WARNING: This game runs like Hot Garbage on 90% of PCs out there

[King Hadu]

Just an FYI for those thinking of buying this game you can do as I did and get it for $15 on Epic Games they give you a 33% cupon on checkout which brings the price down to $15 and honestly even that is asking too much.

This game if you google any benchmark runs like hot garbage because they used UE5 for marketing purposes and NOT because this game pushes any sort of graphical fidelity.

The end result is having RTX 3090 TI 24GB video cards struggling to meet 45 FPS if you don't have the latest cutting edge to run what is one of the most broken poorly optimized games out there then look elsewhere.

Don't even think about using an Intel ARC GPU because it's literally unplayable

The best bet is wait for this to become FREE On EPIC GAMES store You will have to wait about a year again.

I would even go out of my way to call this game a outright scam it's performance is even WORSE than The Day Before.

For example the RTX 4090 just barely managed to pull past 60 FPS in town. Performance will vary but in large fight scenes and town etc you can expect a 4090 to barely get 60FPS

[DEDloc_©]

Originally posted by sd:

Originally posted by DEDloc_©:

Using facts you mean? Yes, the fact that you're comparing dissimilar products makes it hard to compare.

Should all products in a given category perform the same?

I'm comparing an open world game to a linear one. The linear game should have the advantage. RE 4 and Remnant 2 comparison makes sense to me since both are linear tps released in 2023.

Still apples and oranges for the reasons I already pointed out.

Makes no sense at all.

[Varagonax]

I don't want to be THAT guy but the "Evidence" and all that is being thrown around on here is based ENTIRELY on how a game performs under maximum load. The game runs fine when your not trying to make your pc explode by using maximum settings on rig's that simply can't manage them.

ULTRA and HIGH settings are intended for extremely top end pc specs. And I really, REALLY hate to break this to y'all, but pc's aren't universally viable for use for all of time. Parts become old and tech advances so if you aren't also, on occasion, updating or upgrading your builds, you wont be able to run new games. The current "barely runs the game" specs changed like a year ago; gtx 1650 is barely running a new game at like 20, 30 fps at 720p IF your lucky. RTX or their amd equivalents are now the modern sweet spot for cards.

The game runs fine when your not abusing your rig or if you, yah know, arent obsessed with photorealism and 4k setups. Yall need to stop wanting irl COD and start appreciating art design and lighting over being able to see skin pores ooze sweat.

[Will]

ive got a 3090 TI and i run at 102-122 FPS on max settings, i built a 4090 TI pc for my friend and it runs between 170-200 FPS I'm not sure where you got that information but its not accurate. I'd say that your CPU and ram will also play a role so if your parts in that regard are lacking that could be your issue. you should also update your graphics cards.

[tfa]

Originally posted by DEDloc_©:

Originally posted by sd:

I'm comparing an open world game to a linear one. The linear game should have the advantage. RE 4 and Remnant 2 comparison makes sense to me since both are linear tps released in 2023.

Still apples and oranges for the reasons I already pointed out.

Makes no sense at all.

Regardless of engine and team the goal is the same. Make a game that looks as good and runs as good as possible. Some games end up being optimized better than others. Not being able to compare game optimization from different devs is like not being able to compare cars from different manufacturers.

[tfa]

Originally posted by Varagonax:

I don't want to be THAT guy but the "Evidence" and all that is being thrown around on here is based ENTIRELY on how a game performs under maximum load. The game runs fine when your not trying to make your pc explode by using maximum settings on rig's that simply can't manage them.

ULTRA and HIGH settings are intended for extremely top end pc specs. And I really, REALLY hate to break this to y'all, but pc's aren't universally viable for use for all of time. Parts become old and tech advances so if you aren't also, on occasion, updating or upgrading your builds, you wont be able to run new games. The current "barely runs the game" specs changed like a year ago; gtx 1650 is barely running a new game at like 20, 30 fps at 720p IF your lucky. RTX or their amd equivalents are now the modern sweet spot for cards.

The game runs fine when your not abusing your rig or if you, yah know, arent obsessed with photorealism and 4k setups. Yall need to stop wanting irl COD and start appreciating art design and lighting over being able to see skin pores ooze sweat.

The thread is about top of the line pc performance. Abusing your rig? It's very normal to run games with full gpu usage

[DEDloc_©]

Originally posted by sd:

Originally posted by DEDloc_©:

Still apples and oranges for the reasons I already pointed out.

Makes no sense at all.

Regardless of engine and team the goal is the same. Make a game that looks as good and runs as good as possible. Some games end up being optimized better than others. Not being able to compare game optimization from different devs is like not being able to compare cars from different manufacturers.

Excellent point.
You're trying to compare Ferraris and Hondas. Both made at different places by different people, with different design philosophies and ideas. Built with different processes, materials, and levels of craftsmanship. Of course the performance differs LOL
Not sure why you thought you were making your point here. You're actually making mine.

[LittleEtherKitty]

Originally posted by sd:

Originally posted by DEDloc_©:

Still apples and oranges for the reasons I already pointed out.

Makes no sense at all.

Regardless of engine and team the goal is the same. Make a game that looks as good and runs as good as possible. Some games end up being optimized better than others. Not being able to compare game optimization from different devs is like not being able to compare cars from different manufacturers.

That's not really a good comparison, not bad, but not good, either. They're working with an engine that's fairly unknown and trying to learn it better, while car manufacturers only work with already proven and understood technology.

[Spawn of Apathy]

Originally posted by sd:

Originally posted by DEDloc_©:

You're comparing apples and oranges my dude.
RE4 and cyberpunk are both on different engines with different dev teams and resources. Not the same thing at all. It's a strawman.
"I don't know why these two totally different things don't act exactly the same" LOL

With that rationale you can't compare much of anything and as a consumer my only concern is the end product.

It depends on how you compare them. Saying one is better optimized is a little hard to do as the only factor the two games share is being a third person perspective action/shooter. If Remnant 2 was on UE4 we could compare it to vast array of UE4 titles. There's not a huge amount of UE5 titles out yet. And then even when there are more is it fair to compare one of the first UE5 titles to ones made later in the engine's life cycle where updates have been made to the engine and lessons around the industry have been learned? Is Remnant 2 for example worse than The Day Before?

That's not to say the game can't be criticized. Nor that a different balance be made with the game. Maybe you'd prefer a lower fidelity target so that upscaling isn't deemed necessary for more systems. That's fair. Maybe current hardware just isn't ready for Nanite yet. Maybe Nanite isn't really ready to be used for mainstream game creation yet. Maybe for Remnant 2 they should have opted out of using Nanite to save performance just have a less detailed world.

Could a developer release today a version of RE4 built using UE5 that looks and performs just as well as the one Capcom made using their in house engine? Keep in mind the engine RE4 remake was made on is called the "Resident Evil Engine", which seems to imply the engine made specifically to make excellent looking and performing RE games. It's entirely probable that the RE Engine is more suited to making a game like Remnant 2, that looks as good as Remnant 2 does, more easily than UE5 can right now. But since I don't think Capcom is licensing the RE Engine, that would never have been an option for Remnant 2.

Optimization: "the action of making the best or most effective use of a situation or resource."

Is DLSS/FSR/XESS not a resource available to the developers?

[HashSlingingSlasher]

Thanks for the heads up, I was thinking about getting this but I have a 3060ti and I think ill pass on this one.

[Spam]

I5-4670k
3050 RTX
16GB RAM
SSD

Game runs great at ultra. Very smooth. The only problem is the random lockup and total freeze that happens after playing a couple hours. Besides that, the game is awesome.

[tfa]

Originally posted by DEDloc_©:

Originally posted by sd:

Regardless of engine and team the goal is the same. Make a game that looks as good and runs as good as possible. Some games end up being optimized better than others. Not being able to compare game optimization from different devs is like not being able to compare cars from different manufacturers.

Excellent point.
You're trying to compare Ferraris and Hondas. Both made at different places by different people, with different design philosophies and ideas. Built with different processes, materials, and levels of craftsmanship. Of course the performance differs LOL
Not sure why you thought you were making your point here. You're actually making mine.

Obviously I was speaking of comparing competing models. Lexus vs Infiniti for example.

Originally posted by LittleEtherKitty:

Originally posted by sd:

Regardless of engine and team the goal is the same. Make a game that looks as good and runs as good as possible. Some games end up being optimized better than others. Not being able to compare game optimization from different devs is like not being able to compare cars from different manufacturers.

That's not really a good comparison, not bad, but not good, either. They're working with an engine that's fairly unknown and trying to learn it better, while car manufacturers only work with already proven and understood technology.

Car makers are launching new engines and features all the time.

Many people feel that the graphics are good but not good enough to justify the performance. Now maybe nanite and whatever other features UE 5 uses is just that demanding and the game is as well optimized as possible. In that case it might be said that the engine itself has issues. Whether you have a million reasons or none the fact remains that many don't feel the performance is justified, so many will feel there's an issue somewhere along the line.

Originally posted by Spawn of Apathy:

Originally posted by sd:

With that rationale you can't compare much of anything and as a consumer my only concern is the end product.

It depends on how you compare them. Saying one is better optimized is a little hard to do as the only factor the two games share is being a third person perspective action/shooter. If Remnant 2 was on UE4 we could compare it to vast array of UE4 titles. There's not a huge amount of UE5 titles out yet. And then even when there are more is it fair to compare one of the first UE5 titles to ones made later in the engine's life cycle where updates have been made to the engine and lessons around the industry have been learned? Is Remnant 2 for example worse than The Day Before?

That's not to say the game can't be criticized. Nor that a different balance be made with the game. Maybe you'd prefer a lower fidelity target so that upscaling isn't deemed necessary for more systems. That's fair. Maybe current hardware just isn't ready for Nanite yet. Maybe Nanite isn't really ready to be used for mainstream game creation yet. Maybe for Remnant 2 they should have opted out of using Nanite to save performance just have a less detailed world.

Could a developer release today a version of RE4 built using UE5 that looks and performs just as well as the one Capcom made using their in house engine? Keep in mind the engine RE4 remake was made on is called the "Resident Evil Engine", which seems to imply the engine made specifically to make excellent looking and performing RE games. It's entirely probable that the RE Engine is more suited to making a game like Remnant 2, that looks as good as Remnant 2 does, more easily than UE5 can right now. But since I don't think Capcom is licensing the RE Engine, that would never have been an option for Remnant 2.

Optimization: "the action of making the best or most effective use of a situation or resource."

Is DLSS/FSR/XESS not a resource available to the developers?

Some good points and I could be completely wrong and this game is as optimized as possible but if the engine isnt suited for linear action games then we could say the engine isn't optimized thus the game isn't optimized. Then again UE has been a haven for linear action games and Gears 5 has amazing graphics and performance.

With optimization I'm thinking more about the coding side of it that's handled by software engineers.

I'm quoting this PC Gamer article again:

"Upscaling is a crowning achievement for all involved: it represents (mostly) free performance, doesn't cost a penny, and huge swathes of PC gamers can utilise it on their machines. It's really a big deal for gaming, has negated a lot of the performance penalties of graphical techniques such as ray tracing, and is only set to become even more impressive. The thing is, if it becomes an accepted part of the baseline performance, it no longer acts as that performance boost players feel it to be."

https://www.pcgamer.com/remnant-2s-upscaling-settings-are-more-necessity-than-nicety-and-players-arent-happy-about-it/

[Neyreyan_Youtube]

The performance mainly depends on the curent version of the game. The performance has gradually worsen to where it's impossible to play on minimum settings.
The same thing happened in Escape from Tarkov but was years of updates, this was months of updates.
On the curent patch performance is bad but there some patches were it was very good

[Passenger]

Originally posted by King Hadu:

Originally posted by Stinky Sack:

I refunded this game for this exact reason. Thanks for warning people King

Good you made the right move, techspot has a great benchmark article on this game

basically this game struggles to run on a RTX 4090 it barely breaks 60 fps

Ummmmm, Asus tough gaming RTX 4090 OC here with an Intel i7 11700 KF, 32 gigs ram build here and I COMMONLY see 120 fps (max I allow my monitor to display) at 1440p, all settings maxed. I really don't think you know what you are talking about. Don't believe me? I'll send you a screenshot.

Now there are a few areas in the game where optimization could be improved, for example, at the bottom of that room with the descending electricity that you have to race down the sides to the bottom without getting killed. Down there at the bottom, after the fight, if you stand and look back up at all you just ran through, the fps there dropped down to 58 fps. I found that by disabling detail shadows there, you gain an instant 14 fps back up to 72 fps. But my point is the poorly optimized areas are NOT the norm and the game is mostly running as smooth as silk. The 4090 plays this game juuuuuuuuuuuust fiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiine. Granted, not everyone can afford, or even if they can, want's to spend near $2,000 on an RTX 4090, nor should they have to. But game settings EXIST FOR A REASON. Want max settings and 60 fps or higher on every game, even the brand new ones? Then you will have to put down the big bucks or make COMPROMISES. PC gaming has been this way ever since I started doing it back in 1995. I personally did not buy this ridiculously expensive video card to even play games like Remnant 2, but for my VR combat flight simming addiction, but it's certainly capable playing this extremely fun game.

You think you have it bad with hardware not keeping up with games in this day and age? Back in the 90's when PC gaming was advancing fast as lightening, hardware was practically obsolete the day you bought it! Perhaps you should stick to console versions of these games where all of the little sacrifices and compromises to fidelity are made for you so you don't ever miss them.

[King Hadu]

Game also runs like Extra hot garbage on Intel ARC video cards

yet Intel Arc Cards bet Nvidia for the same price point in something like Cyber Punk

This game clearly has major issues

[Passenger]

Originally posted by King Hadu:

Game also runs like Extra hot garbage on Intel ARC video cards

yet Intel Arc Cards bet Nvidia for the same price point in something like Cyber Punk

This game clearly has major issues

No, it has very minor issues. And my RTX 4090 OC slays any Intel Arc. If the devs state from the beginning that the game was designed for use with upscaling, yet you refuse to use upscaling without complaining about it, that is your problem, not theirs. (I don't use upscaling on my 4090 at 1440p, but I PAID for that privalege. However, if I 4k gamed, I would use upscaling and not complain about it.)