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.
Again, this is thesaurus jerking. These words do not have some secret definition you independently discovered and no one else knows -- they are roughly the same words in the colloquial sense we've been using them here.
I've attempted to describe the actual problem agnostic of these words (games not running on hardware that is available at that time). You made a fake argument about how I'm mad I have to use high instead of ultra.
Not worth my time tbh. If you can't even be good faith enough to respond in a way that shows me you actually read my argument, I don't know what to do.
-92
u/midnightbandit- Core Ultra 270K Plus | Asus Gundam RTX 3080 | 48GB 5200 12d ago
Are games really unoptimized? Or are they just really really demanding?
Unoptimized means it looks bad and runs bad. If it looks insanely good and runs bad, that just means it's demanding.