UE5 looks gorgeous.

Originally posted by Fake:

UE5 looks gorgeous.

It's not whitout Merit of course

UE5 games do look great. I don't think that's the problem. The issue stems from people acting like just because THEY don't have issues with the game, then the issues must therefore "not exist". How many times have we heard THAT BS whenever people want to excuse bad PC ports. "Oh, you're struggling to run GTA IV and Crysis at 60+ FPS with everything set to High, well then you must have a "♥♥♥♥♥♥ toaster"".

Nevermind that poor optimization IS a thing and obviously is even more of a thing with UE5 games these days than the two most notorious ones I just listed. Thing is, one probably would struggle LESS to play them if only because there's solutions online to get better performance with tweaking, and even less capable rigs could still easily run them, if not albeit well.

UE from 3 and upwards always had issues now that I think about it.

Stuttering, textures filtering, unoptimized, etc.

Originally posted by Fake:

UE5 looks gorgeous.

I do want to see what a game without a realistic art style would look like on it.

Originally posted by Thermal Lance:

Originally posted by Fake:

UE5 looks gorgeous.

It's not whitout Merit of course

However that doesn't excuse it runs like sh*t on less then ultra modern hardware

Originally posted by Fake:

UE5 looks gorgeous.

UE10 looks better.

maybe developer do get commission from graphic card and CPU manufacturers for every unoptimized game they publish,

or maybe its hardware retailer nesting on every topic about bad optimization, and making advertisement.

UE5 is a next gen engine.
This problem is at both ends.
Could devs design games from low end specs up instead of the other way around? Sure.
But people with 3060s really should know what to expect when buying a UE5 game at this point.

The matter isn't helped by the chorus of devs and consumers saying the game engine doesn't matter and critics "don't know what they are talking about"

It gives people hope that somehow the NEWEST UE5 game WILL run great on their quickly aging budget PC

Originally posted by Bind0fGod:

UE5 is a next gen engine.
This problem is at both ends.
Could devs design games from low end specs up instead of the other way around? Sure.
But people with 3060s really should know what to expect when buying a UE5 game at this point.

The matter isn't helped by the chorus of devs and consumers saying the game engine doesn't matter and critics "don't know what they are talking about"

It gives people hope that somehow the NEWEST UE5 game WILL run great on their quickly aging budget PC

I don't expect new UE5 games to run necessarily well on aging budget PCs. I'd like to think the chorus of people with 4070s and 4090s and 5080s and 5090s complaining are the ones' who's opinion is most valid, since they bought top of the line hardware only to STILL get questionable performance. So far, only Alan Wake 2 could be said to actually justify its requirements, looking like an actual next gen game that will only run well on a future PC. Most of these other games, especially UE5 games, don't necessarily present graphics that justify the much higher requirements.

Nothing is more annoying than someone probably going out to buy a $2K to $3K GPU, only to find themselves STILL struggling to play these games, but now being $2-3K in the hole. It's misleading if not outright false advertising. Don't ask people to have better specs if meeting the recommended requirements doesn't even guarantee PLAYABLE performance half the time, nevermind FPS in the 120+ range.

Originally posted by Iggy Wolf:

Originally posted by Bind0fGod:

UE5 is a next gen engine.
This problem is at both ends.
Could devs design games from low end specs up instead of the other way around? Sure.
But people with 3060s really should know what to expect when buying a UE5 game at this point.

The matter isn't helped by the chorus of devs and consumers saying the game engine doesn't matter and critics "don't know what they are talking about"

It gives people hope that somehow the NEWEST UE5 game WILL run great on their quickly aging budget PC

I don't expect new UE5 games to run necessarily well on aging budget PCs. I'd like to think the chorus of people with 4070s and 4090s and 5080s and 5090s complaining are the ones' who's opinion is most valid, since they bought top of the line hardware only to STILL get questionable performance. So far, only Alan Wake 2 could be said to actually justify its requirements, looking like an actual next gen game that will only run well on a future PC. Most of these other games, especially UE5 games, don't necessarily present graphics that justify the much higher requirements.

Nothing is more annoying than someone probably going out to buy a $2K to $3K GPU, only to find themselves STILL struggling to play these games, but now being $2-3K in the hole. It's misleading if not outright false advertising. Don't ask people to have better specs if meeting the recommended requirements doesn't even guarantee PLAYABLE performance half the time, nevermind FPS in the 120+ range.

It's about expectation Versus reality.
People with 4090 and 5090s complain for the same reason I did when I bought a brand new 2080ti and Jedi Fallen order still only ran at like 70FPS on MAX settings.

Some games / engines just don't fill 144hz/240hz monitors and when you spent 3 grand on a card that can be hard to accept.

it comes down to people actually understanding their own parts and the technology used to build their games.
Something console users don't really have to worry about, And to be frank a huge portion of PC users are console refugees these days

Originally posted by Bind0fGod:

It's about expectation Versus reality.
People with 4090 and 5090s complain for the same reason I did when I bought a brand new 2080ti and Jedi Fallen order srill only ran at like 70FPS on MAX settings.

Some games / engines just don't fill 144hz/240hz monitors and when you spent 3 grand on a card that can be hard to accept.

I mean, we're talking about playable performance. Not uber 144hz/240hz. That's why I said playable as opposed to high frames. Even so, the bigger issue is the stutters and lack of stable frames. I could personally accept something being locked to 60 FPS, if it stays locked, stable, and doesn't stutter or lag.

I think if the worst that defined the previous gen PC ports was simply low FPS regardless of specs, then that was STILL more preferable if that low FPS was at least stable and could be locked, vs new gen games that now struggle to even allow you to scale the settings to match one's own limited hardware and expectations. Basically, people could simply lower settings then to achieve more playable performance. Now, it's like "have the best GPU or get ♥♥♥♥♥♥ because we couldn't be bothered to make the game playable at low or medium settings for weaker hardware".

At this point, people could simply say "Well, then I'll just simply buy a console to play the game". And you might say "Well, sure, have at it. PC gaming's not for you then." But that has NEVER helped make the argument FOR PC gaming. Especially when people are trying to dispel that whole "PC Master Race" argument that tends to make PC gamers look bad. Cause right now, console gamers could easily point and say "Yeah, well at least my ♥♥♥♥ WORKS compared to your stuttering PC crapbox".

Originally posted by DoomsDay:

maybe developer do get commission from graphic card and CPU manufacturers for every unoptimized game they publish,

or maybe its hardware retailer nesting on every topic about bad optimization, and making advertisement.

this, without this people will not buy new GPU each year

Originally posted by Iggy Wolf:

Originally posted by Bind0fGod:

It's about expectation Versus reality.
People with 4090 and 5090s complain for the same reason I did when I bought a brand new 2080ti and Jedi Fallen order srill only ran at like 70FPS on MAX settings.

Some games / engines just don't fill 144hz/240hz monitors and when you spent 3 grand on a card that can be hard to accept.

I mean, we're talking about playable performance. Not uber 144hz/240hz. That's why I said playable as opposed to high frames. Even so, the bigger issue is the stutters and lack of stable frames. I could personally accept something being locked to 60 FPS, if it stays locked, stable, and doesn't stutter or lag.

I think if the worst that defined the previous gen PC ports was simply low FPS regardless of specs, then that was STILL more preferable if that low FPS was at least stable and could be locked, vs new gen games that now struggle to even allow you to scale the settings to match one's own limited hardware and expectations. Basically, people could simply lower settings then to achieve more playable performance. Now, it's like "have the best GPU or get ♥♥♥♥♥♥ because we couldn't be bothered to make the game playable at low or medium settings for weaker hardware".

Expectation Versus reality again.
30 FPS is still console standard .

Most of these games are built for consoles.

The reason some PC games scale so well is they are on engines that are designed to scale on purpose.
UE5 is not. This is known.
Anyone buying a UE5 game should know that unless they are using Framegen they are going to get stutters.

It's been this way for a dozen releases.
Anyone who buys a UE5 game at this point and expects different is at fault.
Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice.... shame on me.

Originally posted by Bind0fGod:

Expectation Versus reality again.
30 FPS is still console standard .

Most of these games are built for consoles.

The reason some PC games scale so well is they are on engines that are designed to scale on purpose.
UE5 is not. This is known.
Anyone buying a UE5 game should know that unless they are using Framegen they are going to get stutters.

It's been this way for a dozen releases.
Anyone who buys a UE5 game at this point and expects different is at fault.
Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice.... shame on me.

On that, we agree. I personally do not think anyone should be going into this with anything less than the expectation that the game WILL run poor until if and when the industry manages to somehow optimize the engine itself that future titles don't end up being a question mark with every new release.