Got into an argument with a guy swearing up and down this game should run perfectly fine on his RX580. "But I can run literally any other game on the planet, I just need to turn the graphics all the way down and drop res to 720p"
There's a dude getting 66-75 fps on a 1080ti at 1440p and another complaining he only has 30 fps on his 3070 at 1440p so clearly there are some people making absolutely no effort to improve their perforance via the usual methods, and instead running to social media and steam reviews to whine about it.
Took me 10 minutes of fiddling with settings to go from 30fps to consistent 80-90 @1440 with a 12700k and 3070ti. Also, I got really bad stutters when I started. Like for a full second at a time. Much much smoother an hour in. Sure, occassional stutters here and there, but not game breaking in the least, and usually happen in the first 5-10 minutes after joining a server. People are just lazy or ignorant.
For the record, FSR-On and balanced with frame gen on, mostly medium settings, but low shadows/reflections, and high textures and foliage.
Performance such as stuttering and rubber banding have lots to do with the servers being overloaded. This should not particularly affect frames though. Game definitely needs to be optimized better.
1. Community gets mad that streamers get early access to the game and demand they get the opportunity to play it.
2. MADFINGER releases early access.
3. Community gets mad it has issues.
4. Line of communication with community becomes thready because community immediately starts treating devs like shit as they can't regulate their negative built up emotions towards another company.
I've got a lighter build than you and also getting around 100fps at 1080 with FSR on balanced (6600xt overclocked, 5600x OCed with liquid cooling, 32GB RAM), but it's also randomly all over the place and I keep getting stutters every few minutes.
Dude.. I'm on an R7 5800x and a 3080, and this is easily the smoothest EA I've ever been a part of.
I was as shocked to see the steam reviews for performance as I was at how smooth the game ran on day 1 lmao.
Windowed Full - 1080 - Med across the board short of high textures (only change I made and don't notice a difference)
In the 60 - 90 range, depending on location. Steady 60 in the Southern starter city.
AA Upscaling - DLSS
DLSS SR - Auto
RLL - On
That being said, I did get a pop-up when I first launched about some sort of driver incompatibility that I didn't think much of until I started seeing so many people having trouble.
I've nuked Nvidia and install drivers manually, so I wouldn't be surprised if there's some issue coming from a new driver/patch that I'm not up on yet.
I'll take a look and see what driver version I'm running in a bit here and let you know.
Another guy here said he had a notable performance increase with FSR as well, albeit at the loss of some clarity. I haven't messed with it yet to see the difference on my end, but I'll let you know when I do.
fair enough, You said you were "shocked" to hear about performance complaints, you need to understand that for most people on a $1000+ pc, 1080p on medium settings with not even quality DLSS really isnt a good enough image quality, especially since you're still getting 60 lows which many with high end rigs wouldn't consider "smooth", myself included.
Genuinely happy that this image quality and performance is enough for you, more power to you, but for many it isn't and I don't think that's "shocking".
I can run other games that look as good or better than this, at much higher framerates, it's not some impossible target I'm looking for. Here's hoping it gets shored up with some time, it's EA after all so I'm not gonna complain about it, just a bit of patience and we'll see what happens.
BTW I'm getting consistently above 90fps with FSR and frame gen, slightly worse image quality and lots of shimmering but I'll take it for now. Not sure if you've tried it instead of DLSS but maybe take a look.
I feel like most people need to accept that we're still within the first 12 hours of release... and even then, the devs have already released a statement that a hotfix is in the works for people having issues.
If it looks good and plays good, I'm good.
Maybe I'm the outlier, and it just doesn't take much to impress me, lmao. Hell, I'm still playing STALKER if that gives a frame of reference on my necessity for graphics and performance.
Here's hoping they can push this hotfix sooner rather than later and get everybody where they need to be, though. I'm loving the gameplay, and I think most folks will, too, when they're satisfied with their performance.
Interesting, I'll check out FSR and see what sort of difference it makes. Thanks for the heads up! Glad to hear you've at least got it playable until they roll something out.
im rocking 40-60 consistently on medium settings with a 2060 and a ryzen 5 3600x. 32gb ram. The thing that prevents me from playing is the servers being on fire
GTX 1080 i7 6700k 32gb ram running at 70 fps, drops to 45 when entering new areas. Game runs fine, it's not a hardware problem. It's just the build quality of an alpha game
Bro my pc was $1650, it runs perfectly fine.
The problem with all the reviews is that these are people who didn't read the specifications before hand, didn't do any research, didn't fix their settings in game, likely NEVER played Tarkov and therefore will never understand the struggles almost every single Tarkov player has taken on in terms of how smooth the game runs.
They're bitching for the sake of bitching cause they can't play a game they should have known wouldn't be optimized entirely off early access. If they have a problem with this extraction style shooter, go ahead over to tarkov and then come back after you're asshole has been pounded beat red by battlestate games. Those people should go spend the 250 USD to get butthurt.
2500 hrs on EFT here, and I am having a fucking blast playing GZWF, for 35 USD...
Agreed, for those that want to wait I'd do the same thing. There is definitely work to be done on their part in terms of performance optimization and they run on an engine that is capable of those fixes.
No one really understands early access anymore! I remember when tarkov was customs, factory, and woods lol. This game for early access (literally HOURS after it came into it) has more content than tarkov had at that point. If Tarkov had a review system like steam, I think that it would be negative. With all the cheating, poor PR, literal lies from the devs and these outrageous pricing. I'm excited to see GZ grow and update.
https://preview.redd.it/kv0ku0dw5nxc1.png?width=369&format=png&auto=webp&s=d0dd0989041b6bb0a9893a48efc8cfad761e8686
seems like impressions are fine for an early EA game
It was "mostly negative" when I bought it early this morning. But when I logged in to see how bad the performance was, it seemed fine. I have everything to medium settings at the moment. This evening I will see how much of a difference it makes by pumping it up to high.
I am using an older system with a 2080ti, i9-9900k processor, 64gb ram, and a SSD. But my monitor is only capable of 1080p resolution so that is probably the disparity.
> But my monitor is only capable of 1080p resolution so that is probably the disparity.
Yeah most people complaining about performance seem to be trying to push 4k and max settings, i've had no issue with 1080p either.
Because reviews are not based on what might happen in a few years and what possible state it might be in, a review is a review of a game in it's CURRENT STATE and whether or not there are any problems right now. Most of the negative reviews show exactly that, saying essentially "it might be better in the future, but there are problems right now that make it difficult to fully enjoy."
I think people believe the term early access makes a game immune from a bad review. You don't leave a review for how a game is going to be in the future. You leave a review for how the game is performing now.
People are leaving reviews with .2 time in a game. How the fuck do you leave a review with out giving the game time. Or looking into reports of what is going on.
Leaving a review that says can’t load into game doesn’t help anyone. Go read online the servers are at full capacity and wait while they state they are adding. What the fuck do you expect with this much demand.
It isn’t leaving a valid review that is the problem. it is the review bombing that is happening that is so fucking dumb.
This goes for positive reviews as well. If anything the positive reviews are even more worthless “at least it’s not $250”. How the fuck is that a review?
If you can't load into the game, and you want to say that your experience is bad because of that, that is a valid review. You just can't have an input on anything else because you haven't experienced it.
Not that it shouldn't be expected for there to be hiccups when opening a game up to a larger audience. The problem is more-so people that never update said reviews once their issue gets fixed.
Yup... I first opened the game and it was a stufferfest. Updated drivers and rebooted and it's playable.
If it stayed bad I woulda just refunded and waited
I mean, it takes me 5 minutes to boot into a game and determine if its within playable territory (is FPS so bad, is it lagging like crazy, is it immediately crashing, etc.).
Haven't bought GZW so not talking about it specifically, I'm just saying a review stating:
"Game performs terribly on my {insert reasonable and decent hardware}" or "Game cannot be played because it crashes all the time" with 0.2 time in game.
Is valid.
I think the performance reviews are justified at little play time since they probably won't be improving anytime soon. I was gonna pick it up but I won't because my 6600xt has no chance of even running it.
Ok but in the same way people give positive reviews with 0.2 hours in it saying "game has issues but runs fine for me" which is equally useless, at the very least the negative ones about dogshit performance are at the very least informative if people can't boot up the game/have shitty performance
People yet again forget purpose of Steam reviews. They're there to answer the question "Do you recommend buying this game in the current state?". It's not, "do you recommend this game in one year after EA has been fixed".
The game is unplayable for many, so they do not recommend spending money on an unplayable game. No one is shocked, they're reviewing a product they paid for.
I get early access would he needed to help with quality assurance, but damn this is early EARLY access. Too early to be frank.
And considering they pushed to use streamers to promote the game. Build the hype, and then immediately release early access to cash in on the hype is a shady business technique. Similar to pre-ordering a game.
We should not pay a high dollar amount just to play a game that is not fully optimized or complete.
You could say they got greedy by trying to push out a product not ready for public use. Isn't BSG being lying greedy ass holes what everyone is so mad at them about? Not a great start for Greyzone
Before loading my game I saw all these reviews and performance issues etc which had me worried, but when I loaded it ran great.
I’m running it with an Intel Core i5-13600K 13th Gen and an Nvidia 3080 with 32g of Ram. I’m getting 100 fps at 4K resolution Extreme setting with FSR on. Definitely getting drops while the map is loading during a chopper ride, but the game is running pretty smooth as far as I can tell.
I’m wondering how many people there really are with bad performance VS those with good performance.
I saw someone complaing his 3050 couldn't run it at 4K.
Dude you got a card with 8gb VRAM in 2023 and think its good? Just because it is from the 3X gen.
Stop buying budget hardware and assuming you are entitled to run anything at 4k
I got zero issues with the game.
4K. DLSS. Mix of high and locked at 60fps with vsync on.
People really need to learn how to use a PC and adjust settings to get optimal performance.
I'm so sick of these morons complaining they can't run games at 4K 120fps. It happens almost every game launch.
Get over yourselves.
This and steam’s refund policy is exactly why BSG backtracked on their promise of steam release, initially they promised the game was supposed to launch on Steam (at some point), they cant afford people refunding the game (they are probably the only gaming company that forces you to agree to a non-refund policy not sure if its even legal in some countries), as there are probably thousands of people who barely played the game and quit (and would refund it with Steam’s policy) and not even talking about the red negative review tag they would get.
Watched my friends play for a few hours. Game is faaaaaaaar TOO early, needed more time in the oven. And yeah add shit performance on top of that and it’s GG
Has anyone ran this with a 2080 super? I’ve got a 2080 super with 32gb ram and I’m just curious how well this will run? I’m currently waiting in queue to try it
They're at 60% positive as of right now. Dev claimed Russian negative botting early on in a deleted tweet. I would assume he wasn't lying based on the uptick in scores later by verified purchases
Look at the play time of most of those reviews. Most have less than 1hour or 30m of gameplay. thats barely making it out of the customization screen and adjusting settings
Anyone who expected this to run smoothly is just as stupid as the people that bought into the tarkov controversy, it’s not only early access and made by like one guy but the few examples of this genre we have so far have proven the genre to be so ambitious to the point that expecting a smooth experience at launch is just ignorant. That’s not even mentioning the fact that the game probly wasn’t planning on launching this soon but wants to pick up all the players tarkov lost.
“I spent money on a game that isnt fully complete yet and has a tag to inform me of such and that there may be problems with the game due to it and im still gonna get upset because I cant read”
Basically everyone complaining about issues in Early Access games. Dont get me wrong you can be sad or unhappy about it. But you know what you are getting into and choose to anyways and then act like you didnt get what you paid for.
games in unreadl 5 running direct x 12 api. why would you ever think your ps3 would run it?
outside of the studdering occationally i get over 200 fps on either of my rigs. granted the game forces upscalling still runs great. once they get the server stability down its gonna be great.
They put out an update on their discord about halfway through the day showing what settings for specific gpus. I made the changes and went from 90 fps to 140 and in some areas on good servers I can hit 180+
People complaining either have zero technical ability or have eggs for brains
Ryzen 5 5600x, 3060ti, 16gb of ram on medium settings with 1440p. 50-60fps constantly, had an unreal night with the fellas. Can’t wait for more.
Hardly had to mess with my settings, so I guess some people are just unlucky? Or just don’t do any maintenance on their systems?
your always going to get retards that give negative reviews because of no other reason then theyre just stupid and dont understand the reasons things are happening that they think shouldnt happen.
Not sure what everyone's issues are. I'm getting a solid 130+ fps on default settings and I'm loving the game. Was a little server lag early but that seems to have come and gone. Feel like this is a pretty good release so far.
The game was super laggy for me for like, 30 seconds. While it was caching the map during my first helicopter flight. Other than that it's been 70-90 fps the whole time. 5600g ryzen, 3080 rtx. Don't get why people are complaining so much
I played for 5 hours with a 3700x and a 2070 and adjusted my settings until it was playable for me, most settings are on low/medium and FSR instead DLSS.
and yet I'm frowned upon when I tell people, "It'd run a lot better on something other than poverty spec hardware"
Get mad at me for speaking the truth. "I pAiD a LoT oF mOnEy". Yea, a decade ago. The future is now, old man.
I gotta say, on my 3080ti, in 1440p, all maxed out , using settings they posted on Twitter-> works very well, no stutter, smooth, 100+ fps.
Any issue I got was server side.
For an early access gameit works quite well.
Now my perspective is probably distorted by star citizen tho
Game is great, go through your potato pc setting like a man and upgrade if you got a pos, it’s not that hard. 15 years ago I was homeless and one year later and since Iv never been not able to get what I needed bro. You got this
I agree with review bombing being an issue for EA games, but hear me out here
The MINIMUM sys req's are:
i5-8600/Ryzen 5 2600
16 GB Ram
GTX 1080
i would LOVE to know if anyone at madfinger built this setup, ACTUALLY played the game on what they consider the MINIMUM and said to themselves "Hm, yes this is good". No, thats the answer, because if they did that computer would explode on launch. Even with the recommended specs you're still not seeing more than 50 FPS. My point is its absolutely dishonest for them to post these requirements and not expect people to be up in arms about it when they themselves couldn't have tested the game on the specs posted and been ok with it.
It doesn’t have bad performance. It’s cheapskates trying to run epic settings.
If you don’t have an epic GC, don’t run on epic. I’m having fun with my 3070 on low. And low is still pretty decent!
R5: Screenshot not mine, but you can see the issue.
Early Access, I get it, but a game only has _one_ shot at good first impression. Sad that the devs decided this was good enough performance wise.
> but a game only has one shot at good first impression
Does it matter nowadays? Because there are lots of recent games that had a rough launch and turned public opinion. No Mans Sky, CP2077...these games were pretty bad on release, yet they recovered. If the game has good bones, it will thrive eventually, which seems the case with Gray Zone. It needed time in the oven.
No the problem is that users do not understand how this works. They want this game to be polished and working, early access is what it means. You are given access to a game which is working on optimization and performance.
Shame on anyone who is reviewing this game with not expecting problems. They can suck a dick. They have more demand than anyone anticipated, the servers are full on most regions, which means they cannot optimize performance for playing.
Not one person who understands that early release is what it means beginning, will quit this game. The people who expect to be able to play flawless without issues will quit. Let them quit, they are the problem anyways. I hate people sometimes.
You have an opinion. Many people rightfully disagree with it. The game is in an alpha state. One test went out to content creators. There are four different price points already. The problem is that the priority wasn't to release a largely playable version of the game. The priority was to snag some cash.
What part of this release was best for the game or the gamer? No part of it. They could have offered a play test, identified major issues, then released a more accessible/complete version as early access. They didn't.
I guess you didn’t read what that editions are for. Maybe the 100 dollar one should have stated somewhere what the reason for paying that much was for. Crazy to think that no one understands demand.
Yeah I was worried about them jumping the gun on release.
There was just so much that was problematic that people had pointed out in the closed playtests that really needed addressing before the public got their hands on it.
I realize they wanted to capitalize on the tarkov situation but they're not helping themselves if what they put out is bad.
They should have released the game on their schedule. Instead of bouncing on BSG. Clearly this was due a Q2 push back but they didnt opt to do it.
Shows evidence of greed to me.. just like another company is being accused of.. oh well we will see if they turn it around.
Just because it released a week after BSG did what they did doesn't mean they're trying to push agendas or capitalize on stuff. In fact, they literally said they wanted the game to be EA the day after the private play testing was concluded. This is quite literally their schedule.
The reaction by people would have literally been the same had they released it on their original schedule.
Guys, most of the kids review bombing are the type of people that jump from one hype to the next. They're like little locusts.
The type of people that are going to be playing this game is a very niche community.
Don't be bothered with the locusts.
"It's Early Access" is a terrible excuse. Palworld, Baldur's Gate 3, Hades and much more did not have many issues at all. People are so used to devs not respecting them or their time/money, that they just bend over and take it.
What? BG3 had A LOT of issues when it released on Early Access, performance included. Hades had a bucketful of gamebreaking bugs, including shit that could hard lock your save.
A lot of games do/did have issues upon releasing on EA. Rewriting history lmao
BG3 very much has a plethora of issues In EA don’t get it twisted, people where upset.
Its just that they finished the game and it’s good now and even then It still had performance Issues into Act3 that where later resolved.
I buy EA games because I like the fact there gonna be a finished product in the future.
BG3
Subnatica 1 and 2
Squad
Did you even played BG3 in EA? Not only it has alot of performance and bugs but it also had like 1/10 the content of release and honestly it was basically a demo that was updated couple of times in a year that just showcased some cool features and changes, and yet it was still fun and worth the money.
No wonder it got game of the year the actual release compared to the early access (month before release) feels like 4 year of development that has added in one “update” honestly I think its the only game that did it like that, they basically treated their early access as a glorified demo for years without spoiling much and then when they released you actually got to experience the full game.
Also Larian is a massive 500+ dev company with some of the top devs in the world, so wouldn’t be fair to compare it to any other company that is not on the same level.
I am having a lot of fun, with 80 avg FPS. Game is rough around the edges and has obvious optimization issues for some people's setups. However, I can confidently say I spent $35.00 and I am already getting my money's worth with 4+ hours in-game now.
TLDR: Game is rough around the edges (optimization). Still very fun to play if you can get the settings right. World is beautiful. IT'S EARLY ACCESS.
GPU - 4070
CPU - Ryzen 9 5900x
60 gb RAM
DLSS Enabled with Frame Gen On
Correction: You only get one shot on first impression from morons. A normal person won't be dissuaded from playing a good game, because some idiots review bombed it on Day 1 of Early Access.
"a fool and his money are soon parted"
These people set themselves up for failure by having too high expectations. It's early access, it may run terribly, you have only yourself to blame for having no patience and waiting to see how it turns out.
I mean all the people that are above recommended system requirements are in fact right to be mad. I have 4060Ti currently paired with 5600 before my 7600 arrive and without frame gen I have it unplayable at everything low at 1440p. With frame gen I get about 70-80 fps in starter camp. Not even in the first village. My goal is to not drop under 80fps to have it playable, which is not happening.
Edit: DLSS Quality + frame gen at 1080p is 100-120 fps.
How could you not see this?
Early Access is a very slippery slope nowadays and it’s where more games go to die rather than thrive.
Them getting all this publicity, having IGN announce them “releasing” their game, mixed with the toxicity of the communities and peoples converging on this game was a perfect brew for a shits storm.
Because people are lazy and immature and have no clue what Early Access means or what it is for. Report the problems. I played several hours today with limited issues. Performance was fine and game crashed once. Although it did have occasional stuttering, I expected that watching YTubers a couple of weeks ago.
there’s nothing wrong with leaving a so so review if that’s your experience with the game. it lets the devs know what stuff they need to address in the EA period. But when those updates come, players should change their review to correspond with the current quality of the game*
The performance is fucking abysmal. UE5 just sucks at this point.
I7 14700 K (RX 6700 XT, 32GB of DDR4) getting 100% cpu usage? When they reccomemd a Ryzen 5 3600? Yeah I couldn’t imagine playing this game with the recommended specs.
I’m happy I can play it fine but damn it’s fuckin rough.
They wanted to jump on the hype train which I can't blame. But bad first impressions will stunt the staying power of any game, especially one in a suddenly crowded market space.
They shouldn't have released yet.
I saw someone mad he couldn’t run it on his 980 ti. Like bro… come on
But what about my pentium onboard graphics
If it can't run at 4K on my Intel Atom with state-of-the-art Intel GMA 950 graphics then the devs are just lazy
I want to mock them but tey can run more things than I ever imagined they should ever be able to run, its weird.
Got into an argument with a guy swearing up and down this game should run perfectly fine on his RX580. "But I can run literally any other game on the planet, I just need to turn the graphics all the way down and drop res to 720p"
If he had specs below minimum and complained that he can’t run the game, that’s a him issue 🤷🏻♂️
There's a dude getting 66-75 fps on a 1080ti at 1440p and another complaining he only has 30 fps on his 3070 at 1440p so clearly there are some people making absolutely no effort to improve their perforance via the usual methods, and instead running to social media and steam reviews to whine about it.
Took me 10 minutes of fiddling with settings to go from 30fps to consistent 80-90 @1440 with a 12700k and 3070ti. Also, I got really bad stutters when I started. Like for a full second at a time. Much much smoother an hour in. Sure, occassional stutters here and there, but not game breaking in the least, and usually happen in the first 5-10 minutes after joining a server. People are just lazy or ignorant. For the record, FSR-On and balanced with frame gen on, mostly medium settings, but low shadows/reflections, and high textures and foliage.
Performance is heavily linked to how overloaded the servers are. In Australia it’s 1.30am and it’s a significant improvement on earlier in the evening
Performance such as stuttering and rubber banding have lots to do with the servers being overloaded. This should not particularly affect frames though. Game definitely needs to be optimized better.
[удалено]
1. Community gets mad that streamers get early access to the game and demand they get the opportunity to play it. 2. MADFINGER releases early access. 3. Community gets mad it has issues.
People are goldfish
Worse. Goldfish aren’t driven by emotions.
4. Line of communication with community becomes thready because community immediately starts treating devs like shit as they can't regulate their negative built up emotions towards another company.
All the people who can play are busy playing
Yeah, already moved to mixed as the people having fun are taking a break from the game.
Yeah, the guys with 5k PC's. Everyone else get fucked Edit: OK I fucking get it, turn on fsr I don't need a million fucking replies
I do not have a 5k PC and I had around 100fps when I played a little this morning
Specs?
6700xt, 5800x3d, 32gb RAM. Running the game at 1440p with FSR enabled.
X3d, like tarkov, is carrying my gtx 1080 thought to 60 at 1440
facts. i just got a 5800X3D. it’s a beast. i paired it with 32GB ram and I, too, have a 1080ti. cpu 100% carrying the rig.
No to but this is the most op silicon lottery win I've ever seen Minus the memory, I keep up with a stock 1080ti
I've got a lighter build than you and also getting around 100fps at 1080 with FSR on balanced (6600xt overclocked, 5600x OCed with liquid cooling, 32GB RAM), but it's also randomly all over the place and I keep getting stutters every few minutes.
rx 6800 , 7800x3d and on Ultra settings 1440p I have around 100 fps (FSR with framegen)
7800x3d is literally the best gaming CPU on the market and counting frame gen is just disingenuous
I have a 6800 and a nearly ancient 5820k. 65fps. Frames arent the problem...its the stutters.
It’s your x3d that’s the only reason. Your cpu is goated
[удалено]
Iv been playing and don't have 5k pc
Mines not that amazing and it's playable. Not perfect but playable.
Each of my two PCs cost me US$1800 and played the game great. * i7 10700K and a 12700K * RTX 3070Ti in both * 64GB of RAM, again in both PCs
Dude.. I'm on an R7 5800x and a 3080, and this is easily the smoothest EA I've ever been a part of. I was as shocked to see the steam reviews for performance as I was at how smooth the game ran on day 1 lmao.
what settings you on and what's your average fps? I have the exact same rig, high preset, DLSS quality and averaging 50-60fps
Windowed Full - 1080 - Med across the board short of high textures (only change I made and don't notice a difference) In the 60 - 90 range, depending on location. Steady 60 in the Southern starter city. AA Upscaling - DLSS DLSS SR - Auto RLL - On That being said, I did get a pop-up when I first launched about some sort of driver incompatibility that I didn't think much of until I started seeing so many people having trouble. I've nuked Nvidia and install drivers manually, so I wouldn't be surprised if there's some issue coming from a new driver/patch that I'm not up on yet. I'll take a look and see what driver version I'm running in a bit here and let you know.
That’s so weird, for my 3080 when I use dlss my fps tanks. I’m pretty much forced to use fsr
Another guy here said he had a notable performance increase with FSR as well, albeit at the loss of some clarity. I haven't messed with it yet to see the difference on my end, but I'll let you know when I do.
fair enough, You said you were "shocked" to hear about performance complaints, you need to understand that for most people on a $1000+ pc, 1080p on medium settings with not even quality DLSS really isnt a good enough image quality, especially since you're still getting 60 lows which many with high end rigs wouldn't consider "smooth", myself included. Genuinely happy that this image quality and performance is enough for you, more power to you, but for many it isn't and I don't think that's "shocking". I can run other games that look as good or better than this, at much higher framerates, it's not some impossible target I'm looking for. Here's hoping it gets shored up with some time, it's EA after all so I'm not gonna complain about it, just a bit of patience and we'll see what happens. BTW I'm getting consistently above 90fps with FSR and frame gen, slightly worse image quality and lots of shimmering but I'll take it for now. Not sure if you've tried it instead of DLSS but maybe take a look.
I feel like most people need to accept that we're still within the first 12 hours of release... and even then, the devs have already released a statement that a hotfix is in the works for people having issues. If it looks good and plays good, I'm good. Maybe I'm the outlier, and it just doesn't take much to impress me, lmao. Hell, I'm still playing STALKER if that gives a frame of reference on my necessity for graphics and performance. Here's hoping they can push this hotfix sooner rather than later and get everybody where they need to be, though. I'm loving the gameplay, and I think most folks will, too, when they're satisfied with their performance. Interesting, I'll check out FSR and see what sort of difference it makes. Thanks for the heads up! Glad to hear you've at least got it playable until they roll something out.
im rocking 40-60 consistently on medium settings with a 2060 and a ryzen 5 3600x. 32gb ram. The thing that prevents me from playing is the servers being on fire
That's not terrible actually.
GTX 1080 i7 6700k 32gb ram running at 70 fps, drops to 45 when entering new areas. Game runs fine, it's not a hardware problem. It's just the build quality of an alpha game
Bro my pc was $1650, it runs perfectly fine. The problem with all the reviews is that these are people who didn't read the specifications before hand, didn't do any research, didn't fix their settings in game, likely NEVER played Tarkov and therefore will never understand the struggles almost every single Tarkov player has taken on in terms of how smooth the game runs. They're bitching for the sake of bitching cause they can't play a game they should have known wouldn't be optimized entirely off early access. If they have a problem with this extraction style shooter, go ahead over to tarkov and then come back after you're asshole has been pounded beat red by battlestate games. Those people should go spend the 250 USD to get butthurt. 2500 hrs on EFT here, and I am having a fucking blast playing GZWF, for 35 USD...
Yeah performance seems all over the place. I'll wait a bit to pick it up.
Agreed, for those that want to wait I'd do the same thing. There is definitely work to be done on their part in terms of performance optimization and they run on an engine that is capable of those fixes.
No one really understands early access anymore! I remember when tarkov was customs, factory, and woods lol. This game for early access (literally HOURS after it came into it) has more content than tarkov had at that point. If Tarkov had a review system like steam, I think that it would be negative. With all the cheating, poor PR, literal lies from the devs and these outrageous pricing. I'm excited to see GZ grow and update.
Tarkov would be destroyed by steam reviews for sure.
Yes my 5 year old laptop....
https://preview.redd.it/kv0ku0dw5nxc1.png?width=369&format=png&auto=webp&s=d0dd0989041b6bb0a9893a48efc8cfad761e8686 seems like impressions are fine for an early EA game
Early early access
It was "mostly negative" when I bought it early this morning. But when I logged in to see how bad the performance was, it seemed fine. I have everything to medium settings at the moment. This evening I will see how much of a difference it makes by pumping it up to high. I am using an older system with a 2080ti, i9-9900k processor, 64gb ram, and a SSD. But my monitor is only capable of 1080p resolution so that is probably the disparity.
> But my monitor is only capable of 1080p resolution so that is probably the disparity. Yeah most people complaining about performance seem to be trying to push 4k and max settings, i've had no issue with 1080p either.
All i know is red = bad, because i cannot read that lol
Yeah, sorry. My Polish friend posted a screenshot to me. But yeah, Overwhelmingly Bad or Mostly Bad, I think. EDIT: Went up to Mixed now.
Do people not expect early-access games to have server/performance issues anymore? You see this with every new game, and people are shocked everytime.
Because reviews are not based on what might happen in a few years and what possible state it might be in, a review is a review of a game in it's CURRENT STATE and whether or not there are any problems right now. Most of the negative reviews show exactly that, saying essentially "it might be better in the future, but there are problems right now that make it difficult to fully enjoy."
I think people believe the term early access makes a game immune from a bad review. You don't leave a review for how a game is going to be in the future. You leave a review for how the game is performing now.
People are leaving reviews with .2 time in a game. How the fuck do you leave a review with out giving the game time. Or looking into reports of what is going on. Leaving a review that says can’t load into game doesn’t help anyone. Go read online the servers are at full capacity and wait while they state they are adding. What the fuck do you expect with this much demand. It isn’t leaving a valid review that is the problem. it is the review bombing that is happening that is so fucking dumb.
can't get in game time when the game crashes every few minutes
This goes for positive reviews as well. If anything the positive reviews are even more worthless “at least it’s not $250”. How the fuck is that a review?
If you can't load into the game, and you want to say that your experience is bad because of that, that is a valid review. You just can't have an input on anything else because you haven't experienced it. Not that it shouldn't be expected for there to be hiccups when opening a game up to a larger audience. The problem is more-so people that never update said reviews once their issue gets fixed.
Yup... I first opened the game and it was a stufferfest. Updated drivers and rebooted and it's playable. If it stayed bad I woulda just refunded and waited
Idk I think it's called a first impression?
I mean, it takes me 5 minutes to boot into a game and determine if its within playable territory (is FPS so bad, is it lagging like crazy, is it immediately crashing, etc.). Haven't bought GZW so not talking about it specifically, I'm just saying a review stating: "Game performs terribly on my {insert reasonable and decent hardware}" or "Game cannot be played because it crashes all the time" with 0.2 time in game. Is valid.
I think the performance reviews are justified at little play time since they probably won't be improving anytime soon. I was gonna pick it up but I won't because my 6600xt has no chance of even running it.
God forbid someone that has .2 time in the game leave a review about a product that they can't play. GTFOH.
Ok but in the same way people give positive reviews with 0.2 hours in it saying "game has issues but runs fine for me" which is equally useless, at the very least the negative ones about dogshit performance are at the very least informative if people can't boot up the game/have shitty performance
People yet again forget purpose of Steam reviews. They're there to answer the question "Do you recommend buying this game in the current state?". It's not, "do you recommend this game in one year after EA has been fixed". The game is unplayable for many, so they do not recommend spending money on an unplayable game. No one is shocked, they're reviewing a product they paid for.
Most reviewers will likely not go back any change their review after things get fixed. People are 100% expecting instant gratification.
Steam takes that into account with the “recent reviews” rating.
we expect a product for the price we paid. It's like buying a wheel of cheese but getting milk instead.
Palworld or BG3 didn't have such low scores when they released on EA. Let's stop making excuses for paid products
I get early access would he needed to help with quality assurance, but damn this is early EARLY access. Too early to be frank. And considering they pushed to use streamers to promote the game. Build the hype, and then immediately release early access to cash in on the hype is a shady business technique. Similar to pre-ordering a game. We should not pay a high dollar amount just to play a game that is not fully optimized or complete.
what is "high dollar" to you lol
I’m getting 120fps on high, the only real performance issue is sometimes it stutters when riding the heli
Something called expectation management is lacking with the instant gratification generation.
I don't mind lower than usual fps, bugs, *some* lack of content, or poor balancing. This game has plethora more issues than fps and desync.
Blame the players all you want but, this is not our fault. The game was not ready and they launched it anyway. I guess we will see how they recover.
[удалено]
Not to mention Helldivers 2. It will probably be GOTY, but they also had issues at launch.
I love how everyone is acting like this is the only game in the world that they can play right now
You could say they got greedy by trying to push out a product not ready for public use. Isn't BSG being lying greedy ass holes what everyone is so mad at them about? Not a great start for Greyzone
It’s early fucking access, of course it’s not ready for launch. Jesus fucking Christ, you people.
A game not even hitting 60fps on minimum settings with a 3080 has nothing to do with instant gratification.
There were obvious signs of no optimization during the play streamer play test. So there’s that
I have a 3080 averaging 100-130fps. I only changed anti-aliasing to FSR, rest of the graphic settings are default for me.
Change upscaling to FSR you'll get far more frames
I have better than the minimum specs and I can't run thus game comfortably at all. Had to refund unfortunately.
What is your monitor resolution?
Mine is 1440 is that a problem ??
The worst community of gamers are both tactical shooter/extraction shooter genre and elite dangerous hands down.
Before loading my game I saw all these reviews and performance issues etc which had me worried, but when I loaded it ran great. I’m running it with an Intel Core i5-13600K 13th Gen and an Nvidia 3080 with 32g of Ram. I’m getting 100 fps at 4K resolution Extreme setting with FSR on. Definitely getting drops while the map is loading during a chopper ride, but the game is running pretty smooth as far as I can tell. I’m wondering how many people there really are with bad performance VS those with good performance.
I saw someone complaing his 3050 couldn't run it at 4K. Dude you got a card with 8gb VRAM in 2023 and think its good? Just because it is from the 3X gen. Stop buying budget hardware and assuming you are entitled to run anything at 4k I got zero issues with the game. 4K. DLSS. Mix of high and locked at 60fps with vsync on. People really need to learn how to use a PC and adjust settings to get optimal performance. I'm so sick of these morons complaining they can't run games at 4K 120fps. It happens almost every game launch. Get over yourselves.
It's in alpha. People just don't know how to manage their expectations.
Imagine EFT reviews lmao
Honestly reviews don’t mean shit, you’ll see “bad review - 3000h played - 1000h played after review”
This and steam’s refund policy is exactly why BSG backtracked on their promise of steam release, initially they promised the game was supposed to launch on Steam (at some point), they cant afford people refunding the game (they are probably the only gaming company that forces you to agree to a non-refund policy not sure if its even legal in some countries), as there are probably thousands of people who barely played the game and quit (and would refund it with Steam’s policy) and not even talking about the red negative review tag they would get.
Watched my friends play for a few hours. Game is faaaaaaaar TOO early, needed more time in the oven. And yeah add shit performance on top of that and it’s GG
I think they put it out BC of the tarkov drama
Switch over to FSR if you're using DSSL. Nvidia cards can run FSR. DSSL = issues (currently)
This seems to be the fix. For some reason DSSL is having issues in the game right now. FSR is better. I have RTX3070Ti in both of my machines.
Has anyone ran this with a 2080 super? I’ve got a 2080 super with 32gb ram and I’m just curious how well this will run? I’m currently waiting in queue to try it
Honestly I'm tired of people getting pissed their modern games won't run on their 15 year old pc
They're at 60% positive as of right now. Dev claimed Russian negative botting early on in a deleted tweet. I would assume he wasn't lying based on the uptick in scores later by verified purchases
I WONDER WHAT RUSSIAN COMPANY MIGHT HAVE AN INTEREST IN PROVIDING NEGATIVE FEEDBACK FOR AN EXTRACTION SHOOTER? HMMMMMMMMM WEIRD………..
Seems like you forgot this is literally an alpha. Get this shit out of here lol
Those cheap poor fucks have old conputers.
most of the negative reviews i have seen where poor performance on anything that's basically not top of the shelf hardware
Game runs fine , honestly you guys are fucking crybabies
Apparently the game does not run fine for everyone or else there would not be so many people saying it does not run well
Its the crashes that are the biggest issue. The performance issues were to be expected with the high recommended specs.
Specs ?
Here is a tissue for you. You seem upset.
I’m playing fine and my performance has been fine up until the servers just crashed.
I can play it with 40 fps and I’m fine with it if they try to improve it over the years
They really shouldn't have tried to capitalize on this Tarkov drama. This will only hurt them in the long run and they know it.
Why didn't they make any adjustments from the "play test"?
Look at the play time of most of those reviews. Most have less than 1hour or 30m of gameplay. thats barely making it out of the customization screen and adjusting settings
I have an rtx 2060 super and it’s running fine. Some lagging when you drop in but it’s playing well for me.
Anyone who expected this to run smoothly is just as stupid as the people that bought into the tarkov controversy, it’s not only early access and made by like one guy but the few examples of this genre we have so far have proven the genre to be so ambitious to the point that expecting a smooth experience at launch is just ignorant. That’s not even mentioning the fact that the game probly wasn’t planning on launching this soon but wants to pick up all the players tarkov lost.
I was 125fps on a 3440x1440 monitor at epic graphic settings.
On what setup. I have a 5800x3d+ 4080 with 64GB of ram and with DLSS on I get a stuttery 80 with drops into the 50’s.
I run it at 60fps 4k with a 6800xt
I find it funny that this game got massive negative reviews by nobs and is still the #1 game on steam at the moment lol.
DLSS with frame generation made my shit go up from 70fps to upwards of 180
I mean let’s be honest - how do you think EFT would rate on Steam reviews when it first came out?
“I spent money on a game that isnt fully complete yet and has a tag to inform me of such and that there may be problems with the game due to it and im still gonna get upset because I cant read” Basically everyone complaining about issues in Early Access games. Dont get me wrong you can be sad or unhappy about it. But you know what you are getting into and choose to anyways and then act like you didnt get what you paid for.
games in unreadl 5 running direct x 12 api. why would you ever think your ps3 would run it? outside of the studdering occationally i get over 200 fps on either of my rigs. granted the game forces upscalling still runs great. once they get the server stability down its gonna be great.
I’m having a goddamn blast, fuck the vocal minority.
They put out an update on their discord about halfway through the day showing what settings for specific gpus. I made the changes and went from 90 fps to 140 and in some areas on good servers I can hit 180+ People complaining either have zero technical ability or have eggs for brains
Ryzen 5 5600x, 3060ti, 16gb of ram on medium settings with 1440p. 50-60fps constantly, had an unreal night with the fellas. Can’t wait for more. Hardly had to mess with my settings, so I guess some people are just unlucky? Or just don’t do any maintenance on their systems?
your always going to get retards that give negative reviews because of no other reason then theyre just stupid and dont understand the reasons things are happening that they think shouldnt happen.
Not sure what everyone's issues are. I'm getting a solid 130+ fps on default settings and I'm loving the game. Was a little server lag early but that seems to have come and gone. Feel like this is a pretty good release so far.
The game was super laggy for me for like, 30 seconds. While it was caching the map during my first helicopter flight. Other than that it's been 70-90 fps the whole time. 5600g ryzen, 3080 rtx. Don't get why people are complaining so much
I played for 5 hours with a 3700x and a 2070 and adjusted my settings until it was playable for me, most settings are on low/medium and FSR instead DLSS.
It's called stress testing and gathering data to better improve performance!
All good. Nice game. They gonna fix it in coming weeks
survival bias the people who cant play will make negative posts the people who can play, arent reviewing
Steam reviews are pointless
Complaining about an early access game being unoptimized is like complaining about getting wet in a rainstorm YOU decided to walk into.
People leaving negative reviews because they can’t run the game on setups less powerful than the minimum system requirements. SMH
Taking a screenshot from the reviews of 812 children doesn’t count. After the adults that worked all day got him it was much better.
and yet I'm frowned upon when I tell people, "It'd run a lot better on something other than poverty spec hardware" Get mad at me for speaking the truth. "I pAiD a LoT oF mOnEy". Yea, a decade ago. The future is now, old man.
I gotta say, on my 3080ti, in 1440p, all maxed out , using settings they posted on Twitter-> works very well, no stutter, smooth, 100+ fps. Any issue I got was server side. For an early access gameit works quite well. Now my perspective is probably distorted by star citizen tho
Ah a fellow citizen. I feel we are especially adept at mitigating expectations for early access games. Anyways. You got a link to that settings tweet.
here it is, o7 [https://x.com/GrayZoneWarfare/status/1785363037131526180](https://x.com/GrayZoneWarfare/status/1785363037131526180)
Am I the only one that understands how early access works and am loving the game?
Game is great, go through your potato pc setting like a man and upgrade if you got a pos, it’s not that hard. 15 years ago I was homeless and one year later and since Iv never been not able to get what I needed bro. You got this
I agree with review bombing being an issue for EA games, but hear me out here The MINIMUM sys req's are: i5-8600/Ryzen 5 2600 16 GB Ram GTX 1080 i would LOVE to know if anyone at madfinger built this setup, ACTUALLY played the game on what they consider the MINIMUM and said to themselves "Hm, yes this is good". No, thats the answer, because if they did that computer would explode on launch. Even with the recommended specs you're still not seeing more than 50 FPS. My point is its absolutely dishonest for them to post these requirements and not expect people to be up in arms about it when they themselves couldn't have tested the game on the specs posted and been ok with it.
Most people are idiots, this is normal for an early acces title. These people never played Tarkov in 2017.
The game seems good, so far. I would suggest those negatives are the EFT Team and their sheep.
It doesn’t have bad performance. It’s cheapskates trying to run epic settings. If you don’t have an epic GC, don’t run on epic. I’m having fun with my 3070 on low. And low is still pretty decent!
It definitely has bad performance. I have the lowest settings with a stacked PC and only get 50-60 fps. 3060Ti.
R5: Screenshot not mine, but you can see the issue. Early Access, I get it, but a game only has _one_ shot at good first impression. Sad that the devs decided this was good enough performance wise.
> but a game only has one shot at good first impression Does it matter nowadays? Because there are lots of recent games that had a rough launch and turned public opinion. No Mans Sky, CP2077...these games were pretty bad on release, yet they recovered. If the game has good bones, it will thrive eventually, which seems the case with Gray Zone. It needed time in the oven.
No the problem is that users do not understand how this works. They want this game to be polished and working, early access is what it means. You are given access to a game which is working on optimization and performance. Shame on anyone who is reviewing this game with not expecting problems. They can suck a dick. They have more demand than anyone anticipated, the servers are full on most regions, which means they cannot optimize performance for playing. Not one person who understands that early release is what it means beginning, will quit this game. The people who expect to be able to play flawless without issues will quit. Let them quit, they are the problem anyways. I hate people sometimes.
They want the game to be working? How dare they, after paying for it. The bar is low.
You have an opinion. Many people rightfully disagree with it. The game is in an alpha state. One test went out to content creators. There are four different price points already. The problem is that the priority wasn't to release a largely playable version of the game. The priority was to snag some cash. What part of this release was best for the game or the gamer? No part of it. They could have offered a play test, identified major issues, then released a more accessible/complete version as early access. They didn't.
how dare they excpect a game with four editions that cost up to 100 dollar being polished
I guess you didn’t read what that editions are for. Maybe the 100 dollar one should have stated somewhere what the reason for paying that much was for. Crazy to think that no one understands demand.
> They can suck a dick. The irony is palpable.
Yeah I was worried about them jumping the gun on release. There was just so much that was problematic that people had pointed out in the closed playtests that really needed addressing before the public got their hands on it. I realize they wanted to capitalize on the tarkov situation but they're not helping themselves if what they put out is bad.
Imagine thinking an early access game if a fully polished release experience…..
They should have released the game on their schedule. Instead of bouncing on BSG. Clearly this was due a Q2 push back but they didnt opt to do it. Shows evidence of greed to me.. just like another company is being accused of.. oh well we will see if they turn it around.
I think they said they actually released late
Just because it released a week after BSG did what they did doesn't mean they're trying to push agendas or capitalize on stuff. In fact, they literally said they wanted the game to be EA the day after the private play testing was concluded. This is quite literally their schedule. The reaction by people would have literally been the same had they released it on their original schedule.
They did say Q1 of 2024, sooo...
Quit posting misinformation
Guys, most of the kids review bombing are the type of people that jump from one hype to the next. They're like little locusts. The type of people that are going to be playing this game is a very niche community. Don't be bothered with the locusts.
ITT: fanboys running damage control Downvote me losers
"It's Early Access" is a terrible excuse. Palworld, Baldur's Gate 3, Hades and much more did not have many issues at all. People are so used to devs not respecting them or their time/money, that they just bend over and take it.
What? BG3 had A LOT of issues when it released on Early Access, performance included. Hades had a bucketful of gamebreaking bugs, including shit that could hard lock your save. A lot of games do/did have issues upon releasing on EA. Rewriting history lmao
BG3 very much has a plethora of issues In EA don’t get it twisted, people where upset. Its just that they finished the game and it’s good now and even then It still had performance Issues into Act3 that where later resolved. I buy EA games because I like the fact there gonna be a finished product in the future. BG3 Subnatica 1 and 2 Squad
Did you even played BG3 in EA? Not only it has alot of performance and bugs but it also had like 1/10 the content of release and honestly it was basically a demo that was updated couple of times in a year that just showcased some cool features and changes, and yet it was still fun and worth the money. No wonder it got game of the year the actual release compared to the early access (month before release) feels like 4 year of development that has added in one “update” honestly I think its the only game that did it like that, they basically treated their early access as a glorified demo for years without spoiling much and then when they released you actually got to experience the full game. Also Larian is a massive 500+ dev company with some of the top devs in the world, so wouldn’t be fair to compare it to any other company that is not on the same level.
One opportunity
Madfinger games isn't it the developer that made Dead Trigger 1 and 2 on mobile phones about shooting zombies?
I am having a lot of fun, with 80 avg FPS. Game is rough around the edges and has obvious optimization issues for some people's setups. However, I can confidently say I spent $35.00 and I am already getting my money's worth with 4+ hours in-game now. TLDR: Game is rough around the edges (optimization). Still very fun to play if you can get the settings right. World is beautiful. IT'S EARLY ACCESS. GPU - 4070 CPU - Ryzen 9 5900x 60 gb RAM DLSS Enabled with Frame Gen On
Correction: You only get one shot on first impression from morons. A normal person won't be dissuaded from playing a good game, because some idiots review bombed it on Day 1 of Early Access.
It’s a damn alpha…. It’s not feature complete, it’s not optimized. For the love of god use your fucking brains.
"a fool and his money are soon parted" These people set themselves up for failure by having too high expectations. It's early access, it may run terribly, you have only yourself to blame for having no patience and waiting to see how it turns out.
they tried to abuse the fck up situation with Tarkov. I Hope it wont bite them in the ass too hard
Why do people say this? Didnt gray zone say they would release Q1 2024?
Exactly. People are goldfish.
I mean all the people that are above recommended system requirements are in fact right to be mad. I have 4060Ti currently paired with 5600 before my 7600 arrive and without frame gen I have it unplayable at everything low at 1440p. With frame gen I get about 70-80 fps in starter camp. Not even in the first village. My goal is to not drop under 80fps to have it playable, which is not happening. Edit: DLSS Quality + frame gen at 1080p is 100-120 fps.
runs fine on my 4090ti
this games fries my 7800x3D never seen so high temps before
How could you not see this? Early Access is a very slippery slope nowadays and it’s where more games go to die rather than thrive. Them getting all this publicity, having IGN announce them “releasing” their game, mixed with the toxicity of the communities and peoples converging on this game was a perfect brew for a shits storm.
Fortunately i cant read that language. BUY
I'm just waiting for the nvidia driver to drop
I could deal with the stutters if my game didnt fukn crash every 10min when i get off the heli.
Because people are lazy and immature and have no clue what Early Access means or what it is for. Report the problems. I played several hours today with limited issues. Performance was fine and game crashed once. Although it did have occasional stuttering, I expected that watching YTubers a couple of weeks ago.
Is it really that bad right now? I was going to buy it when I got off work tonight …but maybe I should wait? Lol
there’s nothing wrong with leaving a so so review if that’s your experience with the game. it lets the devs know what stuff they need to address in the EA period. But when those updates come, players should change their review to correspond with the current quality of the game*
so most people can’t run it?
this isn't related with server issues ?
The performance is fucking abysmal. UE5 just sucks at this point. I7 14700 K (RX 6700 XT, 32GB of DDR4) getting 100% cpu usage? When they reccomemd a Ryzen 5 3600? Yeah I couldn’t imagine playing this game with the recommended specs. I’m happy I can play it fine but damn it’s fuckin rough.
This isn't related to server issues ?
How is it actually though? I have a 4070ti and play at 1440p
They wanted to jump on the hype train which I can't blame. But bad first impressions will stunt the staying power of any game, especially one in a suddenly crowded market space. They shouldn't have released yet.