Current Generation Games Analysis Technical Discussion [2024] [XBSX|S, PS5, PC]
- Thread starter Shifty Geezer
- Start date
davis.anthony
Veteran
I wonder if the game includes a new launcher?
Which could be a decent size itself depending on how much bloat it has.
Which could be a decent size itself depending on how much bloat it has.
Frenetic Pony
Veteran
They didn't include the texture upscaling tech in the PC version? 
raytracingfan
Newcomer
I doubt it would have performed well on a GTX 1060 or RX 5500XT, there must be a reason it's only used on the PS5 version and not the PS4 as well.They didn't include the texture upscaling tech in the PC version?
It's highly optimized for the PS5 hardware. And even there (with ~20TF FP16 compute available) it's very costly IMO for the results.
Last edited:
raytracingfan
Newcomer
In order for the various exotic compression solutions without universal hardware support to take off, I think Steam and other PC game storefronts will have to implement a feature where different assets can be installed depending on the user's hardware.
This will never happen.
Frenetic Pony
Veteran
It's just for higher settings (4k textures) so running on lower end hardware is irrelevant.
But now that I look at the exact difference in size, 84GB for PS5, it may just not be compressed at all (modern game compression is often around 2x).
Possibly a strategy to lower CPU requirements, but if so it's a shit stupid one. Far more people will be put off by a 190gb install size, especially as people without the CPU grunt will also likely not have the drive space at the same time.
It's not going to be 190GBs.. it'll require that to unpack.. but not for the game itself.
edit.. well damn, checking some of my installed PS Studios games on Steam and while they're definitely less.. it's not substantially so. So yea, you're probably right. :/
It's where I'd say that most implementations add little to nothing, and of the situations where it really offers significant visual improvements, the demands for getting those improvements are typically quite steep.
I know they'll do another video talking about the performance costs, but that's really where most people's issues are. It's obvious ray tracing can offer some nice enhancements visually and I think it's reasonable to expect we'll get more games using it better going forward, and more games using it by default(as we'll have with most UE5 games, for instance), but I think the opinion of ray tracing among gamers is not going to drastically change til either the demands of having ray tracing go down significantly, or the price of good hardware that can run it without heavy compromises goes down significantly. Neither of which I'm sure are all that likely going forward.
I dont want to turn this into a topic about whether we can get notable increases in performance per dollar in the future, but at the same time, I dont think we can really discuss the future of ray tracing and how people will perceive it without addressing this question. I really do think it's the most critical part of the situation. Even today, I think people would think better about ray tracing were something like the 4070Ti called a 4060Ti instead for $400. Suddenly, ray tracing with good resolution, overall settings and performance doesn't seem so out of reach, does it? But this isn't reality. And I'm not sure when that kind of performance will be available for $400.
Ya, the titles that show a worthwhile improvement are few and far between. Metro Exodus EE is probably still my personal favorite. I would even put it ahead of Cyberpunk I think. The problem is the high base cost of adding RT. So when you have just a single effect that was bolted on as an afterthought, you will usually end up with something unimpressive.
There are games that always use raytracing. This applies in particular to games with Unreal Engine where ray tracing is increasingly becoming the standard.
davis.anthony
Veteran
I always saw ray tracing as being something for developers rather than gamers.
Not having to create light, shadow and reflection maps because you simply turn on ray tracing would be easier and cheaper than having make all that stuff by hand.
Not having to create light, shadow and reflection maps because you simply turn on ray tracing would be easier and cheaper than having make all that stuff by hand.
I mean yes, I did mention that. Doesn't really change what I'm saying though. They have ray tracing by default, but they are also generally very heavy by default as a result. It's still making it difficult for people who dont buy $600+ GPU's to have a decent all round experience. And that's frustrating for a lot of people. I have no doubt that the visual benefits of ray tracing will get better on average over time, but if the demands for it remain high and improvements in performance per dollar on GPU's are minimal or even non-existent as some claim is gonna be the new norm, this is still a really bad situation overall for the large majority of PC gamers.
If ray/path tracing is gonna be the future, we need reasonably priced hardware that can do it without forcing us to revert to last generation resolution/image quality standards and whatnot, ya know? That's not progress, that's just gonna rightfully be seen as a sidegrade. Maybe frame generation can improve heavily and to where 30-40fps can be turned into 60fps without noticeably affecting input lag? I dunno, but as things are going now, it's looking a little bleak.
davis.anthony
Veteran
That has always been the case on PC, there has always been people who don't have the best hardware and don't have a decent experience.
It's nothing new.
Cappuccino
Newcomer
To this day I haven’t seen anything outpace Metro and they optimized it super well, I played it on an Xbox I had at the time and it looked and ran perfectly. PC gets better graphics obviously but 4A did an excellent job there bringing RT to normal folks without 4090s, and this was 2021 back when 3090 tier performance was thousands of dollars on the secondary market.
The ironic thing is they did this while being Nvidia sponsored lol, it’s probably the best running RT title on AMD hardware.
This is absurd nonsense.
We've spent the past 10+ years of PC gaming where you absolutely did not need any kind of high end hardware to have a great overall experience. This is literally one of the biggest reasons PC gaming grew so much from like 2010-2016. You didn't need to buy expensive, high end PC hardware to have a really good experience. The value aspect was excellent and it helped grow the PC market massively because of it.
You're now trying to argue that people who spend say just $250-400 on their GPU were supposedly always getting some 'not decent' experience. Nope. It's exactly opposite. Those people were usually always getting a great experience. It's only more recently where that $250-400 range gets you a 'less than decent' experience, requiring heavy sacrifices in some area or another if you expect to have ray tracing.
It's a whole different world entirely nowadays. For $250-400, you get a lower end GPU that requires heavy sacrifices if you expect to run ray tracing effects. This is not progress.
You may not get raytracing for $400 but raytracing isn’t necessary for a great experience.
Similar threads
- Locked
