What about BOTH?

If Epic could stop forcing pointless effects that would be great.

But that would take effort

Some dude will find some work-around and make it playable for majority of people, and they will patch it out.

check reviews of the 780ti/r9 290x, these could do 1440p great. Yes games look better now, but if you compare the specs of the totaly inferior gpus i referenced to the new 4070ti and rx 6800xt that strugle on 1080p (modern games), it is obvious the games don't look nowhere as good to justify DEMANDING that much performance. Let alone the gpu prices nowadays.

more like Nvidia is f**king up the game industry if you ask me

There is a deal between NVIDIA and Gaming Industry: if they slow down game performance, they get 20% of the money from saled graphic cards 😡

They're not existing the industry just trying to change and seems to be successfully changing it to fit what they want it to be

They made me switch back to AMD after 10 years

They want to surpass the Amazon money funneling Goliath by taking over AI. They want to do this by establishing themselves as the one stop shop for all corporations and businesses for all their AI workflow. Once integrated into every facet the industry since no one will be able to catch up, and then, RUGPULL. Sky high prices. What you gonna do, not have the cutting edge technology we pushed other companies to not be capable of supportIng such an ecosystem? They are already pushing those classic Apple business practices. The walled garden is being raised. (Already have been really) it's all about control. Monopoly all the way!!!! That's the dream baby!!!! Their fathers would be proud..

I never pay even 60€ for AAA title, picked ac valhalla and ac odyssey both for 15€ on sale. Love em both definetly worth 15€ but even though i Absolutely love em id never pay 60€ for either one

Same with RDR2, i think i got it for 20-29€,

I know people gonns have strong feelings about ac valhalla and odyssey but i dont care. Those are great games with hunders hours of content

I paid €60 back in the NES 8 bit era, compared to that games are "cheap" with todays money.

if you have a pc there is literally no reason to ever buy a non-online game or piece of software again. pirate EVERY god damn thing you can, it helps show these lazy ass developers everywhere that we won't be paying for their fuckin dogshit anymore. if you stumble on the occasional game or app that's actually worth money, then buy it

nha not really, the real reson why everything is getting wrecked is because more games coming out for next gen (current gen) consoles. Why is this so important ? devs make way way WAY more money on consoles then on the pc and people with a pc that perform as a console is less then you think. I know alot of people who play on a laptop and they think a RTX 3070 perform there good ... reality the temps trottel the laptop down and even a RTX 3070 mobile is not close as fast as a RTX 3070 destop then we have the problem with the Vram and wola we have a wrecking Generation of shit ware, if Nvidia will give the RTX 3070 12 gb this card will run fine for the next years but Nvidia dont want you to do that and buy instead ther RTX 4070ti 1 - 2 years after the release of the RTX 3070 because they can charge more money.

@@allxtend4005 This has been the case forever, since the first console came out. Sure thats not the reason why it currently sucks this much...

It's because they can just say "use DLSS for our lack of optimization".

​@@allxtend4005Game devs make the games... Only the publisher and company gets mostly of the money

Seems*

eh, most AAA games are awful anyways. I tend to avoid UE games due to the massive bloat the engine forces. So, it just means we're going to hit the point where Epic is going to need to optimize their engine or fear losing out to Unity, Godot, or studios making their own engines again.

​@@backlogbuddiesand that's why i feel an inner peace in playing xbox 360 and xbox one era of games.

@@Benito650 I'm playing Titan Fall 2. I understand.

@@backlogbuddies won't happen for a while epic has intertwined with PlayStation through proxy amd and nividia rushes to give them every bit of tech they create. You can expect bad games for the foreseeable future

Was ray tracing really the next step? Idk I have a 3070 and I fckn hate the preformance trade off. Even with dlss it doesnt really make that much of a difference in most games. The only game I feel that RTX makes a significant difference is in cyberpunk.

A deceivingly inefficient graphics card, but it will cost you a lot of money.

I'm going to correct you on this very erroneous comment. Image reconstruction and frame generation are absolutely not "party tricks". They're superb solutions that will age progressively and have already passed native results in many ways such as the handling of text, fine details, the new ray reconstruction, etc. Frame generation is an extremely old concept of interpolation just applied with a new method in graphics rendering for video games and is actually a really good solution with caveats. Future technologies are going to continue this route such as full scene generation (Nvidia's DLSS10 comment is actually based on real tech they've been working on such as their city demo which is a few years old actually). The issue here is that developers, themselves, are being found to cut corners and rely on upscaling solutions to resolve their inept efforts to optimize their product (game). Not all developers are doing this, either, but rather just a handful but those few stick out sorely and people then overstate the issue as if it is an industry wide issue (it is not, but it could become a bigger issue if developers don't take responsibility). Further, upscaling even when not producing native/or better results is still a great solution to help weaker systems catch up while not compromising greatly on visual quality and performance. These core technologies are going to stay and only becoming increasingly relevant. They're not some half baked party trick, unless you mean AMD's often shoddy inferior solutions which still need to catch up and probably eventually will (just slower than it should be taking them).

Hence why it will be popular, it plays on a potato.

Well the 3060 mobile is within 10% of a desktop 3060 and 2x faster than a 1060

Cause it aint unreal 5

why are you saying "even in my 3060 laptop" that's miles better than a 1060

​@@anuvette the 3060 will struggle with unreal 5. Anything slower likely will barely play it or not at all, eliminating most of the player base pre launch.

until the early steam user reviews turn away sales.... and when they go to just platforms without that, their reputation overall kills their audience.

Megabyte red sector You have no idea about industries lol

translating scene and optimizing performance in games for lower weaker PCs is a tedious, pain-in-the-butt process that no developers take joy in doing and only do it out of necessity when mainstream consumer computers have yet the power and technology to run natively. When now Nvidia has finally produced powerful enough GPUs and the technology to be able to process real time lighting and rendering, developers would gladly spend less time, effort and cost to optimize and port their games to lower end systems just so it can be played on them, and rather spend the time and effort in the development of the core game itself, which is already quite a gargantuan task.

@@rexomi17 And you have no idea how customers work. On PC, user reviews are kind of king considering the biggest store on the hardware (steam) puts a score for it right there under the title graphic so its one of the very first things you see. A red "mixed" or " Negative" will make most people pause. And yes, it can "jump up with an asterisk" to cover that, but really only if it started positively. I mean if Overwatch 2 has yet to get that, starting negative is not something so easily fixed. And eventually (albiet much slower) reputations take hold. People begin to associate a company with shit products if it happens enough. Even the dumbest crowd eventually recognizes patterns.

​@kenhew4641 i dont know im seeing shit performance in alot of games and yet the come out with either broken core or just not a fun game. What i think is happening is they just ignore alot of issues now saying ah we have ai for that then cut the cost of paying devs for actual optimisation and can release games a bit earlier without these pesky extra steps to worry about.

What's your theory? Who do you think is paying who for what?

I haven't seen those intros since the early 2000's lol. When you got earaped by the nvidia intro when starting a game, and having to spam esc.

same as ray tracing by the time it becomes the norm. devs just implement lighting fast and automatically instead of using their time, brains and tricks to render lights more efficiently.

@@arz1898 I don't think ray tracing counts because it just looks better than rasterized lighting and light behaves realistically to the environment unlike raster, it benefits us gamers and game devs, it's just that GPU manufacturers need to make a more efficient and capable cards. Frame Gen on the other hand, needs like 60fps and Reflex to mitigate input lag, if anything lower than that, the input could be noticeable. In order to make these features great, it must be used by game devs who actually optimise their games and not rely on FG or DLSS. Game developers are misusing DLSS as way to play the game but not for boosting fps, looking at you Remnant 2 and other new games.

It's worth it.

It really doesnt benefit gamers at all... the tiny difference you see with raytracing on really isnt worth paying a thousand dollars extra for a GPU that will be able to render it.@@CasualG-mer

@@CasualG-mer right, all of them worth the use IF they actually care to make good. some games from 2016 looks better at most current games while also eating resources for breakfast lol. they just making excuses with these techs to do the bare minimum as a standard...

Nope. They will leave you poor people behind and only cater to the gamers with money.

yeah no matter what nvidia still tops, mean whoever complain about nvidia most still stick with nvidia,they might not bought into the newest gen card but will choose the most value atm of their purchase BUT STILL NVIDIA, its a fact

@@kenshinhimura9387 i highly doubt devs will only cater to the top 5% of gamers and thats if your only including pc gamers the ps5 and series X arent even more powerful than a 3060 so they'd have to drop console support to lol

@@user-iu5ib8bj6l because AMD also do things that made people buy nvidia cards. it's the fact that been happening for the last 15 years.

Tbh they need to adjust to consoles lol Immortals on PS5 and XSX runs in 720p60fps and upscale to higher res. XSS runs in dynamic 480-720p48-60fps and upscale to higher res.

they do both sell lower end gpus as higher ends ones at higher prices than last gens. ie 3050 250$, 4060 300$ 50$ hike but with a 60 class name to make it seem like the price didnt go up...

What the fuck do you want, a 50 dollar card that equals last gen performance? the 3050 is inferiour to the 4060, even if the 4060 is trash, its a warranted 50 dollar price hike.@@Eric-ct2ri

@@Yes-sw8gh lmfao i simply stated that nvidia double dipped on increasing prices by one selling lower end cards as higher end ones and 2 by selling them at higher prices than last gen... and no its not a warrented 50$ price hike... if it were they would of called it a 4050 instead of trying to deceive us by calling it a 4060.

@@hello7431 it might but its never going to happen... eitherway its not what i said its what the otherguy said...

more like they don't like how normal consumer/gamer want those GPU with cheaper price when the device is so much more capable than just a tool to be used in rendering games.

Not so sure about that, UE 5 was developed for 5 years, and UE 4 lasted for about 15 - 16 years until UE 5 was announced. it wouldn't get that fast, maybe... hopefully..?

@@irulannaba6970 Give me some of that positivity sir, I'm really needing some.

@@irulannaba6970 UE did not last 15 years. UE lasted 8 years. Every UE lasts one console generation. UE 5 was supposed to come out when the PS5 and XBSeX came out but was delayed two years. UE5 was supposed to launch 3 years ago and it came out last year. PS1 era was UE1. PS2 Era was UE2 and some PS2 games used UE2, which ran horribly. PS3 was UE3. Batman Arkham series is all UE3, except Knight. PS4 was UE4. First two years of the PS5's lifespan was UE4 due to technical issues with the engine. It's been in developer's hands for AAA studios since before the PS5 came out.

Ever since rtx has been introduced developers will gradually shift to letting the gpu process and render physically based lighting, and won't spend the time and effort to "fake" their scenes in games. If you're still holding out and not buying into Nvidia 's technology, you're just being left out playing any future games.

@@kenhew4641 Not complaining about Nvidia tech. Im complaining about how fast we will need to upgrade in the near future be it nvidia or not.

That game is trash lmao how can anyone care about not being able to run it

Steam refund comes handy for me

​@@SL4PSH0CKjust remember not to pass that 2 hour playtime mark.

​@@SL4PSH0CKor even piracy

@@axandraalex5869 when the game launch w/ a launcher and downloads the game or verifies it. its taking that sweet time 😂

@@nicola_pronoob true that, thats how i figure how unoptimized Remnant 2 was and how lacking its graphic option is

I'd like to make a Windows 98SE and/or XP PC; some retro games actually look really fun, and even use or require fascinating technologies.

Retro gaming? What does that mean

he gonna return to Tetris@@ok217

You mean 2050

😂😂😂😂

​@@risottonero7347I think he meant 2077

new amd slogan: "once in a lifetime tech solutions!"

Fsr 3 soon will come dont be a hater. It was just a couple of months ago they announced it.

The reconstruction also fastens the temporal accumulation so bounce lighting changes color quicker

There's a difference when you sync the frames, but it is barely noticiable

That's the point of ray reconstruction. It combines two steps into one where it have more information to reconstruct and denoise those rays

​@@LTNetjak I looked up the video in question, and the RR footage looks far better in terms of lighting quality. I doubt we'll know for sure until it's available to the public, but if I had to hazard a guess I'd say that the RR denoiser not having to fill in gaps by blurring a noisy image could result in more accurate colors, making it feel more intense?

@@Aragashia RR is just a different denoiser denoising is complicated and required for raytracing unless you want to raytrace at over 4x the output resolution what isnt feasible for the forseeable future

This

RX 6600 works fine on 1440p unless all you want to do is play Cyberbug for the stupid RT effects lol.

Honest my 3060ti is a perfectly fine card at 1440p with minor rt on cyberpunk. Probably going to get Intel's next flagship card though for higher vram

It is for now. but itl phase out your card in 2 years

@@Boosted_aj Only if you plan to play it in ultra resolution. Change it to high and you still won't have to change the graphic card...

Given that the Steam Deck is a very inexpensive portable system, that shouldn't be seen as a major problem. You can only expect so much from a 400 dollar, ultra-compact, portable system.

@syncmonism Why should you only expect so much? That seems like a pretty flimsy excuse. Ratchet and Clank was ported to PC and scaled down to work on the steam deck. Plenty of other games have been as well. It's not that difficult to include settings in a game that let you scale it for a variety of hardware. The fact that games like The Witcher 3 and Doom Eternal exist on the Switch is proof of that.

@@hueypautonoman doom eternal runs on switch? wtf?

​@@articlizeThe switch can run it because the devs actually cared about optimization.

Raw power is dead

@@rexomi17 Said who? You, under every comment mentioning it?

You forgot to mention on Native res. No Upscaling bullshits.

Believing sweet little NVIDIA lies hahahaha

@@deyandimitrov72874K ready graphics card! \*looks inside* … … 720p ready graphics card!

Don’t wanna defend Nvidia here, but the release of the 1080 was like 7-8 years ago? Pretty sure even Nvidia couldn’t look that far into the future of gaming. Nonetheless it’s frustrating, that even I can’t play the game at 4K with my 4090. Gaming is at an all time low and it’s only getting worse from here.

@@tertozer3543 You are the only one that can play that game. 😄 The rest of us with 3070s, 3080s,6800XTs are in trouble.😭

​@hello7431 you should be buying new hardware every 2 years anyways if you expect to keep up and play the newest games.

​@@kenshinhimura9387Tell that to the majority of people playing games coming from third world countries

@@kenshinhimura9387 hey my pc from 2017 still works, I aint upgrading it

@@kenshinhimura9387 this is comment is so hilariously out of touch, I don't even know what to say.

@@kenshinhimura9387My friend has an RTX 3060 and has no plans to upgrade lol it is really ridiculous that devs are making games so taxing and ignoring the low-mid market

Well said!

I totally understand and i agree gaming feels many times feels worse in recent years than it did in the good old days (I'm an old sucker myself) But I want to remind you of the good side if gaming and hardware. I used my old I7 2600k up until a year ago and a 1080ti with it (talk about many years of value, 2600k was released 2012 and 1080ti in 2017). Now I recently bought a new am5 computer with a 7600x and still my old 1080ti. Gonna upgrade to a 6800xt-6950xt for 400-500 dollars shortly i think. With used hardware you can get good bang for your buck and when AAA studios disappoint there's always old games plus new indie games that retain that old school quality gaming feel and no bullshit. On the topic of hardware, a used AM4 computer with a AMD 6000 gpu is great value in today's used market. My point is all this new greed and bullshit in the "gaming sphere" is avoidable 😀👌

Hardware tip to get great value, am4 + amd 6000 can get you a great computer out of used parts for a total of 600-900 dollars. Gaming tip, alot of old school fps and other great indie games are available for cheap. Ultrakill, Dusk, Battlebit, Cultic. Are all great fps games. Newer titles like Elden Ring, Baldurs Gate 3, Half Life Alyx are all great games aswell.

sold my graphics cards during the crypto drought and found pleanty of good games that could run on an AMD APU/IGPU. Ive avoided mainstream AAA games for about 20 years. there's plenty of superb games that can run on minimal hardware requirments. Why spend 1000s of dollars when modern new games a mostly buggy garbarge full of microtransations.

In short... a reinassance

Make your triple A games and optimize it

Its not DLSS, FSR or XeSS fault these things were made to support RT and give last breath to old GPUs but lazy devs now use these to optimize less. As for UE5 you are devs propaganda victim gimmicks like lumen and nanite are not for us, only for developers to reduce development time, and the side effect is these stuff are very demanding and barely offers anything better than the usual technology used so far.

Full ray tracing remains computationally expensive. DLSS approximates ray tracing efficiently, making some effects achievable on consumer hardware. As graphics advance, new solutions will likely be needed to fully enable ray tracing. For now, DLSS strikes a balance - reducing the processing burden while allowing some ray tracing effects. Rasterization can still produce great visuals. For those prioritizing performance over advanced effects, turning off ray tracing remains an option.

You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. This game uses Lumen and has software ray tracing always on. It's impossible to turn off with this implementation of lumen.@@Ccodebits Also this part is just an opinion, but you sound like a self serving corporate tech apologizing cuck for justifying and trying to excuse this.

@@Ccodebits thats a good use of it as well, but lately, it felt like they've been abusing the feature a bit for games today instead of optimizing it (non ray tracing performance). Like I bought a 3080 recently and at 1440p, I cant even get 60 fps on some games without tweaking some settings to medium/low. I know I can lower settings and all but I keep asking myself (is this what I get for buying a game full price?). Which comes to why online update kill games but thats a different story.

They say that they've improved it in each case. It's third parties who say that they've "fixed" it. Don't complain about them improving something more than once.

@@syncmonism That was confusion. If I wanted to complain, I'd bring up the fact that I STILL can't alt tab without major stutters in several games since that big DX11 driver rewrite over a year ago.

No, AMD is demolishing nvidia at every pricepoint. Just remember the same 500$ a 16gb 4060 ti costs will get you a 6800xt with a proper 256 bit bus. At 400$ for the base 4060ti 8gb you can get a 6700xt 12gb and save some money or a 6800 non xt for a few bucks more. The 7900xt is 50-100$ less than a 4070ti and is double digits faster in a lot of games, it's closer to the 4080 than the 4070ti.

@@PineyJustice I'm not saying AMD is worse. I know you get more value for money with AMD, but what I'm saying is that 7000 series is more expensive than 6000 without a big enough of an upgrade to justify the price. They are literally doing exactly what nVidia are doing.

@@Nevvalth 7000 series is not more expensive than 6000 series. It's actually cheaper. The 6950xt was an 1100$ gpu, the 6800xt was a 650$ gpu. AMD dropped the prices of 6000 cards to the price/performance of the 7000 stack. They are providing that generational price/performance change retroactive to last gen, the new cards are not going to come out and beat that. Secondly the 7000 cards do beat the 6000 cards even at those prices. A 650$ 6800xt was closer to a 1100$ 6950xt than a 6950xt is to a 7900xt. In newer games the gap between the 7900xt and the 6950xt keeps growing larger too, especially with RT and 4k. The 6600 came out at 330$ msrp, the 7600 is faster than an entire tier up beating the 6650xt for 270$ msrp. so no, you are entirely wrong.

@@XZ-III You don't need 8-cores if the CPU is new enough. Having fewer more powerful cores is usually better than more less powerful cores. A 7600 will out-perform any 8-core Zen 2 CPU easily, in any game. A 5600 will usually out-perform a 3700X, and is unlikely to be worse.

​@@XZ-III6 stronger cores are better than 8 that are not quite as strong. The PS4 had 8 cores and yet it could hardly maintain 30fps let alone 60 in the vast majority of titles.

The CPU limit is either the heaviest thread, or the heaviest thread on less than one core. If you have too few cores, the heaviest thread is affected. If your cores are not fast, your speed is capped. 8-core recommendations over the last 3-years have been based on ensuring your game runs unencumbered with system thread interruption. However some of the early 8-cores are likely too slow today.

I hope they dont screw up for older cards again

@@1ricov817 One can only hope... lol

Raw power dead anyway

​@@rexomi17Because you intentionally giving it away for ... "Fakeframes". To Nvidia why would they sell you their exspensive hardware when they can keep their exspensive hardware and sell you 100% "Fakeframes" via a Sheild like set top steaming box to stream all your "Fakeframes" from nvdiias servers for one low monthly payment starting at $299 a month settop streaming box sold separately.

Ive seen it tested on a 6600..... wasn't the best test (didnt even do all their tests on the same area) but... it didn't look too bad imho. it was able to stay around 30 in 1080 high/ultra mixes which is MUCH better then I expected... Im far more pissed off with EA requiring you to log into their servers to play a single player game. I'm done before you begin

@@MegabyteRedSector 6600 usually can do every game high settings way above 60. This is atrocious.

@@deyandimitrov7287 Yeah, I would agree in most cases, but I just expected FAR worse in this case... well that and maybe it's just the vids Ive seen, but it seems to me that "low" on this game matches much higher in those other games.... could be wrong though. But as I said, I'm FAR more upset with the always online requirement for a single player game. The game could run 8K 120 FPS on ultra with a Geforce 710, and I would still reject that, so...

@@MegabyteRedSector Hah, yeah, that online thing is bs. From the videos I have seen there is not much difference in fps between Ultra and Low, so that means it does not matter which one you use. That also means this game needs optimization and performance patches. Shocker, right... 😄

@@MegabyteRedSector I couldn't agree more

Um......it's clearly a new frame on each segment.

ray reconstruction is just a different denoiser with AI baked into it to improve its denoising capability its not really that complicated and its just a flat out improvement since the performance difference is minor

What if, along with the expected high-end improvements to ray tracing, they also introduce a simplified Lumen designed to run on old hardware, at equal or better performance to rasterization. If they could allow it to scale low enough that everyone can play it, devs would finally be free to not build the rasterization at all wherever raytraced lighting is used.

Lumen in particular is very efficient, and even the most basic version of Lumen does seem to look quite good. It even runs just as well on AMD's 6000 series cards as it does on Nvidia cards (RX 6800 XT can match the 3080 and 4070 with Lumen enabled in the first two games that included Lumen). It still has a big impact on FPS, but it's worth using more often than some other versions of ray tracing. I'm curious to see how well it will run in more games.

People have been saying this for almost five years and it hasn't happened yet

@@syncmonism Sure, Lumen is software ray tracing, im not talking about nvidia rtx implementation, im talking about not needing to basically do 2 versions of your game, a rasterized one and a ray traced one (whether lumen or not)

@@spagootest2185 did you watch the video?

Same

Most people that are complaining are playing their games at 4k resolution. Of course they will have more problems.

Games are just a bunch of tricks to make things look realistic, you can't make it lifelike without more raytracing everywhere. Now it's used very lightly.

I care less and less about graphics as the days go on, so many awful games have excellent graphics and so many great games have awful graphics

Stack-slide.. Reviewers should just state upfront that they are comparing the 7800 to the 6700 etc.. conclude the improvement is OK (+20%), but the price is too high.

in XFX case they were looking for the trouble in the first place. they were supposed to be nvidia exclusive partner to get some perk that exclusive to those that selling nvidia only. XFX probably regret the decision back then to leave nvidia right now as they never get the same glory as they did when they still selling nvidia GPU before. in fact back in 2012 the company almost go bankrupt because they lost quite significant of their revenue from nvidia GPU sales. as for nvidia threaten for those work with intel actually this was something that happen even before intel releasing Arc to the market. those that already selling nvidia GPU are afraid their GPU allotment will be reduced by nvidia if they start working with intel. for nvidia it is make more sense for them to give priority to partner that want to sell more of their GPU than one that want to sell a product that will directly competing with nvidia.

at this point amd just needs to stick to the low end / mid range markets like they've been doing; they'll never catch up to nvidia at the pace they're going, and it really doesn't matter because whatever top end card nvidia comes out with is ultimately irrelevant when the average person can't afford it

Immortals on PS5 and XSX runs in 720p60fps and upscales to higher res. On XSS it runs in 480+720p48-60fps and upscales tp higher res.

😂 gota spam games out for 60£

The RTX 2060 Super had 8GB of VRAM Waiting for ppl to respond with the "nerd" emoji lmao

@@mateothelifeless7800 🤓

@@DeepDownInTheOcean lol

@@mateothelifeless7800 :>

Thats not how it works 😁

Excellent price to performance currently the best.

@@leanlifter1 yeah new 7700xt is 450$ 6000 series still best

Yeah its also reason why UE4 was so shitty also. UE3 on other hand was good engine because every studio that made game on them usually made their own modifications for their games and optimized it further. Batman Arkham Knight runs on UE3 on steroids Rocksteady completly replaced for example renderer for this version ofc PC version sucked af but it was pure port team fault.

from what ive heard, a dev said in UE4 the optimization was built into the engine itself. it was basically a box they check. with UE5 the price of the power is now they have to do the optimizing themselves which they dont really know how (there are usually teams dedicated to it) so thats why UE5 games are coming out like pretty trash.

@@bradhaines3142 you cant have optimization in box to check every game, platform, version of the engine needs to be optimized different, some parts of code rewritten, some compression format changes, some unnecesary things cut down or scaled down. If they said that UE4 had built in optimization they didnt optimized at all they used ready solutions that should only be placeholder until they optimize.

@@bradhaines3142 We're talking about game specific optimizations. There's no generic "make everything better" checkbox that magically maxes out performance. There's always the need to optimize certain things that only apply to your specific project.

@@_Clivey Immortals of Avenum and Remnant 2 are prime examples of this engine being crappy or all that fancy stuff is very demanding to run but changes almost nothing. They chose to switch to UE5 because of pure development time and cost reduction when everyone uses the same engine, it means you don't have to take your time and money training new developers to use your own engine, Lumen means you don't have to bake lighting and shadows, and you don't need to configure additional lighting to support baked lighting, you don't need to configure light sources, color correction, triggers for turning lights on and off, etc. Nanite means you don't need to generate LOD as the engine does it automatically for you, etc. I said it from the beginning UE5 is going to be crap because UE4 isn't great either it's pretty lazy and amateurish for Triple A developers to use ready engine in 2023 and beyond instead of having their own engine which is made and designed from start to finish for their own games and they have more control on it. On the other hand, we'll have to wait for more games that aren't made on UE5 to see if any significant graphical improvements can be made (like Crysis in 2007) because so far the games are hard to run even on consoles ( Immortals runs 720p on XSX and PS5 while XSS runs at 480p lol) which are known to be easier to optimize than on PC but so far all new games released this year dont look much better than games made 3-4 years ago ago and current minor improvments are not worth performance hit and requirments rise on PC and especially are not worth resolution hit on consoles.

What are you talking about Nvidia has never had any meaningful long term support or open-source support lol. These "features" would make Nvidia lose money.

I completely agree with you. But we have all these corporation hounds that will buy any product from said corporation and justify every single horrible decision they make, for whatever fucking reason their brains can come up with, and will spend thousands of dollars on their new products every year, no matter the reasoning. Nvidia could launch a new card called the RTX 125687820 that's priced for 2000$ with it only being a very slight upgrade over an RTX 4080 and you'd see these guys selling their parents to afford it. The "gaming industry" could raise the price for new games up to 1000$ and you'd still have people defending it. Its disheartening. But, if the worst happens, there's still plenty of old games out there, which, barring graphics, are way better in gameplay, story presentation, pretty much anything, to modern triple AAA games. And indie games too, which completely stomp most of AAA games. If AAA developers keep pushing people to upgrade their systems every year because of new technology that, if well optimized, could actually work on older hardware just fine, people who don't have the money to spend thousands of dollars just to be able to play 2-3 hours in the weekend will drop buying the new games. Hell, even people who have more than enough money to spend will stop buying their games because at this point, the investment just doesn't match the result you get (a half-baked, poorly developed and optimized game), and they can better spend their money elsewhere, on something that will benefit them more in their actual lives. Sales will suffer because the corporate hounds won't be enough to keep the industry afloat, and indie games will rise to an even greater height because of their more in-budget games. There are plenty of new games out there that work horribly on a budget machine. But, go do your research and you can find the optimization issue that could be fixed with a single patch from a developer and you suddenly play just fine. Look at Armored Core VI for example. Game runs like garbage, even on powerful PCs, and the community already found the issue, and by fixing it, you can play the game on a steady 60+FPS without stutters on a budget PC. (By the way, I'm a very big fan of FromSoftware and their games in general, but the optimization issues on AC VI were horrendous, there were people with RTX 3080's and last gen CPUs having issues, and after the fixes were found by the community, people with GTX 960s, 1060s with very old gen CPUs are playing the game just fine with no stutters and good framerate). All in all, with the exception of certain modern games, I'm sticking way back with the older games, not because of graphics or whatever, but just because most older games were actually good, and run just fine. Most modern games not only require an ungodly machine to be able to run perfectly without tinkering with settings and upscaling and al that trash, the games themselves aren't even that good, they are barebones, very few of them actually have any soul in them. Why? Because these corporations aren't interested in making games, but products that will print them as much money as possible. Its the complete opposite of gaming back in the 90s and 00s, where developers made games they wanted to play because they were also gamers, and sure, games were made in a way for them to make a profit, but above all else, games were made to be fun. Its exactly because of this that indie games are so popular nowadays, they inherited what made games good in the first place. At the end of the day, if I have to spend God only knows how long tinkering to be able to play a modern game that my hardware far exceed the requirements for, then I'd rather keep playing my older games. It's not like I'm a child who plays games 8 to 10 hours every day of the week anymore, I have more things going on, and any game, as long as its good, to entertain me for an hour or two after work, is more than enough.

Its barely decernable unless you have superhuman spidy senses.

Is that sarcasm?

But how will I play on my AMD Vega 3 APU?!

Linux gaming has come very far in recent years, give it a go! hehe

Its getting good mostly thanks to Gabe.

Ey Aaron remember when crysis came out and ppl would be making yt videos RUNNING CRYSIS EXTREM HD GRAFIX WITH Q6600 4GB 800MHZ RAM WINDOWS XP SP3 the good ole...

@@CanularRadio yes, very fondly, but also slightly fuzzily 🤔 (those were my heavy smoking years 😉)... I've also been chasing the next big performance upgrade for 37 years now though, having been a geek all my life, with my first computer being the zx80/81, and first console the Atari 2600 😅

God remember when GPUs used to come with a "it can run crysis" checkmark on the box?@@CanularRadio

I mean Crysis wasn't that unoptimized, it's playable on 256MB VRAM video cards

Crysis had a lot of framerate issues due to its AI and water. When the game gets away from the water your GPU relaxes, this is why the final boss kills older GPUs, and when you fight the aliens your CPU relaxes. The Korean soldiers had better AI than the aliens who were programmed to move towards player at all times and shoot. Where as the Koreans were programmed to look for clues, listen for sounds, and talk to each other. Much more CPU taxing.

Looking at you, FEAR.