• simple@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    We’ve been warned, I expected performance to be rough but ~35fps on a 4090 is a new low for me.

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

      I’ve played some action games in the teens and was fine with it. Maybe lower frame rate at low resolution (1080) isn’t as apparent as the high 4K, but I’ve never understood why people can’t play with frame rates still far faster than film (if it’s truly refreshing the frames completely and not ripping the picture of course). I suppose this argument goes the same direction as the vinyl/CD one, with both opinions dead sure they’re right.

      If the game is handling variations of frame rates during play badly, that’s a different story. The goal is for the player to not realize there’s a change and stay focused on the game.

      • 9bananas@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        simple explanation: people get used to their monitors’ frame rate.

        if all you’ve been using is a 60Hz display, you won’t notice a difference down to 30-40 fps as much as you would when you’ve been using a 144Hz display.

        our brains notice differences much more easily than absolutes, so a larger difference in refresh rate produces a more negative experience.

        think about it like this:

        The refresh rate influences your cursor movements.

        so if a game runs slower than you’re used to, you’ll miss more of your clicks, and you’ll need to compensate by slowing down your movements until you get used to the new refresh rate.

        this effect becomes very obvious at very low fps (>20fps). it’s when people start doing super slow movements.

        same thing happens when you go from 144Hz down to, say, 40Hz.

        that’s an immediately noticeable difference!

      • 30p87@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        And then there’s everything not triple A, which is 99% terrible but 1% gold.

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

      Some of the settings are messed up, I think. It definitely can run faster than that by toning down some settings on that hardware. They really should have changed the defaults or straight up removed some visual settings, given what they do to the game. In my experience, the volumetric clouds, reflections and GI presets are all messed up and cost a disproportionate amount of performance when maxed out.

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

    Cities skyline 2 performance is pretty bad from the stream I was watching. HOWEVER according to this review by Wal Der Qual if you set the dynamic resolution to “constant” you will get an FPS boost. It helped the gal on the stream I was watching anyhow. I cant speak for their other suggestions as they didnt get tried on the stream.

    • Izzy@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Dynamic resolution? So it is going to bring you down to sub 1080p in order to run at a decent framerate? That doesn’t seem worth it.

      • Ethalis@jlai.lu
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Honestly the endgame was pretty fun as well on face value if a bit barren, it’s the midgame that was super disappointing to me. Overall it’s a decent game imo, it just set expectations way too high and couldn’t deliver

  • Purple@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    This was me with mythbusters: the game. Followed it for 7 months for nothing

  • circuitfarmer@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    All they had to do was throw it in Early Access while they fixed it. The reviews would likely be stellar in that case. Releasing it fully in this state just feels like some corporate BS. Disappointed in dev and publisher, and they keep making it worse with their weird excuses.

    “Built with modern hardware in mind”, homie this shit ain’t even running right on a 4090. And 30fps target? Idk what they’re smoking.

  • Christian@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    I remember thinking that surely Duke Nukem Forever would turn out awesome once it’s finally finished. After seeing the reception I just decided it wasn’t worth checking out.

      • Klear@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        After the hell that was its development, the game was surprisingly good.

        BTW isn’t there a project to finish the original vision of the game? That I’m definitely looking forward to.

  • KᑌᔕᕼIᗩ@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    I am so down for a sequel of this game and while it looks good the only thing making me hesitate are the performance issues. I’m tempted to just play the first one more and even pick up a DLC I want for that instead of putting the cash to this.

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

      So far I’ve played 4 hours and I just think there’s a hate train on it. I have a 3000 series card and took the recommended steps from paradox and the game plays fine, I’m enjoying it. From what I understand VRAM is the choke point, so if you don’t have a ton then maybe hold off

      • KᑌᔕᕼIᗩ@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        I have a 3080 so I should be alright and watching a few streams it seems playable too. Might utilize the two hour refund period and see.

          • KᑌᔕᕼIᗩ@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            I loaded up the 100k city and it was playable after following the various guides out there for me. It reminded me a bit of how Dwarf Fortress used to slow down and stutter when you had a lot of dwarfs running around.

            That said, they should have kept it in the oven until sometime in 2024. Besides performance improvements there are a few rough edges especially Chirper and in the simulation itself that need more work. One example is civs complaining about healthcare excessively until you unlock the upgrade for the full hospital and build one. Also some of the new tools like the road one and the pipe system need more polish as they can be unintuitive and frustrating to use at times.

            It’s ultimately not a bad game it just shouldn’t be released yet. They should have gone the early access route because that’s how it feels at the moment.

    • bitsplease@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      You basically get them through Steam - 2 hours is generally enough to figure out if a game is a total ripoff or not

  • GreenMario@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Me and X: Rebirth. Looking forward to it for years and it comes out as an abomination.

    5 years later I pick up the game on a deep deep sale and I try to dock and the physics gets screwy and immediately refund it. This was after 4 expansions and several patches to make it version 4.something.

    Also Payday 3. Though the server issues have been fixed.

  • Pinklink@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    For me it was fucking Void Train. I just want a new Raft okay??? And that’s what Void Train was supposed to be!!1

    • Oka@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      On paper, void train was exciting, but not in execution.