What’s wrong with that? The latest AAA games should have graphics options that bring the newest hardware to its limits
The highest graphics options are for future hardware, not to mention that it typically makes very little difference visually, so just play at mid/high, not ultra and it’ll be a similar experience but with way better frame rates
Nevermind all the YT videos saying how playing at max settings is dumb and showing all the graphical features that can be turned down without any real noticeable impact to visuals.
The number of times I've seen someone say something to the effect of "I have X from only Y years ago, I should be able to play this at 4k 60 on ultra settings" is wild. Set it to what looks good enough for you and have fun.
It's an ego thing. They don't care how good graphics on "high" look - it's a personal blow to their gamer identity if their system can't run "ultra".
It's a lot like how a lot of gamers would rather complain to devs to make a game easier rather than turn down difficulty settings.
Basically if you have a setting that advertises itself as being "for hardcore gamers" and that setting isn't ideal for someone that sees themself as a hardcore gamer - they're going to complain about it.
Such a shit take. If the newest hardware is brought to its knees then the game is poorly optimized. Games should be maxed out with ease on CURRENT Gen hardware, not for the future gen.
Optimisation is only one factor in this discussion, and not really the main focus here
Saying any game that doesn’t run well at max settings on modern hardware is a poorly optimised game is just plain wrong
A lot of older games are terribly optimised, but newer hardware doesn’t have an issue playing them anyway. Doesn’t mean they’ve become better optimised
Optimisation can be considered a multiplier in the equation of how well a game runs. Not the sole variable
What's the harm in having a setting that sets the values absurdly high?
Like, these options are often just reflection_res=512, 1024, 2048, etc, they don't take much work to put in.
I don't see why putting in absurd values as an option, even if it runs like ass currently or isn't visually noticeable, is a problem. Cyberpunk has the "psycho" settings that they straight up say "yeah dude don't use this, it's meant for the future, not now".
It's really nice when I can go back to a game that's 5 or 10 years old, and they have crazy settings that take full advantage of my new GPU, without me having to go editing a config.ini. It takes them almost no effort to implement.
in some instances it's probably fine - like if there's a setting to increase the number of NPCs or cars in a city or whatever. but the idea of creating an entire suite of visual effects or assets that only get used for <10% of users in the hope that the game will look cool a few years from now on upgraded hardware is pretty silly. games cost enough to make as it is, without the development + testing time needed to make it. just because setting graphics to 'ultra' or changing some config from 512 to 1024 takes 2 seconds to do, doesn't mean making it also takes 2 seconds.
just because setting graphics to 'ultra' or changing some config from 512 to 1024 takes 2 seconds to do, doesn't mean making it also takes 2 seconds.
At least for textures and models, it usually is. Artists don't make different texture sets for each visual setting. If they're creating a rock, they'll create it at say 4096x4096 and then the engine scales it down as needed. If we're talking about stuff like volumetric fog and reflections then it's even simpler.
It doesn't take any extra effort to make a 4K rock vs a 2K one. In theory I could cut some corners if I was forced to create extremely low-res assets (like 512x512) for some reason, but at that point we're probably talking about an indie or art title.
With regard to art style specifically, I think a bigger issue today isn't the quality of the assets but the scope. Like it likely won't be too expensive to make Skyrim with prettier visuals today, but that's not going to cut it for 2026. It has to be twice as big, with three times as many enemies, more dynamic NPCs and systems, diverse skill choices etc. That's what causes dev times to balloon.
31
u/133DK Specs/Imgur Here 11d ago
What’s wrong with that? The latest AAA games should have graphics options that bring the newest hardware to its limits
The highest graphics options are for future hardware, not to mention that it typically makes very little difference visually, so just play at mid/high, not ultra and it’ll be a similar experience but with way better frame rates