Blair Witch

Blair Witch

View Stats:
Luca9519 Aug 31, 2019 @ 3:07am
FPS problem
Am i the only one who is having problems with fps?i mean if i put all on ultra i have something like 30 fps and if i put all in low except the scale i go on 44 ?
WTF
< >
Showing 61-75 of 78 comments
abstractrat Oct 30, 2020 @ 4:57am 
Yeahhh, I can't play this game at all.
I got this for free from epic games and I can barely run 20 frames with low everything.
BuBBle.D Nov 18, 2020 @ 1:47am 
Originally posted by ☪︎NickEclipse☪:
Turn OFF LPV, set Shadows to Medium, turn OFF Motion Blur, let everything else to ON and HIGH/MAX, TXAA (FXAA doesn't give better performances), and set resolution to 1600x900 instead of 1920x1080.

This resolution will give a good boost, without having to resort to the awful Half resolution setting. Not optimal, but better than nothing. With this, I can get an average of 50-60FPS with an old GTX 970.

Using an RTX3070 I got around 85 fps at the starting point of the game (at the cars with maps, missing posters, etc.). After trying what NickEclipse wrote(thank you), i.e. - turning off LPS, shadows to MEDIUM, Motion Blur was already off (hate that crap with a passion) and leaving everything else at max, I average around 125 FPS.
Considering the look of the game (it is nothing special) I would have expected better/higher FPS.
Last edited by BuBBle.D; Nov 18, 2020 @ 1:53am
MikeTheLab Dec 29, 2020 @ 10:02am 
Just tried it maxed out on a rtx 3090, i9 10900k, 32gb ram and a good m2 drive (too lazy to write down detailed specs atm) and I'm getting 50fps on 2560x1440 resolution. Changed scalability from uber to full and jumped to 100-120fps. The game looks pretty much the same. What's the point of scalability if it doesn't change anything? :P
eqalidan Dec 29, 2020 @ 10:24pm 
Originally posted by ☪︎NickEclipse☪:
Originally posted by Mike:
Just tried it maxed out on a rtx 3090, i9 10900k, 32gb ram and a good m2 drive (too lazy to write down detailed specs atm) and I'm getting 50fps on 2560x1440 resolution. Changed scalability from uber to full and jumped to 100-120fps. The game looks pretty much the same. What's the point of scalability if it doesn't change anything? :P

If I'm not mistaking, Uber doubles your native resolution. So if you're running 2K native, it will make it 4K. So kind of normal it runs half the framerate, even on an RTX 3090. Game is still badly optimized overall, but since I got an RTX 2070 (versus my old GTX 970), I can pretty much max it on at 60FPS 1080p.

Honestly, i'm not sure on poor optimization given what screenshots look like, but that aside, if it does double the resolution, 4k at least consumer side is 3640x2160 and doubling from 1440 is, 5120x2880 so technically it would be closer to if not 5k.
dakrath Mar 7, 2021 @ 9:17am 
I'm running an AMD R5 3600 with an RX 5700 XT (reference) at 1440p, performance sucks. Drops into the 40s and I'm usually in the 50s.
Last edited by dakrath; Mar 7, 2021 @ 9:18am
MikeTheLab Mar 10, 2021 @ 3:12pm 
Make sure Resolution Scale is NOT set to uber :)
NomNom Mar 15, 2021 @ 7:23pm 
Originally posted by Mike:
Make sure Resolution Scale is NOT set to uber :)
This. Setting the resolution scale to uber makes your FPS commit half suicide.
ThePlayzPaidOff Oct 1, 2021 @ 5:49pm 
Originally posted by robs2010mazda6s:
Originally posted by Shopping Cart:
1920x1080 i think is the default resolution nowadays :/
No, its not.. and you no one should have to (assume that its 1080p) when people can stop being lazy and list the resolution and settings like they use to do before everyone became so incredibly vague.

I have had to ask this many times in the past and when the person answered I would get anywhere from 1080p to 1440p to 4k.. so no.. we shouldnt be expected to assume anything.

...maybe you can try adding some common sense to that shopping cart.

Ngl, this was really dumb to say. 1920x1080 is the nom. 2xxx x xxxx is only for really good pcs with a set up, and anything lower then 1920x1080 is typically because of performance issues.

All in all, if someone was having performance issues its common sense they wouldn't want to be at a high resolution, and if they are already at a low resolution that information would be redundant to you.
ThePlayzPaidOff Oct 1, 2021 @ 8:22pm 
Originally posted by Erebus:
Originally posted by ThePlayzPaidOff:

Ngl, this was really dumb to say. 1920x1080 is the nom. 2xxx x xxxx is only for really good pcs with a set up, and anything lower then 1920x1080 is typically because of performance issues.

All in all, if someone was having performance issues its common sense they wouldn't want to be at a high resolution, and if they are already at a low resolution that information would be redundant to you.
People drive resolutions their hardware isn't capable of all the time. It's important for people to list it and other details.

Even if 1080p is the most common resolution. It is dumb to assume. a good 30+% of Steam has different resolutions than that. Some are running multi-monitor as well which is tracked as a different stat.

You're logic is flawed. You conceded that it is the common resolution and then concluded that therefore you can't assume it is the case.
If someone was in your house taking items and you didn't know them, sure you could conclude that they are just confused and in the wrong house, however it is only logical that they are a thief.

Same situation, if we know X is common, then why would we assume Y. More so, the person I was replying to was condescending being the main reason I even said anything.
ThePlayzPaidOff Oct 2, 2021 @ 1:26am 
Originally posted by Erebus:
Originally posted by ThePlayzPaidOff:

You're logic is flawed. You conceded that it is the common resolution and then concluded that therefore you can't assume it is the case.
If someone was in your house taking items and you didn't know them, sure you could conclude that they are just confused and in the wrong house, however it is only logical that they are a thief.

Same situation, if we know X is common, then why would we assume Y. More so, the person I was replying to was condescending being the main reason I even said anything.
When dealing with performance claims or tech problems only an utter fool would assume.

For one thing not everyone runs thing at their native desktop resolution. For two some settings res scale, SSAA, etc. will vary based on what the "original resolution" is set to. Res scale 2.0 is way different between 1080p and 1440p or any other arbitrary resolution.

And a good 30+% of Steam has different resolution screens. Plus VSR and DSR are things people can and do run higher resolutions than their monitors.

People should ALWAYS give their resolution and specs when discussing performance. It provides a frame of reference to know whether they are underperforming, getting good performance, performing at par, or if their expectations for their hardware is just out of whack.

Only a utter fool would be so fallacious as to generalize a simplistic issue pretending to make a point via implication of a diverse nature.

As said before, if it is less than 1920x1080 its likely not the issue, if its more the person likely set it to that and therefore likely is understanding enough this is a issue on their own. In all of my time talking to support for any game, they never brought up resolution. Obviously the reason for this is most people don't mess with the default resolution and therefore only lower it for additional FPS.

The only way your argument makes sense is if you are assuming people don't have common sense.

Stop fallaciously representing statistics as if it means anything in correlation with your argument. Assuming its correct, 30% of ALL steam users, is not 30% of the player base of this game. Even if it were, you would be safe more then half (70%) of the time assuming X was the case. Again this is not even specifically for this game so that number would likely be 80% of the time at at least. Really all you've done is made the OoO 2.0 argument and in the process shot yourself in the foot. I know you don't have a 0.5 K/D my man, but you don't need to start with yourself.

Again, only person who wouldn't assume someone has normal settings for something as simple as resolution is someone who thinks people are not competent enough to understand the most basic of settings, I for one am not one to demean others indirectly. I am sorry you think of people so lowly and rather than recommending resolution be set to X, go off about how much of a fool you think someone is for not finding it apparent to tell you about something that is rarely set to anything other then Y. :happyzombie:

Last edited by ThePlayzPaidOff; Oct 2, 2021 @ 3:12am
ThePlayzPaidOff Oct 2, 2021 @ 12:27pm 

Originally posted by Erebus:
"So what you're arguing for a future where people don't provide any context for issues and everyone just assumes the "most common" thing? What a colossal waste of time that clown idea would be. It takes no effort to list specs and settings, but trying to troubleshoot or provide context when operating off erroneous assumptions is a nightmare."

MR.STRAWMAN GIVE ME A BREAK, BUM BUM BUM BUM, PLEASE STOP YOUR B***** FOR GOODNESS SAKE, BUM BUM BUM.
Sorry, your strawman reminded me of that song.

Anywho, no, resolution is a special level of obvious, I wasn't talking about anything other then resolution. You are just trying to smuggle in all of that other stuff because you are desperately clinging to destroying my ethos because you realize my logos is sound. In any case, as said before if its X then its not a issue and therefore redundant, if Y then the person set it to Y themselve.

Originally posted by Erebus:
Also people, especially end-users, are generally lacking common sense. It's normal for people to mess with settings they don;t even understand. When SSAA and res scale were new you regularly had people crying about the "1080p performance" unaware that they had the internal rendering res cranked to 4K via those settings.

Im sorry you think so lowly of others, I can't really say much about that. Everyone makes mistakes at some point, best thing to do is to be understanding rather than rude. Its possible to recommend universal settings to X without understanding their resolution.

Originally posted by Erebus:
As for your garbage about "30% of steam users isn't 30% of this user base", while technically true your interpreting it to favor the lame argument you're pushing. For all we know from the forums the majority of this games userbase could fall within that 30%. There is no way to prove or disprove that one without deeper analytics than either of us have access to.

I laughed when you said this, you conceded your argument without conceding your argument. "Ok man, I really hate what you just said, even if it is true, you can't prove it, and even if you are right, you can't prove it therefore stalemate newwb".
Yhea no thats not how that works, its basic math. If 30% of all steam users are doing X, Y, Z, ect they are therefore spread out. I was being generous with 80%. In fact, we can go ahead and look at stats since you like them so much. Steam charts claim themselves, Blair witch has a all time peak of only 2,000 rounded. Therefore its much more likely that of that 30% 0.2 of that can even be logically applicable.



Originally posted by Erebus:
Normal settings isn't a thing. Depending on what the drivers expose and what hardware is present most modern games will set things differently on first boot, some won't even default to native res.

Normal resolution is a thing, and therefore normal settings are a thing. I am specifying resolution because that is what we are talking about, with normal being defined as common.
Modern games with auto detecting software always set the settings to what is recommended for the card, or if they can't then set them to the lowest possible settings by default. Least literally every game I have ever played. (Sad I have to add that last part to avoid you making a dishonest argument.)

Originally posted by Erebus:
The "fool" part is more directed at a particular clown that thinks because they own a 1080p monitor and run everything at 1080p that the other 60 some percent of 1080p owners do the exact same thing. The clown arguing that no one should have to provide this information at all.

You replied but made no refutement, if I just copy and pasted what I just said it would hold credibility still and be a logical reply to what you just said.

Originally posted by Erebus:
By your craptastic "logic" no one should ever have to disclose AMD or NVidia either since there are actually more Nvidia users than even 1080p users, by a decent margin even.

No, by your fallacious assertion that would be the case. I was talking of resolution. Both AMD and Nvidia are very common so you'd of course have to ask depending on what it is.

Originally posted by Erebus:
What purpose does assuming everything actually serve for talking performance or troubleshooting when resolution provides the key context to determine if the performance stated is good, bad, or otherwise. It provides context about narrowing down possible solutions, problem settings, or finding system bottlenecks. Maybe someone has bad perf at 1080p, and gains no perf dropping res lower... that would help point to a CPU/RAM bottleneck or system overhead issue.

That fact that the most of the time people can figure they're own resolution, and if for some reason they can't if they just don't touch the default they typically are fine, and in the rarest case in which they aren't, then most people have the common sense if everything else is lowered to lower the resolution.

Its like asking why is it a bad idea to jump of a cliff, because while sure you might survive jumping off a cliff its unlikely to lead you to a favorable result.
Why would someone constantly walk into a minefield when there is no reason too, that is basically what you are asking me.

Originally posted by Erebus:
At the absolute best by assuming specs/settings if you get it right the other person never realizes the importance of including it and at absolute worst people give faulty suggestions (possibly making things worse) because they made the wrong assumptions.

That best would happen at least 70% of the time according to you, (high then that if we be realistic) because it is the common setting. So ok, now lets look at the worse. I am not even sure how you could do such a thing due to someones res being to high. Sure if the main problem is someones res (which yet again, they would have to manually change 99% of the time to something they can't run and therefore would likely realize it in itself is something they have done wrong.) telling them to set X lower might actually help and allow them to play on that higher res. More so, in the case that it doesn't, the suggestion was still valid, just it wasn't a solution for a specific benchmark of playablity. Meaning it would still help even if it was not the issue.

Again, it is not common for someone to have a stupid high resolution on even high end machines. If someone set res to X, and it was too high then they would likely instantly notice it. If someone set res to y (Y being to low) they would not notice anything other then a much smoother situation. So in the end, the original argument I made answers this question.
Last edited by ThePlayzPaidOff; Oct 2, 2021 @ 12:35pm
ThePlayzPaidOff Oct 2, 2021 @ 12:42pm 
Originally posted by Nicko:
I'll give Erebus reason that posting your specs and what settings you use is important though. Not sure what the point of the other guy is, but necro-ing an old thread to argue this isn't too bright.

Kind of funny and sad at the same time that you guys have to not-so-low-key insult each-others over such minor ♥♥♥♥ though. But be my guest. LOL

Neither of use have insulted the other, at worse we've just been rude to one another. It is so oddly annoying to watch other people complain about two people having a conversation, and then judge those people ignoring the fact that they are now not only contributing to the conversation, but also contributing to prolonging it by getting one of the two people to digress from the original topic AND still only read one persons point of view to understand what they are saying. Like wth.

Anywho, your confused with my position likely because this guy is asserting that I am saying X when I am not. I am not even sure how this started. Someone was being rude to someone, and then this white knight replied to my reply to someone else defending them.

My position was simple, that typically people play on 1920x1080 res, and that OR was stating something dumb by saying that people don't.

Then this guy came out of nowhere as said before and said that is does matter then points out a statistic that benefits my argument of only 30% of people have a different resolution then 1920x1080 while straw maning my position 100 times.

In any case I am only debating this guy because its a hobby to me, and I find it fun.
ThePlayzPaidOff Oct 2, 2021 @ 1:35pm 
Originally posted by Erebus:
Originally posted by ThePlayzPaidOff:
Then this guy came out of nowhere as said before and said that is does matter then points out a statistic that benefits my argument of only 30% of people have a different resolution

67.53% (Steam survey is finally loading again) is far from being "safe to always assume".

You're treating that like it is 90+ percent. It also ignores the fact people don't always run at native solution. Especially after the advent of DSR and VSR, and the increased focus in recent years on upscaling technologies, resolution scale settings, and what not.

Why even argue whatever point you think you are making? It takes someone a mere moment to disclose, and eliminates guesswork. 67/100 is not "almost always" odds. Nowhere near close. And in the last month the 1080p share in the Steam hardware survey dropped by almost a whole %.

Exactly red herring now, reply to my previous argument or don't bother.
Not going to repeat something that I just replied to. Read my argument thats addressed to you, that is sent just recently and you'll find the answer you are looking for.

For someone who totes common sense, you don't seem to be using it.
Last edited by ThePlayzPaidOff; Oct 2, 2021 @ 1:42pm
ThePlayzPaidOff Oct 3, 2021 @ 3:59pm 
Originally posted by Nicko:
LOL Well, maybe that's a hobby to you, but writing novels would probably be a more lucrative hobby for you. I mean, WOW.

I used to write a LOT when I was younger when debating stuff, but you take the cake man. Congrats.

Anyways, I hope this thing is settled now.

Uhm, thank you...?
Only issue with text is sarcasm is hard to figure.
ThePlayzPaidOff Oct 3, 2021 @ 10:51pm 
Originally posted by Nicko:
You're right my lord, my intellect is so small compared to yours, that I really thought wasting your time on trivial ♥♥♥♥ writing novels about it was a real hobby of yours. My bad. LOL

I'm not being sarcastic by the way.

HUFF HUFF HUFF, its too hard to focus rn. Im cracked rn on caffine, and no sleep after just getting done learning a new concept in C++, while learning about coffee and finally finishing some deep life thoughts I had to process and formulate a reply.

Therefore I will just state every interpretation of what I think you said as follows.

1.) Why thank you squire
2.) Thank you but you aren't intellectually inferior
3.) Sure for five dollars
4.) Thats pretty mean
5.) Uhm... ok
6.) I love novels though
7.) I am honored to waste time on other humans, every human is unique and there are so many of them that I will only be able to meet, talk to, and learn about a minority in the majority of them. Therefore, by chance I just so happened to find you, and therefore value our time together.
8.) Fook you mate
9.) This is a hobby
10.) LOL, wait, why are we laughing?

Ok, take whatever reply you think you deserve, and run with that. Im too tired to understand what you mean.
Last edited by ThePlayzPaidOff; Oct 3, 2021 @ 10:53pm
< >
Showing 61-75 of 78 comments
Per page: 1530 50