MH:Wilds is a reminder that picking the wrong game Engine can realy mess up a game.

[Ahrijlaken]

UE5 is notoriously known to have bad performance, hard to optimize, time consuming etc ... why did capcom choose it over something like their RE engine/MT framework ?

Do Epic game force it on games ?

Edit : I read an old article, it's in fact RE engine. Look like it's still a wrong choose but UE5 is not to blame here.

[ZaydinTTV]

I thought it was using the RE Engine.

*quick google search* Yep, it's using the RE Engine.

[2D神]

This is on RE Engine. Problem is RE Engine is made with close corridor like Resident Evil. Dragon Dogma 2 was the first take on an open world using this engine and now Wilds is seamlessly going through the same issue.

[Tenz]

RE Engine is great.

[ZaydinTTV]

Originally posted by Tenz:

RE Engine is great.

When it's used for the proper game.

Take the Frostbite Engine: Great for shooters and such. But when EA started trying to shoehorn it into all their games, problems came up. BioWare allegedly had a ton of trouble making it work for a semi-open world RPG like Dragon Age: Inquisition because the engine wasn't designed for it. Same with Mass Effect: Andromeda.

[Papa john]

Originally posted by Tenz:

RE Engine is great.

not for open world games it isn't

[Arcalas]

I know someone answered it but, Don"t care still playing it.

[NiamhNyx]

Originally posted by 2D神:

This is on RE Engine. Problem is RE Engine is made with close corridor like Resident Evil. Dragon Dogma 2 was the first take on an open world using this engine and now Wilds is seamlessly going through the same issue.

the issue isnt the open world either, like a lot of you seem to be parroting with out critically thinking about it. Yes its not made for open worlds, but the open world its self is acceptable.

DD2 runs fine when outside of a town. My i7-12700k and 3080ti were able to hit 70+ fps
Walking in to town would drop it to 40fps.

In wilds beta I was getting 55fps 3080ti (native 1440p ultra) / 65fps 4080s (native 1440p ultra) until I got the same drops to around 40fps in the towns.

What could be the linking factor? RE Engine npcs. The npcs in RE Engine are very cpu intensive, thats the major issue.

Monster Hunter has more pull than Dragons Dogma, so we might see engine updates to help with it this time. (Which I hope would trickle down to DD2)

[Shadowlet]

Originally posted by Ahrijlaken:

UE5 is notoriously known to have bad performance, hard to optimize, time consuming etc ... why did capcom choose it over something like their RE engine/MT framework ?

Look like it's still a wrong choose but UE5 is not to blame here.

UE5 is never to blame for dev incompetence and inserting trees and foliage with absurdly high polygon counts for example.

[Papa john]

Originally posted by NiamhNyx:

Originally posted by 2D神:

This is on RE Engine. Problem is RE Engine is made with close corridor like Resident Evil. Dragon Dogma 2 was the first take on an open world using this engine and now Wilds is seamlessly going through the same issue.

the issue isnt the open world either, like a lot of you seem to be parroting with out critically thinking about it. Yes its not made for open worlds, but the open world its self is acceptable.

DD2 runs fine when outside of a town. My i7-12700k and 3080ti were able to hit 70+ fps
Walking in to town would drop it to 40fps.

In wilds beta I was getting 55fps 3080ti (native 1440p ultra) / 65fps 4080s (native 1440p ultra) until I got the same drops to around 40fps in the towns.

What could be the linking factor? RE Engine npcs. The npcs in RE Engine are very cpu intensive, thats the major issue.

Monster Hunter has more pull than Dragons Dogma, so we might see engine updates to help with it this time. (Which I hope would trickle down to DD2)

while the npc's are an issue it's easy to tell the large spaces cause issues as well
look at the gameplay segments of the benchmark to see this
the gameplay segments in open areas tank performance
like going from a difference of 80 fps to 40

[Papa john]

Originally posted by Shadowlet:

Originally posted by Ahrijlaken:

UE5 is notoriously known to have bad performance, hard to optimize, time consuming etc ... why did capcom choose it over something like their RE engine/MT framework ?

Look like it's still a wrong choose but UE5 is not to blame here.

UE5 is never to blame for dev incompetence and inserting trees and foliage with absurdly high polygon counts for example.

it partially is
compare cyberpunk at max settings to any unreal 5 open world game to see the difference
unreal has massive issues with stuttering
open world games show this off a ton

[ChubbiChibbai]

Originally posted by Ahrijlaken:

UE5 is notoriously known to have bad performance, hard to optimize, time consuming etc ... why did capcom choose it over something like their RE engine/MT framework ?

Do Epic game force it on games ?

Edit : I read an old article, it's in fact RE engine. Look like it's still a wrong choose but UE5 is not to blame here.

Even though this has been discussed, one big reason studios will choose UE5 over an older internal engine is because far more people know UE5 which makes scaling the team and hiring new people an easier process.

Often it can take a long time for new hires to learn a complex internal engine as well as the cost of maintaining and updating your engine pipeline. On paper there are are real cost benefits to using a well known, well supported off the shelf engine.

Also. Just to be 'that guy' but i haven't had an issue with any UE5 games as far back as they have been launching. Even Calysto Protocol at launch i was able to get decent performance out of and its only improved since launch.

A huge part of this 'UE5 is a bad engine' dialogue is coming from people with weaker outdated hardware. So while yeah UE5 is very demanding and if you don't have a well put together and modern system you are going to struggle with asset streaming, global illumination and EU5's global illumination - its still an incredible engine and once hardware catches up people will realise that.

I'd rather game engines comtinued to move the industry forwards in terms of visuals instead of everything being held back by PC players with budget systems.

Back in the day the PC master race used to be criticise consoles for holding things back but now we have this entire generation of budget PC gamers who seem to think the entire industry should cater to their systems while they also fail to understad how to do the most basic of configuration of any game settings.

[SirusTheMadDJ]

You caught the fact it's RE Engine, and not UE5, so that's a pass.

Buuut...

Originally posted by Ahrijlaken:

Do Epic game force it on games ?

*Throws PC out the window*

No, dearest poster. Engines are not forced onto developers. They're chosen or made with whatever the game needs to have function wise, or based on the skill of the coders, or what they want to use.

For instance, a lot of indies use Godot or Unity, since it's free or cheaper than a licence to a bigger engine, and could take less of a cut of sales.

Everyone uses Havok physics because it does the job, and it's easy to include it with the engine they're running on, for instance. Or Noita needed to code their own engine because of how the game was dependant on every pixel having it's own property.

It's cheaper to use an off the shelf engine, a lot easier, and typically, unless you need features that the others can't do, the only other reason you create your own engine is to show off that you can. And, since not every developer is a multi building, multinational business, sometimes showing off is too expensive.

Not the...dumbest take on this I've heard, but it's up there. Still, hopefully I've cleared the waters there for you.

Now...I just need to get my box out of the pond....

[Papa john]

Originally posted by ChubbiChibbai:

Originally posted by Ahrijlaken:

UE5 is notoriously known to have bad performance, hard to optimize, time consuming etc ... why did capcom choose it over something like their RE engine/MT framework ?

Do Epic game force it on games ?

Edit : I read an old article, it's in fact RE engine. Look like it's still a wrong choose but UE5 is not to blame here.

Even though this has been discussed, one big reason studios will choose UE5 over an older internal engine is because far more people know UE5 which makes scaling the team and hiring new people an easier process.

Often it can take a long time for new hires to learn a complex internal engine as well as the cost of maintaining and updating your engine pipeline. On paper there are are real cost benefits to using a well known, well supported off the shelf engine.

Also. Just to be 'that guy' but i haven't had an issue with any UE5 games as far back as they have been launching. Even Calysto Protocol at launch i was able to get decent performance out of and its only improved since launch.

A huge part of this 'UE5 is a bad engine' dialogue is coming from people with weaker outdated hardware. So while yeah UE5 is very demanding and if you don't have a well put together and modern system you are going to struggle with asset streaming, global illumination and EU5's global illumination - its still an incredible engine and once hardware catches up people will realise that.

I'd rather game engines comtinued to move the industry forwards in terms of visuals instead of everything being held back by PC players with budget systems.

Back in the day the PC master race used to be criticise consoles for holding things back but now we have this entire generation of budget PC gamers who seem to think the entire industry should cater to their systems while they also fail to understad how to do the most basic of configuration of any game settings.

you must have some mystical super system or something
im running a 7900xtx 7800x3d on one of the more expensive pcie 4.0 ssd's and i still get stutters constantly on unreal 5 games

[NiamhNyx]

Originally posted by Papa john:

Originally posted by NiamhNyx:

the issue isnt the open world either, like a lot of you seem to be parroting with out critically thinking about it. Yes its not made for open worlds, but the open world its self is acceptable.

DD2 runs fine when outside of a town. My i7-12700k and 3080ti were able to hit 70+ fps
Walking in to town would drop it to 40fps.

In wilds beta I was getting 55fps 3080ti (native 1440p ultra) / 65fps 4080s (native 1440p ultra) until I got the same drops to around 40fps in the towns.

What could be the linking factor? RE Engine npcs. The npcs in RE Engine are very cpu intensive, thats the major issue.

Monster Hunter has more pull than Dragons Dogma, so we might see engine updates to help with it this time. (Which I hope would trickle down to DD2)

while the npc's are an issue it's easy to tell the large spaces cause issues as well
look at the gameplay segments of the benchmark to see this
the gameplay segments in open areas tank performance
like going from a difference of 80 fps to 40

You are comparing cutscenes to gameplay, which is moronic. You NEVER compare those when looking at performance, its misleading.

[Papa john]

Originally posted by NiamhNyx:

Originally posted by Papa john:

while the npc's are an issue it's easy to tell the large spaces cause issues as well
look at the gameplay segments of the benchmark to see this
the gameplay segments in open areas tank performance
like going from a difference of 80 fps to 40

You are comparing cutscenes to gameplay, which is moronic. You NEVER compare those when looking at performance, its misleading.

did you not bother to read?
i literally said the gameplay segments
it's only like 1/3rd of the benchmark or something