before 16GB of VRAM was really a thing and we aren't actually scaling the textures to actually use the VRAM. Instead developers just treat it as a buffer to not optimize at all.

HUB gonna backtrack fast

@@lakersrams7761 LOL no, HUB has shown problems in many other games like A plague tail and Hogwarts. Keep dreaming.

Hopefully Steam makes its trial version feature available to every new release the way it did for Dead Space. This will eliminate the need to refund the game as you don't need to buy the game to trial it. This will fuck up the preorders of all the big companies unless they get their shit together and release a proper PC port

Return the title? Really? I'm playing it on a pirated version I think patch 1.0.4 or something like that with a GTX 970 and i7-4790k. I was surprised by how well it looked and ran. Around 30-40fps depending on the area with FSR on Quality it's great. Had only ONE crash after playing multiple hours. For an old ass PC I think it's fine...

on a 5900x and RX 6600 i had barely any problems with the launch version lol people simply found out about their atrocious cooling configs because they had never truly stress tested their system before

Are you waiting for a price drop or the game to be fixed.. Maybe it's time to put up your pirate hat instead of still buying broken games

search good and you can download for free... saves you also the 20

Is the 'stuff' you commenting on the results of a 15 minute video that came out 5 minutes ago?

PC gaming happened

because people pre order games like fucking idiots.

@@CaravelClerihew what do you mean?

Inexperienced developers. Same with CD Projekt Red, BioWare, DICE, Respawn, etc.

Same here except I got it for free.

Actually, both games were ported by the same developer. What were Sony thinking hiring them...

@@conyo985 I remember i bought Arkham Knight after it was fixed because they were giving everyone who bought AK until some point other games with DLCs for free xd.

Interestingly enough, I'm finishing the game with only one crash, on an 8 year old system... You can pretty much play the game right now, there's no need at all to wait that much lol

@@gamzillio Yeah I remember that... They only two companies I trust when it comes to high quality ports are QLOC and NIXXES.

Criminal how dead space was just abandoned after the March patch. Survivor is still rough as hell too.

It's insane that they've just seemingly decided to be completely done with Dead Space, I guess because there wasn't as much uproar as with Jedi they figured it was fine and not to bother.

Alex talks about it near the end of the video. Yes.

many people wrote to Dead Space devs about traversal stutters , but the answer was that devs team couldnt reproduce the problem (or just dont give a shit) , so we can simply forget about Dead Space fixes which is sad

There are two kind of CPU usage in 2023: Max out all cores/threads or use only 2 cores and left the others sleep... the sweat spot would be around 50% on every core/thread on a 6c/12t CPU.

@@PeterPauls 6c/12t is low end these days, even lowest tier i5, 13400 offers 10c/16t config. 6c/12t config has been in mainstream since zen 1 and intel 8th gen, that was ~6 years ago.

@@h1tzzYT Whatever, it didn’t’t change what was the meaning of what I said.

They work really hard at Hardware Unboxed, but their VRAM argument is flawed. They say Nvidia should put more VRAM on their cards, whilst this may make PC game development cheaper, it will make the hardware more expensive. Triple A PC games with excellent optimisation are released at the same price as games like TLOU so why should the consumer have to pay more for their hardware!? Even to the layman seeing Red Dead's high texture setting requires ~4GB, you could tell TLOU medium texture setting had not been worked on considering the reported usage in the settings menu.

They are incompetent at best and down right dishonest at worst. When FSR 1.0 came out they were saying that DLSS was not clearly better than FSR 1.0 and they mostly traded blows. Before that they were hawking sharpening filters. When the 20 series came out they were telling people to save 100 dollars and buy a 1080ti over a 2080 because the raytracing performance on the 2080 useless and the cards were the same in every other way. Two years later when RDNA2 came out they werent calling RDNA2’s raytracing useless even though it does raytracing slower than the 20 series released two years earlier. Now their deal is telling people that FSR 2.0 and DLSS are more or less the same (like they did was FSR 1.0 and sharpening filters before), where if you actually matched the visual quality of both DLSS would be running twice as fast. At 4K, DLSS ultra performance visual quality is comparable to FSR 2.0 performance but is half the internal resolution which equates to an almost doubling in performance. Also look at the games that HUB decides to cover and the games they do not cover. Every time a broken PC port comes out, they need to quickly do a video saying the VRAM in Nvidia cards is too low and is obsolete before a patch can come out and cut the vram requirements in half. It’s like they are the busted PC port channel. The future of real time rendering is light transport simulation not unoptimized texture budgeting. In their 4070 vs 6950 video did they show any pathtraced games? No because they wanted to highlight the 10% faster raster performance of the 6950 without highlighting that the 6950 does raytracing slower than a 2080. And the 10% raster performance gets crushed into negative numbers when you factor DLSS vs FSR with like for like visual quality.

​@@mstewart248 hub literally misinforming many viewers to just go last gen when last gen has so much power consumption.... even though they bragged that last geb Nvidia cards were power hungry now that narrative dies immediately

@@modelcitizen9279 Digital Foundry has said in a recent podcast that Nvidia should put more VRAM on their cards

@@mstewart248 On the other hand, Digital Foundry has admitted that they are sponsored by Nvidia, they even put it in the video tittles sometimes. On their 4070 video they compare Nvidia and AMD card performance on path tracing on the first game they test, misleading their viewers, since there is only one modern game from 2020 with Path tracing and it barely runs on 4070. Path tracing is a nice feature for old games, but for the next 5 years on a 4070, it's Lumen and UE5.

not only its still 25 minutes , also now there are shader compilation stutters in cut scenes and in gameplay lol

5 months later. it’s still there. barely starting the story cuz how shit it plays still

"Should be" why do you even think you know anything? when games at 1080p can easily max out an 8gb budget, you're clearly very wrong.

Because you install a game only once, but need to recompile everytime you updzte your drivers.

Nope. That's why channels like DF are important to keep the video games industry in check. The shenanigans they'll pull will go out of control if no one calls them out.

They definitely wouldn’t. Just like Resident Evil 4’s and Dead Spaces issues wouldn’t have been addressed. Warner Bros with Hogwarts Legacy though obviously don’t GAS about the Series X version.

Probably, eventually. But DF makes it easy to pinpoint issues, and they break everything down so well. Most publications would just describe things as "unstable" or choppy and a lot of the much harder to see things would fall by the wayside. Like the frame stutter for example. I don't even notice it in this clip they show, until they slow it down. Something most people would probably miss as well

@@TheHAMMER91 I still can’t fathom how some people say they don’t see frame stutters or wildly variable framerates. Especially those who claim they can’t tell the difference between 30 and 60 FPS. I’d get my eyes checked if that were the case.

of course they would, this is just stupidity thinking

The game's base DLSS sharpening changed - mention it later in the Video - Alex

@@DigitalFoundry There was no mention of DLSS during the high texture comparison, so it was assumed that its native. 1) if that is using DLSS, then how do the High textures compare between the launch version and the newest patch at native +Taa? Are they the same? Or is there also a decrease in sharpness like in the comparison in this video? 2) Now with DLSS, is there a way to get the game to look like the launch version. Is it just a case of increasing the DLSS sharpness? But, you recomended setting it at 0. So for now, while using DLSS, the launch version will look better and more detailed. 3) I remember in 1 of your tweets, the PS5 version having better textures and lightning and reflections than the launch version in some scenes. Even at high settings. Is that fixed? Or is the PC version still behind and tied with PS5 versions in some scenes?

Not from AMD fans

This video isn't going to get nearly as much traction as the videos and posts online about 8 GB being obsolete. That's the unfortunate reality of too many terrible PC ports being released back to back, and then being patched much later on when nobody's really talking about it.

It is a problem because of poor optimization that won't stop after this video

​@@my40789 Most AMD users have 8GB cards, while 3060 12GB is one of the most popular GPUs on steam.

That’s what I was wondering. Got a 10gb 3080 and was hoping for 60fps @4K with DLSS quality or performance mode. Guess the PS5 version will have to do.. :/

Blame the limitations of the PC platform, console are to fast now to brute force and keep up. PC will keep getting cucmed by Nvidia and intel.....sad

​@@SWOTHDRA tell me you know Jack shit about pcs without telling me you know Jack shit about pcs

@@SWOTHDRA the only advantage the consoles have is the I/O and now with direct storage 1.2 being released that advantage is way less, and pcs still have way better CPU and GPU performance and a better feature set with DLSS

​@@SWOTHDRA you're hilarious. you realize a pc the same price is faster than any console now right?

@@bradhaines3142 No. A console is faster. PS5 costs $500 dollars and can run games at 4k. No PC costing $500 can run games at 4K. Its coz of two reasons. First the optimisation, second is that consoles are sold at loss. So, no similar priced pc can outperform a console.

I mean somewhat? Returnal is still very stuttery

@@ImGonnaFudgeThatFish DLSS 3 helps a bit

Returnal PC was a traversal stuttering paradise and never was fixed, just mitigated through the use of frame generation and then the port was completely abandoned. Such a lazy job.

Optimization

Because 8GB isn't enough for new gpu's being released and I can appreciate the many KZfaqr's pointing this out trying to pressure Nvidia especially to stop releasing 8GB cards in 2023. An entry level card, fine but TLOU being more optimized doesn't prove anything because it was so broken to begin with. We have evidence with new games that cards like the 3070 even though perfectly capable computationally are handicapped by their low vram buffer. I don't understand how anyone can defend this.

TLOU has no excuse, but games with heavy use of RTX need more Vram. And Nvidia keeps advertising these Vram hungry features while failing to increase the Vram on their cards.

$700 gpu only 60fps lol

@@Conner06 if you payed 700 for your 3070 you got FLEECED lol

Direct storage is an excellent feature but sadly it relies on the developer to put that in. Hope I am wrong but I bet in a few years time you could count on both hands how many games use direct storage on PC. That will be a sad thing.

forspoken didn't even utilize the full feature set, but even just the loading was impressive. from the menu screen you clicked load and you were instantly in the game world. I"m used to games loading fast, Cyberpunk's loading screen last s only a couple seconds. but Forspoken didn't even have a loading screen. it was instantaneous

king of a 3rd world country maybe

Have you see uncharted2???

that's why theres like 3 or 4 bench videos for the ps3 framerate like traversal fps and random shit like that on this channel

you can add Elden Ring to that list. It runs much smoother on my 12700kf with e-cores disabled.

Because the hardware is not a variable for consoles. For PC, there are a lot of possibilities for the target hardware. A bulk of these stutters come from shader compilation which is unique to each combination of hardware. This is a non issue on consoles because devs can just precompile the shaders and ship it with the game. Another problem is that PS5 has custom solution for extremely fast SSD data streaming and asset decompression. High end PCs can brute force this via PCIE 4.0 SSDs and a beefy CPU (with more cores), but mid range CPU and PCIE 3.0 SSDs will not be able to keep up. PS5 has custom hardware for this. Alex also mentions here that DirectStorage (MS version of fast data streaming on the Xbox) would be highly effective in this case. Tldr, this is a console game first (duh), designed to utilise the custom hardware on the PS5 to the fullest. This doesn’t necessarily translate 1-1 to a PS5 equivalent PC that Alex is using in this video. Which is why a PS5 equivalent PC is struggling here.

Still?

​@@JimBobeStill run like crap. I had to upgrade to 32gb ram in order for the game to not crash every 15 minutes but framerate is still all over the place, not to mention the awful CPU and GPU usage and temp. This is exactly the same situation as Arkham Knight PC on launch. People with strong hardware will be able to brute force it but it doesn't make it any better for low to mid-end users.

@@PLYTATN sad

I had zero issues other than high CPU usage. Played and finished in May 2024

@@Radek494 yeah its just the high cpu usuage that worrys me, doesnt it ruin the cpu will they ever fix it?

Seems to be a thing with the engine itself, Uncharted 4 takes long too.

You can play 1440p, just not max setting

I‘m more about near future games. About what‘s happen the latest games, I got the feeling 8GB isn‘t quite enough, but at the same time the developers are shitty at optimizing their games. I‘m just worrying about my 12GB Card and set me up for buying a new one just already next year. I want that 1440p/Ultra/stabil 60fps😅

Or given away for free at a certain date.

??

It's 24 mins. What are you talking about?

​@@conyo985 sorry im here to attack multi-million dollar companies that release trash ports not defend them

Alex doesn’t know shit. Has no development experience. Don’t think he has the the relevant development experience to provide his opinion on the topic. NX Gamer does better performance reviews than DF in my opinion. You need someone who knows whats going on with code. Not just comparing new games to old gen games.

To run the game at ps5 equivalent resolution and framerate you need a 4070. A 3070 is supposed to be more power then a ps5... But this is one of the ONLY next gen games made for the the PS5, so maybe when cross-gen finally ends this will start to be the norm.

I have not read more nonsense and fan nonsense for a long time. The whole problem is tied to the fact that developers do not use the method of transferring decompression to gpu, which will save the cpu from any additional loads, thereby we will get rid of the key and, in fact, the only problem. With the use of this functionality, unpacking data from ssd will be done bypassing ram and cpu instantly in vram, the essence is the same, only a more suitable chip will be used - gpu, which, in turn, will not have even close similar problems due to increased load as in the case of cpu decompression, yes, it will probably affect gpu performance, but not in any radical way, besides, there are clear examples and even confirmation of this, a test in the only game where this method is implemented. Your statements that for 4k 60 fps we need a pc 2 times better than the ps5 are absurd, because the ps5 is corny not capable of 4k60, which already sounds like a fan statement from your side. In addition, speaking of chips, the closest analogue on pc is RX 6700 10gb, which has a more powerful chip by default than in ps5, and even if you offer decompression on it, the big question is whether it will be worse than gpu ps5 after that. Summing up, the whole problem is in the unused functionality, the use of which will begin sooner or later, which even without all this reduces your statements to 0

@@vega7481 6700 is runs way worse then the PS5 in this game

@@12coco100 After reading what you wrote above, to answer you seriously, this is much below my level. This generally applies to the one to whom I initially answered, but you break through this bar

The problem in question doesn't stem from data to and from the ssd and the ram. Even using a pcie gen 5 10gb/s ssd with 1.5-2m iops would have the same problem in this regard. But I do agree, should use a gen 4 pcie in the test bench.

@@Dsntmtter2ME yeah my recommendation didn't really have anything to do with this game specifically, just a general recommendation for any PS5 ports going forward. I have to imagine it will be critical for Rift Apart for example.