Установить Steam
войти
|
язык
简体中文 (упрощенный китайский)
繁體中文 (традиционный китайский)
日本語 (японский)
한국어 (корейский)
ไทย (тайский)
Български (болгарский)
Čeština (чешский)
Dansk (датский)
Deutsch (немецкий)
English (английский)
Español - España (испанский)
Español - Latinoamérica (латиноам. испанский)
Ελληνικά (греческий)
Français (французский)
Italiano (итальянский)
Bahasa Indonesia (индонезийский)
Magyar (венгерский)
Nederlands (нидерландский)
Norsk (норвежский)
Polski (польский)
Português (португальский)
Português-Brasil (бразильский португальский)
Română (румынский)
Suomi (финский)
Svenska (шведский)
Türkçe (турецкий)
Tiếng Việt (вьетнамский)
Українська (украинский)
Сообщить о проблеме с переводом
why this game who look like has barely come out of the ps3 era pumps more resources than Cyberpunk 2077 or RDR2 and even Monster Hunter World which are much more visually impressive
the game may be good but in terms of optimization it's absolutely shameful
So far I been playing modern games just fine. Any minor lag is a none issue. So once Capcom irons out the performance issues I think the processor can handle it.
Upgraded for Starfield. Tbh just wait for the 5060. That's why I went cheap for now waiting for 5070 Ti basically. 1080 and 4060 are basically same power except extra software features for the 4060.
People insist on playing the game with specs that are way below the minimum advertised.
Then, they review bomb.
So is it an excuse to release a game that is so poorly optimized and which needs more resources than the BIGGEST games ever released years ago which are still graphic and technical slaps and which runs perfectly on a Gtx 1080 to say that it's people's fault for not being able to run correctly a game that could have been released in 2011?