not a fan huh

[godleene]

if you dont buy this game you never liked monster hunter and thats ok lol

[L:D]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Velber:

Ursprünglich geschrieben von ELON BOOSTED DIDDY!!!:

World took a bunch of Years to get to playable state lmao. There's no warrant now since Crapcom didn't care about fixing Dragon's Cockma 2 and they are using the same Engine for Wilds. Since we are now at the Point where they are shilling Fake Frame Generation from the Start to not even get Stable 60 FPS on Highest Settings XD and still managing to look worse than World. Unoptimized Mess, Broken MP, more Latency due to Fake Frame Gen and Malware for more Overhead. Not to mention you'll be paying Top Dollar to "Alpha Test" their Unfinished Mess for a Year prob.

It is more than ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ paying that much to Alpha Test for them when they should be paying you.

This is not some Poor "Indie" Dev that started "Last Thursday" so i'm not gonna give a Pass to Shameless Corpos that prioritize the Microturdsaction Shop and Anticonsumer Malware instead of delivering a Finished Product.

troll alert
world was fine

No it was not. World had a lot of issues on release. The performance mod become so famous after an single day after release that people still talk about it. And the mod simple removed extremely unoptimized coding for the game run better.

[L:D]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von GamingWithSilvertail:

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Sylph:

if you talk here expect a response lol. dlss and fg to hit 60fps on the hardware they ask for is criminal. you are tweaking

Are you new to PC gaming? Minimal requirements for games for decades have aimed 30 FPS where recommended aimed 60 FPS, and in alot of games these recommended specs ment that you had to have a CPU/GPU from the last three - Four years...


Again RTX 3060 Ti and Ryzen 3600 gets you 100~ FPS with FG on the beta. Not 60. It's pretty smooth. Thats hardly 'criminal'. That's an entry PC right now...

Oh really? Then how do you explain people playing World/Iceborne on 960/970 gtx and reaching 60 fps?

An decade huh? Using witcher 3, metal gear solid 5 and rise of tomb raider as example (2015 games). And using gtx 660, which was very common back then, it could reach 45-50 fps for all them, and that's the minimum requirements.
And don't forget that we're talking about 2015, around the same date nvidia was releasing 900 series, 3 years after 660 was released.

Now, we're talking about an game that can't even reach 60fps without dlss and frame gen on an 4060 that was released an year ago.
It's impressive, considering that you actually know how gaming used to be back then, how much desensitized you all are. Whatever ♥♥♥♥ people offer you is an insta accept with an big smile on your face, and soon things will get even worse because of that. 5090 is a ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ joke, but that's ok because nvidia can sell 5090ti after an year for $4k anyway.

And there's no way you locking 60fps on RTX 3060 Ti and Ryzen 3600 in combat, much less reaching 100fps. In fact, not even better setups could reach much more than 80-90fps without dlss and frame gen during the beta. And they're reaching these number going from 12-20 frametime which is pathetic.

Asking if someone is new at something and follow up with this is same level as embarrassing of all those people calling themselves as mh veteran.

[Velber]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von L:D:

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Velber:

troll alert
world was fine

No it was not. World had a lot of issues on release. The performance mod become so famous after an single day after release that people still talk about it. And the mod simple removed extremely unoptimized coding for the game run better.

lol what, it did, the only issues were connection related

[JPM岩]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Velber:

Ursprünglich geschrieben von L:D:

No it was not. World had a lot of issues on release. The performance mod become so famous after an single day after release that people still talk about it. And the mod simple removed extremely unoptimized coding for the game run better.

lol what, it did, the only issues were connection related

No, World was horribly unoptimized on release. It barely hit 20FPS on PS4, the console it was advertised for. Connection issues was a seperate thing.

[GamingWithSilvertail]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von L:D:

Ursprünglich geschrieben von GamingWithSilvertail:

Are you new to PC gaming? Minimal requirements for games for decades have aimed 30 FPS where recommended aimed 60 FPS, and in alot of games these recommended specs ment that you had to have a CPU/GPU from the last three - Four years...


Again RTX 3060 Ti and Ryzen 3600 gets you 100~ FPS with FG on the beta. Not 60. It's pretty smooth. Thats hardly 'criminal'. That's an entry PC right now...

Oh really? Then how do you explain people playing World/Iceborne on 960/970 gtx and reaching 60 fps?

An decade huh? Using witcher 3, metal gear solid 5 and rise of tomb raider as example (2015 games). And using gtx 660, which was very common back then, it could reach 45-50 fps for all them, and that's the minimum requirements.
And don't forget that we're talking about 2015, around the same date nvidia was releasing 900 series, 3 years after 660 was released.

Are you for real or what?

Did you even read what the person I quoted claimed about 60 fps?

You're confirming my point.

FYI TNT Riva nor Voodoo 3 could play quake 2 smoothly, and there's plenty more games from those era's that have the same results.

Offcourse, if your happy with the performance, go ahead, but

Ursprünglich geschrieben von L:D:

Now, we're talking about an game that can't even reach 60fps without dlss and frame gen on an 4060 that was released an year ago.

You should wait till they release the game. The beta was using a much older build (and so are the upcoming two).

I know you dont want to hear that, or read that, cause you wrote this wall in angre mode.
S

Ursprünglich geschrieben von L:D:

Oh really? Then how do you explain people playing World/Iceborne on 960/970 gtx and reaching 60 fps?

I hope you're aware that Wprld had 760 as minimum requirement... not 960?

Ursprünglich geschrieben von L:D:

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Velber:

troll alert
world was fine

No it was not. World had a lot of issues on release. The performance mod become so famous after an single day after release that people still talk about it. And the mod simple removed extremely unoptimized coding for the game run better.

This performance mod was made to 'cater' to those people using xeon processors from 09 and there where alot of them for world.

I shake my head. I had a 1070 7770K and I was playing high settings 60 +...

The only issue with PC release was the fact that MP started to break during lucnh time on EU due to its populairity on steam. ANd fyi I double dipped both PS4 and PC version of World and IB. I dont even have the ps4 pro. It ran okay for a console game. It wasnt as bad as DF said it was.

There was a minor stutter caused by lightning particles and that it.

And one last thing:

Min requirements are posted by developers for reasons other then just running games: Support.