235
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] hardypart@feddit.de 72 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

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

[-] kameecoding@lemmy.world 39 points 8 months ago

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

[-] AProfessional@lemmy.world 33 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

It’s not the resolution:

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

[-] ThunderingJerboa@kbin.social 30 points 8 months ago

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.

[-] Centillionaire@kbin.social 21 points 8 months ago

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.

[-] ThunderingJerboa@kbin.social 9 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

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@lemmy.world 5 points 8 months ago

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

[-] DancingIsForbidden@lemmy.world 8 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

No. This is a city builder, not cyberpunk. This is a cpu optimization problem, not a gpu one. Also, a lazy development team doesn’t add enough features for it to suffer from such major optimization problems.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] hardypart@feddit.de 12 points 8 months ago

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

[-] arefx@lemmy.ml 8 points 8 months 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.

[-] jeremy_sylvis@midwest.social 19 points 8 months ago

at 4K/High Settings

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

[-] Spedwell@lemmy.world 23 points 8 months ago

... 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.

[-] JohnEdwa@sopuli.xyz 7 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months 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@lemmy.world 7 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

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

[-] Cethin@lemmy.zip 4 points 8 months ago

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)
[-] EssentialCoffee@midwest.social 7 points 8 months ago

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

[-] ThunderingJerboa@kbin.social 4 points 8 months ago

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@lemmy.world 43 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

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

[-] Cethin@lemmy.zip 18 points 8 months 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.

[-] QueriesQueried@sh.itjust.works 5 points 8 months 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)
[-] mindbleach@sh.itjust.works 36 points 8 months ago

GPUs have been general-purpose many-core processors for like fifteen years now. Please stop designing simulations that run exclusively on CPU... and especially stop tying your simulation speed to the goddamn renderer.

I've written a 60 Hz renderer for a game that's allowed to chug while you glide smoothly through it, and I've written a 60 Hz physics engine for a game that gets fractional frames per second, and I'm just some schmuck. What is your excuse? What kind of NP-hard nightmare did you design for yourselves, instead of identifying bottlenecks and faking the hell out of them? SimCity could run on 8-bit microcomputers. You cannot possibly be struggling to reach an acceptable minimum complexity, using hardware that's forty years newer and ten thousand times faster.

[-] Cethin@lemmy.zip 14 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

I'm pretty confident the game isn't tied to framerate, and also the game is almost always GPU bottlenecked from what I've heard. From what I've watched of the game, it has a ton of compute shaders and other shader work. In particular, weather is apparently a large cause of framerate issues, particularly temperatures. That's because (I'm betting) the game is computing temperatures on the GPU and using that to draw snow and other things on the terrain and also structures. I'm pretty sure they know what they're doing. They just did too much, and now they need to try to optimize it.

[-] sl3dge@programming.dev 6 points 8 months ago

They don’t work on a custom engine. So they don’t have engine programmers so they don’t know how or probably can’t (i don’t know how you would do that in Unity). That’s the price you pay for ease of development

[-] mindbleach@sh.itjust.works 6 points 8 months ago

If Unity is so dodgy that a team of professionals can't figure out how to spread a workload over time, they should have written it off immediately. The nature of their game was not a surprise. They're not naive in this genre - it's a direct sequel.

load more comments (5 replies)
[-] The_Cunt_of_Monte_Cristo@lemmy.world 34 points 8 months ago

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

[-] elgordio@kbin.social 31 points 8 months ago

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@lemmy.world 23 points 8 months ago

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

[-] sudoku@programming.dev 10 points 8 months ago

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

load more comments (5 replies)
[-] PrinzMegahertz@lemmy.world 12 points 8 months 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.

[-] bionicjoey@lemmy.ca 9 points 8 months 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

[-] sudoku@programming.dev 18 points 8 months ago

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@lemmy.world 17 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

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@lemmy.world 18 points 8 months ago

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

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Saledovil@sh.itjust.works 10 points 8 months ago

It will run at a glorious 60fph.

load more comments (5 replies)
[-] hiddengoat@kbin.social 14 points 8 months ago

Linked article is nothing but Unreal Engine fanboy masturbation.

Those people are fucking weird.

[-] BananaTrifleViolin@kbin.social 16 points 8 months ago

Also a bizarre comparison. Cities 2 is a simulation game - they are very CPU intense games. The graphics are nice but it's likely it's problems with balancing the CPU demand and the graphics that is the problem, rather than the graphics themselves. Simulation bottlenecks will drop the FPS drastically, regardless of the graphics engine.

From what I'e seen of the game on Twitch, I think the performance issues aren't game breaking. It seems the game runs fine if you reduce settings; while it's far from ideal it looks playable.

But it will be damaging for the game. Mods won't launch until after the game is launched, and that may be delayed further by time taken fixing the game post launch. For a game that suceeded in a very large part due to user content that may really harm the game's success.

[-] woelkchen@lemmy.world 11 points 8 months ago

Linked article is nothing but Unreal Engine fanboy masturbation.

UE having better 3D performance than Unity isn't really that much of a hot take. Unity got that much traction because of its really favorable licensing terms before the recent change.

[-] hiddengoat@kbin.social 10 points 8 months ago

Have you seriously not noticed how there's this weirdo subset that feels the need to throat UE every chance they get?

Why does the author specifically mention UE and not any of the other engines on the market? Why not Source, which is renowned for being one of the most flexible and performant engines out there?

UE fanboyism is real and it's fucking weird.

[-] woelkchen@lemmy.world 11 points 8 months ago

Have you seriously not noticed how there’s this weirdo subset that feels the need to throat UE every chance they get?

No, I didn't but I'm also not diving into every tech subculture.

Why does the author specifically mention UE and not any of the other engines on the market?

My guess is because of its versatility and the rumor from a couple of months ago that Cities 2 was UE-based. As an open source proponent myself, I would like to see the CryEngine-derived Open 3D Engine (O3DE) or Godot to gain more traction but at least the latter is still lacking on some features other 3D engines have for ages – I seem to recall to read a few weeks ago that shader stuttering is still a thing even in the newest Godot release. I don't think any shipped product is using O3DE, so using that would be a big gamble for a relatively small development studio.

Why not Source, which is renowned for being one of the most flexible and performant engines out there?

Source 1 is pretty outdated and Source 2 is used by Dota2 and two FPS games.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Anonymousllama@lemmy.world 9 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

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

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] elxeno@lemm.ee 8 points 8 months ago
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 21 Oct 2023
235 points (95.4% liked)

Games

15775 readers
614 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