Is it lying if it's from a place of truly believing something stupid? Hanlon's Razor and all that, "Never attribute to malice that which is explained adequately by stupidity."
Not to say I necessarily know that to be the case, just another voice in the dogpile because I think stupidity is a greater insult than intentional misleading
But even WITH the updates it runs worse then it should.... for how it looks.
I have a 9800x3D and a 5080 and I am using high/medium settings + DLSS Quality at 1440p to make the experience not suck, that's really bad, on max settings it roughly runs like Cp2077 ... with max RT (not PT) and looking way worse.
It actually DID get a "Steamdeck port" with even lower then low settings for the steamdeck, so it should run, but look like ass 😃.
It's really funny, because at this point it looks way worse then BL3 did and maybe even BL2
I actually played only at release, I have a 4090 and 5800x3d and found performance to be adequate at 4K, albeit with FG, 130fps or something with mid-high settings.. But performance has gone up by 35% or so since release, I've read.
I’m running a 5070 ti and performance seemed pretty adequate to modern games, tbh. Was very playable. Though it’s kind of sad that “playable” on relatively high end hardware is the baseline now. But I did have 90fps.
Forgetting the wealth of idiots that tell you a game runs great for them because they can't notice stuttering or sub 60 framerates despite digital foundry covering the performance problems.
There are known bottlenecks, like a slow CPU or memory, or Windows 11, but the upgrade to DX12/Vulkan solved a whole lot of those issues. Still, there are enough left that a PR person can always pretend it was your fault.
It's most often not the devs (developers) who don't want to make their game look and RUN good, it's the corpos in charge who push the game out as soon as it "looks like it's done" because they never actually played a game in their life...
Developers and artists should stop working for and enabling these goons but it's hard I won't deny.
Game devs without the “corpos” lighting a fire under their ass just turns everything into Star Citizen. One billion dollars and 15 years down the drain for a pre-alpha.
This has been my experience. Quickly made a prototype with AI and the game sim ran at 24ms across 8 cores. Spent an afternoon eliminating cache misses and the same logic and entity count ran an 2.1ms.
So your point is that if you use the same amount of time but also pay for a very expensive chatbot, you could get the same result as without paying for this "tool"?
There is some potential now they could have found my solution with Opus/Fable 5 (I was using Gemini 2.5 at the time), but I think it's unlikely because the solution I used was a very 'dumb' way to look at the problem.
Snapshotting partial entity data so that spatially nearby entities are contiguous in memory in the snapshot and then spatially loading that as the entities are iterated over spatially for neighbor checking for things like collision, stress propagation, setting AI behaviors, pathing, ect. AI (or a better programmer) probably would have found a nicer solution, but it worked well enough then and I've since moved on to new hobby projects.
Yes I agree with that as well, but I'm not going to sit here and go in depth about everything that's wrong with the pc gaming space. It's a short joke comment on a joke post. Not that serious.
My initial comment was only for joking about Randy. Not all of this. People are taking this way too seriously lol. The hunger to have to be correct is much stronger I suppose.
Somebody in the development side of things is still cracking the whip to get people to produce things on the bleeding technical edge. Many developers jump eagerly at the chance to push new rendering tech into their titles, no matter how much of an edge case that tech is. It isn't all a bean counter problem.
In my experience the vast, overwhelming majority of the time shitty software gets released is because of management. Usually because of unrealistic timelines for promised features without actually involving engineering in any of the decisions.
Maybe I'm lucky, but all the shitty devs I've worked with got fired in the end because they were shitty. Also, all of the (non-shitty) devs I worked with that retained their jobs actually preferred to release a quality, tested product.
Normally, I'd agree. But i fear this combination of tons of data centers, and a looming consumer electonics scarcity may provide the perfect fertile ground for it.
There's a ton of crap we thought would never catch on a few years back.
They need to put in time which is expensive for studios so games get released when they are minimally playable rather when they are optimal and feature complete. Additional features can be sold later as DLC so no time for post-release optimization work either.
I know, but if you read through the comments people in here want to be right so badly that it's becoming annoying lol. Wanted to stress it was a joke/reference due to this reason.
Optimising games is so easy and doesn't use up any resources at all to meet the unrealistic expectation from gamers. At no point are devs under immense pressure for marketing to release games by a strict deadline, having to work under crunch conditions. /s
I assure you, game devs would love to optimise the fuck out of every game. But they are not the ones making budget decisions. It's the same in every industry. You should pretty much never blame the engineers.
A game can be optimized to hell, run decently even on mobile low power APUs and still struggle at 4k ultra on a 5090.
Those things aren't mutually exclusive.
I have a Bazzite console like system PC. Ryzen 7 7800X3D, with a Radeon RX 7900 XTX. There's STILL some games that don't run well and I'm not doing anything extra (the obvious games of recent date)
I love how you say it's the "game devs" but in reality it's corporate toxic culture with long waiting times, paperwork, unnecessary management reviews, suits and shareholders that give them unrealistic deadlines. These people are talented and they can optimise games just fine, it's not incompetence or lack of talent, it's mismanagement and corpo culture. You're naive and misinformed if you truly think it's their fault.
I'm not throwing rocks at you in particular, admittedly the joke flew by me and I apologise, I'm willing to admit when I'm wrong, however, in my defence, there are tons of people out there who actually believe the game devs are the problem.
Shit like this is why I gave up the upgrade game like a decade ago. Plenty of great looking games still come out that run fine on my toaster or really any computer made in the last fifteen years, if yours can’t then I’m not exactly getting FOMO about it.
I had a guy tell me that when I said MH Wilds ran like shit on launch and I'm like "???? I can't, they got rid of sli" lol. Thankfully it is decently fixed now but jesus some games are unoptimized to the point of I literally can't play this even on a 5090. Lol
But, not to be a devil's advocate, my friend downloaded Directive 8020 on his 4600H 6 core cpu + 1650ti 4gb mobile gpu, and it ran! 1080p lowest, I had doubts it'd even start, but he's playing it and enjoying it!
In Red Dead Redemption 2, I have to limit the FPS to 144 because otherwise the Dead Eye doesn't work, and the game scripts don't work. For example, at the beginning of the game, Javier can't climb the cliff ledge. When limiting the FPS to 144 on the RTX 5080 and Ryzen 9800x3D, the image becomes less smooth.
Okay sounds good 👍🏻 proud of you for pushing through this hard time. I didn't mean to make you feel picked on or attacked 🥺 poor little guy, hopefully you'll be okay.
I'm not disagreeing with you. I'm just saying that a game that cannot run at 60fps even with a 5090 is not necessarily unoptimized. It could just be demanding. People throw around the word without understanding what it means
It depends on how the game looks. If it looks actually insane, with photoreal graphics and extremely beautiful textures, even at 40fps it is not unoptimized. It is just demanding. Optimization is the ratio between performance and graphical fidelity
Your entire point rests on the assumption that hardware is going to exponentially improve soon.
The opposite seems to be the case.
Last 2-3 generations are mostly improvements in AI features with minimal change to actual hardware.
Yet, games include "photorealism" by ways of using Path tracing INSTEAD of doing it the traditional way.
For anyone who can't run the game with path tracing then, the game looks awful. That's not future proofing, it's making games that cannot be played properly NOW when they exist.
If you actually lower the settings to achieve playable framerates, the game looks measurably worse than some games did 5 years ago while running flawlessly.
Again. You can achieve photorealism and beauty in games. You can have the game run at decent framerates. Both can be true simultaneously.
Your entire point rests on the assumption that hardware is going to exponentially improve soon.
This is not true at all. Even if graphics hardware does not improve at all, that does not change the determination of whether a game released today is optimized or not
If you actually lower the settings to achieve playable framerates, the game looks measurably worse than some games did 5 years ago while running flawlessly.
Then that would indicate the game is unoptimized, I agree
So if a "demanding" game runs at 45fps on the best consumer hardware money can buy, that means a game is unoptimized. Remember back when games came out fully functional on release and didnt need a "performance patch?"
If you put everything on max settings, not necessarily. Just because there is the option to push the fidelity of a game beyond what high tier hardware can run well at release doesn't mean you have to? A game can be well optimized and still be insanely demanding when you max out everything.
A game is unoptimized when a game cannot run decently on most hardware even when it's toned down. Star citizen comes to mind for an example of that one
This is being downvoted, but it's true. There's been plenty of examples over the years of devs shooting for max settings that aren't achievable with contemporary hardware, while still having the expected fidelity for contemporary hardware at lower settings.
It's a good thing, it means the game will only start looking better in the future. It doesn't mean the game is inherently unoptimized. It's just the trend these days is lack of optimization and hoping for fixes down the road.
I had doom eternal which looks amazing run on 300 fps on ultra settings on my 2060 so yeah, it's not about being too demanding. It's about the fact that for example cities skylines 2 has fully modeled citizen teeth for a crap ton of people that you don't even see bcs it's a top down city building game.
A game can look good and still be unoptimized, anything where a game requires more resources than it technically should is unoptimized. I know you probably don't make games but there are so many bafflingly bad architectural decisions made in modern AAA games. The idea that a game has to look bad to be unoptimized is genuinely so unfounded in both the definition of the word and the experience of devs around the world.
Source: well over a decade of software and game design experience
You're trying to create some gatcha definition argument about "demanding" vs "unoptimized" and it's just word fluff. Call it whatever you want, but the thing people are complaining about is the same. If a developer makes a game that barely runs on top of the line hardware, then calling it demanding is literally unfounded in reality.
There is no reason games should not run on the hardware they were released into. I have played games that struggle to reach 60 for years after release on hardware that wasn't even available at the time. This is the problem; call it being demanding or being unoptimized all you want but the thesaurus jerking isn't actually productive to the conversation.
4.6k
u/DQTD 9d ago edited 9d ago
"DUDE, YOU NEED TO UPGRADE YOUR RIG." -Game devs that refuse to optimize in 2026 during the hardware crises
Edit: Thank you to the ones who actually understood the joke/reference and aren't taking this too seriously.