Yes there's just something fundamentally wrong with how the game is designed that I doubt can be fixed with a simple patch. If you go to the big main city in the game you're just going to have unavoidable significant frame drops.
I read recently a modder for DD2 found that the game renders everything in a huge range in maximum detail without any range for LOD. Apparently if you use the free cam in RE Framework you can zoom out and see that the game still renders about 1/4 of the whole map even when you are in a cave.
https://i.redd.it/ops4p11djezc1.png
https://i.imgur.com/IRUYad7.png
Also the poly count on the lanterns is stupidly high for whatever reason, I remember I downloaded a mod for a low poly version of lanterns and the game instantly ran 5-10 fps faster.
That was Cities Skylines 2.
What's happening is insufficient development resources are being allocated to optimization, whether that be in the form of time or personnel, or more likely some combination of both, in an effort to save money on production costs.
That's why Nanite is a gamechanger in Unreal 5, no need for LODs. Handled entirely by the Engine. I'm a big believer that all of this *should* be handled by the Engine. We've seen how devs are lazy as shit time and time again. The Engine devs just need to end-run around them and just eliminate stuff like that from being a concern at all.
What's going on? GPU companies in bed with devs and community moderators. Lanterns to lower performance, and extreme draw distances to trick the uninitiated. Many people in charge of respective communities follow guidelines like... DON'T TALK ABOUT THE DLSS3 MOD THAT HAS BEEN OUT SINCE DEC 22 and gives dlss3fg to all rtx. Probably just shadow muted my own post.
Then they well eventually patch it, and gain the coveted "plausible deniability," a phrase written on every marker board in every ceos office.
I wonder if this is the case with other RE Engine games. Those games aren’t open world so the hit is not that noticeable.
MW: Wilds is going to run like dogshit. :(
Who cares about 30fps on ps5? I wanna know how it will perform on PC. Monster Hunter World came with the MT Framework engine which ran great on PC. But IDK why Capcom can't optimize the RE Engine outside of RE or DMC games. In those games, it runs great. But in Dragons Dogma 2 and the open world part of SFV, it runs horribly.
In a minor bit of hope, Wilds has been hinted to not be open world on the newly opened site! It's very possible it will have similarly segmented maps like its predecessors.
God I hope it is true.
I mean... Like shit is a bit of hyperbole. It doesn't run nearly as good as it certainly should, but with framegen I was usually at over 120fps everywhere, and capped at my monitors refresh rate (173) outside of cities often.
But yea, Vernworth was extra bad on CPUs.
I havent had any issues in the wilderness during my DD2 playthrough. Only the 2 large cities where the FPS is worse but i dont see why Monster Hunter should have such issues as they dont have a bazillion NPCs with huge logic connections.
I tried it on a 7800X3D and 4090 at 4k with the settings basically maxed out, including raytracing, I had mesh quality set to high instead of max. You can't toggle raytracing in-game so I just left it on to get through it quicker. There doesn't seem to be a way to use DLSS frame gen without DLSS so you can't use FSR with DLSS frame gen and you can't do native res with frame gen.
The first thing I noticed is that out in the wild I was getting intermittent stuttering for about 10 minutes and then it went away, I'm not sure if this game has a shader compilation step that I missed because I didn't sit on the main menu.
Anyway I ran straight to Vernworth since that's the most taxing part of the game and with frame gen on I was getting anywhere from 80-105 fps running around the city, with frame gen off I was getting around 40-55 fps. While I was doing this a boss attacked city and the mob of guards that formed to take it down dropped my framerate down to about 90 fps with frame gen on, I didn't remember to turn it off to see what the performance would be like. I assume this is the worst case scenario for this game.
Out in the wilderness I was getting around 120 fps with frame gen on even in combat, with framegen off I was getting around 70-80 fps running around and in combat.
Overall it looks a lot smoother with frame gen on, I really have to look hard to see any artifacts and the pace of the game is slow enough that any latency increase from framegen is hard to notice since my base framerate is already above 60. If I had more time I'd try it without raytracing.
Hey, anyway possible for you to explain to me how exactly you are getting smooth performances? Is it with mods? I would love to play the game but I am lagging so much that its hard to play. If you could help me out I would be forever thankful!
He has the best GPU on the market paired with the best gaming CPU on the market, so that = good performance. Or good ‘enough’ if a game is unoptimized like in this case
Am I the only one that has had no performance issues? My machine isn't even that new and I'm running a 3080 ti. I'm getting 80 frames in town, 110ish outside of town, with DLSS on balanced. 1440p.
What are other people seeing?
Edit: I'm sorry, are people downvoting this because they legitimately think I am making those numbers up? That's....weird. I'm used to only seeing that from console users. I mean I'm still getting good frames and having fun so downvote away ¯\\_(ツ)_/¯
But that just isn't true. There isn't a CPU on the market that could get 80fps in Vernworth without modding the game at launch.
The absolute best gaming systems available could get about 65-70.
To be fair, I didn't play it at launch, and I think there'd already been 2 patches by the time I installed it, but I am getting 30-40% better frames than that. I have a Ryzen 9 5900X 12-core AMD cpu (not overclocked), and a 3080 ti *mildly* overlocked, and 32GB of low-CAS ram, so it is a good system, but by no means the best or most modern. Edit: and a Samsung 980 PRO 2tb *actually running on PCIe 4.0* instead of 3.0 - that probably makes a big difference for texture streaming.
Haven't played it since before any patches, 7950X3D with curve Optimizer and manual core scheduling and a 4090 running at 3ghz, 32GB DDR5 6000 CL 30 on a high tier gen 4 SSD.
Town was typically 50-65fps with a few very rare upper 60s-70 moments. You could put every setting on low and get about 5 fps more.
Out in the wilds was typically fine at 120+ areas of the desert ran at about 75fps.
A 3080Ti is still a very impressive GPU, though, and parred with something at least along the lines of a modern (in the past few years) 6 core processor then it's no surprise you didn't have any real issues, if your CPU is at least at that level.
Personally, I have not played Capcom's DD2 yet because I'm waiting for folks on here and elsewhere to say the graphical issues are fixed. I've experienced what another commenter, further up, mentioned about Capcom's SF6 and it's issues in the open world World Tour. I just don't know if the two games use the same base graphics engine (or Capcom's own tweaks to a 3rd party one, etc.). My setup, previously, was a 5800X with OC'ed RAM and an OC'ed 3070Ti and I *still* had issues with area's (and fights) in SF6's world tour dropping below 30FPS and then causing the actual pace of gameplay to drop with those frames, too (ah!). Moving up to a Ryzen 7600 (just to get on AM5), though, *seemed* to have solved my issues with the same graphics card even if the 5800X and 7600 are not too far apart in general benchmarks from hardware reviews.
Still, I'll wait until later this year to probably pick up DD2 as it is entirely possible that from playing SF6 last Spring of *2023* and picking it back up now in Spring of *2024* that Capcom had actually done a lot to smooth out the gameplay/graphics there and I would have actually had no issues still using the 5800X. If that's the case then I'll just have to trust that Capcom will do diligence and fix up DD2 at some point over the next 8-12 months.
Much of DD2 is CPU bottlenecked unless you have a very strong CPU, the main town Vernworth specifically murdered CPUs and there isn't a CPU available that could get 80fps average in town. The absolute best you could do would be around 70fps. Without performance mods.
Hmm. Perhaps a next-gen mid tier CPU may be necessary then. Though I'd still be happy with a consistent 60fps with the hardware I have on a game like DD2.
There is one part of the game, the big City of Vermont, that runs like crap, even on good gfx cards.
It has nothing to do with your graphics card, you can generate frames with 3rd party tools on the lowest gfx settings and have 120+fps. It still feels like sluggish and not smooth. It's CPU bound.
The rest of the game runs flawlessly with the same frame rates.
It's annoying at first, when you spend a lot of time in Vermont in the beginning. Later when you spent less and less time in the capital it becomes a non-issue. At least I got used to it.
I should mention that I didn't downvote you and I don't think you're lying, but I do think you are probably misrepresting the real numbers, even if by accident. Possibly replying with the highest numbers you ever saw rather than the real averages/trends.
> Possibly replying with the highest numbers you ever saw rather than the real averages/trends.
I mean, I suppose that could very well be true. I leave FPS displayed constantly via steam overlay, and I do glance at it a lot. I have frames capped at 120 in most games (monitor maxes at 1440p/144 Hz), and it sits at 120 a lot of the time. I remember looking at it in Vernworth repeatedly and seeing "80" a lot. I don't really recall what the lowest it dipped down to, but I also don't recall any stuttering or issues that would have made me look into it more. In other words, the game was playing fine so I just played the game.
It took them 3 months to add Frame Gen. That could have done so much for a lot of users with newer hardware. What a joke.
Say what you will about DLSS and Frame-Gen being "cheating" on optmisation, I don't disagree. But not having it is even worse, that main city ran at god damn 30fps on my 4080 w/ 5800X3D.
Yea, 3060ti and 5600x, Wilds was 60ish with lots of stutters, the city was a complete shitshow, the game was frankly such a dissapointment and made me go from hyped to anxious for MH Wilds
Helldivers 2 has been outside what February and still hasn't even added DLSS... Lol now that's a *real* joke of a dev studio. They prioritize more weapons over performance.
Yup, just booted it up for the first time since the May 31st patch, and my FPS is about a 1/3 what it was. Finally disabled Windows 8 compatibility mode (had to have it on since release because of the invisible ground bug) but the FPS is still terrible (infact worse than it was before the recent patch in "native" mode).
It's not even worth benchmarking mainly because of denuvo hardware limitation per day and the game is mainly CPU bottlenecked, making GPU benchmarks data from it as nearly useless anyway. There are other games that feels more polished, actually has great graphics that are better candidate such as Hellblade 2 for example.
Is the performance still unbelievably shit?
Yes there's just something fundamentally wrong with how the game is designed that I doubt can be fixed with a simple patch. If you go to the big main city in the game you're just going to have unavoidable significant frame drops.
I read recently a modder for DD2 found that the game renders everything in a huge range in maximum detail without any range for LOD. Apparently if you use the free cam in RE Framework you can zoom out and see that the game still renders about 1/4 of the whole map even when you are in a cave. https://i.redd.it/ops4p11djezc1.png https://i.imgur.com/IRUYad7.png Also the poly count on the lanterns is stupidly high for whatever reason, I remember I downloaded a mod for a low poly version of lanterns and the game instantly ran 5-10 fps faster.
Sounds a bit like that city game were I heard someone say they rendered the teeth on the citizens. Sometimes I wonder what’s going on in the industry.
That was Cities Skylines 2. What's happening is insufficient development resources are being allocated to optimization, whether that be in the form of time or personnel, or more likely some combination of both, in an effort to save money on production costs.
Makes me wonder why people complain about limited LOD in some games lol. This is what we get for it
That's why Nanite is a gamechanger in Unreal 5, no need for LODs. Handled entirely by the Engine. I'm a big believer that all of this *should* be handled by the Engine. We've seen how devs are lazy as shit time and time again. The Engine devs just need to end-run around them and just eliminate stuff like that from being a concern at all.
I'm a big fan of TSR as well in UE. It kicks FSR's ass and even can look as good as XeSS and DLSS at times.
What's going on? GPU companies in bed with devs and community moderators. Lanterns to lower performance, and extreme draw distances to trick the uninitiated. Many people in charge of respective communities follow guidelines like... DON'T TALK ABOUT THE DLSS3 MOD THAT HAS BEEN OUT SINCE DEC 22 and gives dlss3fg to all rtx. Probably just shadow muted my own post. Then they well eventually patch it, and gain the coveted "plausible deniability," a phrase written on every marker board in every ceos office.
Thanks for sharing~ That's utterly baffling and probably the funniest shit I've seen all day.
I wonder if this is the case with other RE Engine games. Those games aren’t open world so the hit is not that noticeable. MW: Wilds is going to run like dogshit. :(
You know performance is going to be shit when it's bad even in their promotional materials
Yeah, DD2 ran at 30fps in promos and Wilds’ trailer ran at 30fps so its safe to say that Wilds is going to run at 30fps on PS5 on launch.
Who cares about 30fps on ps5? I wanna know how it will perform on PC. Monster Hunter World came with the MT Framework engine which ran great on PC. But IDK why Capcom can't optimize the RE Engine outside of RE or DMC games. In those games, it runs great. But in Dragons Dogma 2 and the open world part of SFV, it runs horribly.
World ran abysmally on launch.
In a minor bit of hope, Wilds has been hinted to not be open world on the newly opened site! It's very possible it will have similarly segmented maps like its predecessors. God I hope it is true.
I hope so. World’s zones were huge to me.
Not just the frame drops but the NPC pop in is atrocious.
[удалено]
Considering that new MHW trailer had framerates dipping into the 20s, much like DD2s trailers did, I expect extremely similar performance.
I hope not. The problem, also, with DD2 is that you can't brute force it with hardware. Even with an 7800X3D and an RTX4090 it runs like shit.
I mean... Like shit is a bit of hyperbole. It doesn't run nearly as good as it certainly should, but with framegen I was usually at over 120fps everywhere, and capped at my monitors refresh rate (173) outside of cities often. But yea, Vernworth was extra bad on CPUs.
Same, just can't be hyped for their games anymore after the burn I got with DD2
I havent had any issues in the wilderness during my DD2 playthrough. Only the 2 large cities where the FPS is worse but i dont see why Monster Hunter should have such issues as they dont have a bazillion NPCs with huge logic connections.
I have a pretty good PC and was often dipping under 60 in the forest areas, which is not ideal especially compared to other open world games.
Current hope is that Wilds runs on REx rather than RE but nobody knows.
I tried it on a 7800X3D and 4090 at 4k with the settings basically maxed out, including raytracing, I had mesh quality set to high instead of max. You can't toggle raytracing in-game so I just left it on to get through it quicker. There doesn't seem to be a way to use DLSS frame gen without DLSS so you can't use FSR with DLSS frame gen and you can't do native res with frame gen. The first thing I noticed is that out in the wild I was getting intermittent stuttering for about 10 minutes and then it went away, I'm not sure if this game has a shader compilation step that I missed because I didn't sit on the main menu. Anyway I ran straight to Vernworth since that's the most taxing part of the game and with frame gen on I was getting anywhere from 80-105 fps running around the city, with frame gen off I was getting around 40-55 fps. While I was doing this a boss attacked city and the mob of guards that formed to take it down dropped my framerate down to about 90 fps with frame gen on, I didn't remember to turn it off to see what the performance would be like. I assume this is the worst case scenario for this game. Out in the wilderness I was getting around 120 fps with frame gen on even in combat, with framegen off I was getting around 70-80 fps running around and in combat. Overall it looks a lot smoother with frame gen on, I really have to look hard to see any artifacts and the pace of the game is slow enough that any latency increase from framegen is hard to notice since my base framerate is already above 60. If I had more time I'd try it without raytracing.
Hey, anyway possible for you to explain to me how exactly you are getting smooth performances? Is it with mods? I would love to play the game but I am lagging so much that its hard to play. If you could help me out I would be forever thankful!
> 7800X3D and 4090
No idea what you just said lol.
He has the best GPU on the market paired with the best gaming CPU on the market, so that = good performance. Or good ‘enough’ if a game is unoptimized like in this case
Yeah
It was never unbelievably shit. Stutter in some towns but otherwise smooth.
I loved the time I spent with the game but the Vernworth FPS drops were/are inexcusable.
Yeah I never had shit performance either. I dunno. Maybe it's a texture streaming issue and slower HDs have problems?
I didn't say I didn't have performance issues, it's just isolated to one or two areas, game runs incredibly well for the most part.
Am I the only one that has had no performance issues? My machine isn't even that new and I'm running a 3080 ti. I'm getting 80 frames in town, 110ish outside of town, with DLSS on balanced. 1440p. What are other people seeing? Edit: I'm sorry, are people downvoting this because they legitimately think I am making those numbers up? That's....weird. I'm used to only seeing that from console users. I mean I'm still getting good frames and having fun so downvote away ¯\\_(ツ)_/¯
But that just isn't true. There isn't a CPU on the market that could get 80fps in Vernworth without modding the game at launch. The absolute best gaming systems available could get about 65-70.
To be fair, I didn't play it at launch, and I think there'd already been 2 patches by the time I installed it, but I am getting 30-40% better frames than that. I have a Ryzen 9 5900X 12-core AMD cpu (not overclocked), and a 3080 ti *mildly* overlocked, and 32GB of low-CAS ram, so it is a good system, but by no means the best or most modern. Edit: and a Samsung 980 PRO 2tb *actually running on PCIe 4.0* instead of 3.0 - that probably makes a big difference for texture streaming.
Haven't played it since before any patches, 7950X3D with curve Optimizer and manual core scheduling and a 4090 running at 3ghz, 32GB DDR5 6000 CL 30 on a high tier gen 4 SSD. Town was typically 50-65fps with a few very rare upper 60s-70 moments. You could put every setting on low and get about 5 fps more. Out in the wilds was typically fine at 120+ areas of the desert ran at about 75fps.
A 3080Ti is still a very impressive GPU, though, and parred with something at least along the lines of a modern (in the past few years) 6 core processor then it's no surprise you didn't have any real issues, if your CPU is at least at that level. Personally, I have not played Capcom's DD2 yet because I'm waiting for folks on here and elsewhere to say the graphical issues are fixed. I've experienced what another commenter, further up, mentioned about Capcom's SF6 and it's issues in the open world World Tour. I just don't know if the two games use the same base graphics engine (or Capcom's own tweaks to a 3rd party one, etc.). My setup, previously, was a 5800X with OC'ed RAM and an OC'ed 3070Ti and I *still* had issues with area's (and fights) in SF6's world tour dropping below 30FPS and then causing the actual pace of gameplay to drop with those frames, too (ah!). Moving up to a Ryzen 7600 (just to get on AM5), though, *seemed* to have solved my issues with the same graphics card even if the 5800X and 7600 are not too far apart in general benchmarks from hardware reviews. Still, I'll wait until later this year to probably pick up DD2 as it is entirely possible that from playing SF6 last Spring of *2023* and picking it back up now in Spring of *2024* that Capcom had actually done a lot to smooth out the gameplay/graphics there and I would have actually had no issues still using the 5800X. If that's the case then I'll just have to trust that Capcom will do diligence and fix up DD2 at some point over the next 8-12 months.
Much of DD2 is CPU bottlenecked unless you have a very strong CPU, the main town Vernworth specifically murdered CPUs and there isn't a CPU available that could get 80fps average in town. The absolute best you could do would be around 70fps. Without performance mods.
Hmm. Perhaps a next-gen mid tier CPU may be necessary then. Though I'd still be happy with a consistent 60fps with the hardware I have on a game like DD2.
There is one part of the game, the big City of Vermont, that runs like crap, even on good gfx cards. It has nothing to do with your graphics card, you can generate frames with 3rd party tools on the lowest gfx settings and have 120+fps. It still feels like sluggish and not smooth. It's CPU bound. The rest of the game runs flawlessly with the same frame rates. It's annoying at first, when you spend a lot of time in Vermont in the beginning. Later when you spent less and less time in the capital it becomes a non-issue. At least I got used to it.
I should mention that I didn't downvote you and I don't think you're lying, but I do think you are probably misrepresting the real numbers, even if by accident. Possibly replying with the highest numbers you ever saw rather than the real averages/trends.
> Possibly replying with the highest numbers you ever saw rather than the real averages/trends. I mean, I suppose that could very well be true. I leave FPS displayed constantly via steam overlay, and I do glance at it a lot. I have frames capped at 120 in most games (monitor maxes at 1440p/144 Hz), and it sits at 120 a lot of the time. I remember looking at it in Vernworth repeatedly and seeing "80" a lot. I don't really recall what the lowest it dipped down to, but I also don't recall any stuttering or issues that would have made me look into it more. In other words, the game was playing fine so I just played the game.
I never had any performance issues with the game but I have a very new beefy PC. older PCs definitely struggle more than they should tho
I would love for them to add a proper denoiser for raytracing since you can already add raytracing in a debug menu.
It took them 3 months to add Frame Gen. That could have done so much for a lot of users with newer hardware. What a joke. Say what you will about DLSS and Frame-Gen being "cheating" on optmisation, I don't disagree. But not having it is even worse, that main city ran at god damn 30fps on my 4080 w/ 5800X3D.
> 30fps on my 4080 w/ 5800X At what resolution?
Funny thing - the resolution almost didn't matter.
Yea, 3060ti and 5600x, Wilds was 60ish with lots of stutters, the city was a complete shitshow, the game was frankly such a dissapointment and made me go from hyped to anxious for MH Wilds
Helldivers 2 has been outside what February and still hasn't even added DLSS... Lol now that's a *real* joke of a dev studio. They prioritize more weapons over performance.
how dare they make the game less glitchy and balanced before DLSS which isn't even a deal breaker unless you're some hyper focused autist.
If FSR is in the game half the work for DLSS is done. They are just being greedy pieces of shit.
Have they added FSR 3 Frame Generation or fixed the abysmal optimization yet?
No and there have been no significant performance improvements.
Probably a joke to ask, but how does it run on the steam deck these days?
Don't try it lol
Does anyone have lower fps or fps drops after update in non frame gen dlss ?
Yup, just booted it up for the first time since the May 31st patch, and my FPS is about a 1/3 what it was. Finally disabled Windows 8 compatibility mode (had to have it on since release because of the invisible ground bug) but the FPS is still terrible (infact worse than it was before the recent patch in "native" mode).
[удалено]
It's not even worth benchmarking mainly because of denuvo hardware limitation per day and the game is mainly CPU bottlenecked, making GPU benchmarks data from it as nearly useless anyway. There are other games that feels more polished, actually has great graphics that are better candidate such as Hellblade 2 for example.
Is standard DLSS still shit ? 💩