WILDS RUNS OBJECTIVELY BAD (benchmarks on popular games)

[Jobko]

Wilds vs KCD2 comparison: https://imgsli.com/MzQ4OTMz

Monster Hunter Wilds Beta 2: 44 fps , lowest settings, 720p, DLSS ultra performance. Unplayable, crashes instantly.

Monster Hunter Wilds Benchmark: 60 fps average on medium, 1440p, DLSS ultra performance, on a 3070. Lows of like 20-30, highs of 70-80.

RDR2: 90-100 fps on 4K DLSS quality, high settings. High of 171, low of 45.

CP2077: 70 fps average , medium to ultra settings, 4k DLSS performance. 63 low, 80 high.

KCD: 80 fps average , medium settings, 4k native. 70 low, 90 high.

Black Myth Wukong (original benchmark with no post release optimisations): 99 fps average , 120 fps maximum, low 5th 88 fps, minimum (one frame spike) 17 fps. Medium settings, DLSS Ultra Performance, 1440p, motion blur off. https://i.imgur.com/LgTa8tj.jpeg (these settings mimic the Wilds ones exactly).

Path of Exile 2 60-70+ fps average @ max settings, 4k native (no upscaling).

Death Stranding 90 fps average @ max settings, 4k - DLSS Quality

This is on latest Nvidia drivers.

[Virgo]

Is anyone going to address the fact that Dragons Dogma 2 STILL runs like hot ass and is running on the exact same engine, so much so that people said Dragons Dogma 2 was a MH:Wilds tech demo?

Can you ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ explain that or not, what is the excuse. Why does that game run horribly still.

[GamingWithSilvertail]

İlk olarak Jobko tarafından gönderildi:

Monster Hunter Wilds: 60 fps average on medium, 1440p, DLSS ultra performance, on a 3070. Lows of like 20-30, highs of 70-80.

RDR2: 90-100 fps on 4K DLSS quality, high settings. High of 171, low of 45.

CP2077: 70 fps average, medium to ultra settings, 4k DLSS performance. 63 low, 80 high.

KCD: 80 fps average, medium settings, 4k native. 70 low, 90 high.

This is on latest Nvidia drivers.

Great, now benchmark heavy games like wu kong for current hardware :p

[Dusklite]

İlk olarak GamingWithSilvertail tarafından gönderildi:

İlk olarak Jobko tarafından gönderildi:

Monster Hunter Wilds: 60 fps average on medium, 1440p, DLSS ultra performance, on a 3070. Lows of like 20-30, highs of 70-80.

RDR2: 90-100 fps on 4K DLSS quality, high settings. High of 171, low of 45.

CP2077: 70 fps average, medium to ultra settings, 4k DLSS performance. 63 low, 80 high.

KCD: 80 fps average, medium settings, 4k native. 70 low, 90 high.

This is on latest Nvidia drivers.

Great, now benchmark heavy games like wu kong for current hardware :p

Aren't you slowly becoming a White Knight here? And I mean the "willfully blind" kind of defender of the indefensible?

Benchmark Wo Long for us, please and then come back and tell us that there cannot be games out there that just are not optimized (yet).

Sure, you can brute-force anything with a really expensive setup. But do you want to?

I earn enough on my job to get the newest stuff if I so choose, but if I did, I'd be wasting a lot of money. And in this day and age wasting money is even more unwise than it was, say, 10 years ago.

The economy and politics everywhere on this planet are becoming increasingly unstable and blowing all your cash on your hobby is a really... let's say bold move.

[Merrydoc]

Its simple. If you are not happy with the Performence dont buy the Game.

[Illumina]

Go on and find launch day CP2077 with the same drivers that were available.

[GamingWithSilvertail]

İlk olarak Dusklite tarafından gönderildi:

İlk olarak GamingWithSilvertail tarafından gönderildi:

Great, now benchmark heavy games like wu kong for current hardware :p

Aren't you slowly becoming a White Knight here? And I mean the "willfully blind" kind of defender of the indefensible?

Benchmark Wo Long for us, please and then come back and tell us that there cannot be games out there that just are not optimized (yet).

Sure, you can brute-force anything with a really expensive setup. But do you want to?

I earn enough on my job to get the newest stuff if I so choose, but if I did, I'd be wasting a lot of money. And in this day and age wasting money is even more unwise than it was, say, 10 years ago.

The economy and politics everywhere on this planet are becoming increasingly unstable and blowing all your cash on your hobby is a really... let's say bold move.

No, I just question the reasoning behind this because OP litterally listed a buncch of games which where problematic for then current hardware.

[Gigadesu!]

Why are people defending terrible optimization? Do people just like going against their best interest? I don't understand feels like people are being dishonest or just ignorant. Some of it feels like cope otherwise people would just not engage with these topics and argue so much about what many of us know to be a fact.

[KingOfFriedChicken]

İlk olarak Gigadesu! tarafından gönderildi:

Why are people defending terrible optimization? Do people just like going against their best interest? I don't understand feels like people are being dishonest or just ignorant. Some of it feels like cope otherwise people would just not engage with these topics and argue so much about what many of us know to be a fact.

Because not all of us consider 60fps stable "terrible" it's pretty subjective honestly lol I'm not trying to get 240fps I'm not playing COD or fortnite

[Dusklite]

İlk olarak GamingWithSilvertail tarafından gönderildi:

İlk olarak Dusklite tarafından gönderildi:

Aren't you slowly becoming a White Knight here? And I mean the "willfully blind" kind of defender of the indefensible?

Benchmark Wo Long for us, please and then come back and tell us that there cannot be games out there that just are not optimized (yet).

Sure, you can brute-force anything with a really expensive setup. But do you want to?

I earn enough on my job to get the newest stuff if I so choose, but if I did, I'd be wasting a lot of money. And in this day and age wasting money is even more unwise than it was, say, 10 years ago.

The economy and politics everywhere on this planet are becoming increasingly unstable and blowing all your cash on your hobby is a really... let's say bold move.

No, I just question the reasoning behind this because OP litterally listed a buncch of games which where problematic for then current hardware.

That's really not how you appear here or elsewhere on this board.
Your lack of empathy towards anyone with a decent mid-range setup struggling with performance on a game they really WANT to play is only one step short of actual dismissal and only a stone throw away from disdain.

Very questionable from an outside view, just saying.

[GamingWithSilvertail]

İlk olarak Gigadesu! tarafından gönderildi:

Why are people defending terrible optimization? Do people just like going against their best interest? I don't understand feels like people are being dishonest or just ignorant. Some of it feels like cope otherwise people would just not engage with these topics and argue so much about what many of us know to be a fact.

Look, If you're gonna list a bunch of games that definiatly where not optimised you're going to get called on it. It's a forum.

I fail to see how RDR2 ran proper on a gtx 1060....

https://www.techpowerup.com/review/red-dead-redemption-2-benchmark-test-performance-analysis/4.html
You litterally had to have a 2070 super (That wasnt even released yet) to achieve 60...

Changing settings from high to low did nothing on that game.


Sure everyone can use the tutorial to benchmark but that area is very light and a seperate instance compared to the main map... XD

[turbogum]

İlk olarak Jobko tarafından gönderildi:

CP2077 is better now and more stable and has better frames, but launch framerate was better or equivalent to Wilds.

It was much better, people who claim Cyberpunk was just as bad at launch probably haven't actually played it themselves back then.

As awful as Cyberpunk's launch was, at the time I could actually play it in 1080p 60 FPS on low-medium settings on my old PC with 1660 Super and Ryzen 5 3600, and the game didn't even crash once during my 50+ hours long playthrough. It was a buggy mess of an unfinished game, it was also poorly optimized, and yet it still ran much better on the hardware that was available at the time, than Wilds does on current hardware.

In comparison Wilds is basically unplayable on low end hardware, and even on high end hardware it runs and looks like complete garbage. The game simply doesn't offer anything to justify the bloated system requirements, and that's honestly also the case for most other large releases from the past few years.

Visuals comparable to games from up to 8+ years ago, gameplay from 15+ years ago, but the system requirements and prices (especially if you include DLCs, "deluxe" editions and MTX) are rising exponentially. That's modern AAA gaming for you.

Quick Edit:
And to clarify my Cyberpunk perf at launch, it would occasionally dip to 40-50s FPS, but it still ran at 60 most of the time on my low budget PC that I've had back then.

[Jobko]

İlk olarak turbogum tarafından gönderildi:

İlk olarak Jobko tarafından gönderildi:

CP2077 is better now and more stable and has better frames, but launch framerate was better or equivalent to Wilds.

It was much better, people who claim Cyberpunk was just as bad at launch probably haven't actually played it themselves back then.

As awful as Cyberpunk's launch was, at the time I could actually play it in 1080p 60 FPS on low-medium settings on my old PC with 1660 Super and Ryzen 5 3600, and the game didn't even crash once during my 50+ hours long playthrough. It was a buggy mess of an unfinished game, it was also poorly optimized, and yet it still ran much better on the hardware that was available at the time, than Wilds does on current hardware.

In comparison Wilds is basically unplayable on low end hardware, and even on high end hardware it runs and looks like complete garbage. The game simply doesn't offer anything to justify the bloated system requirements, and that's honestly also the case for most other large releases from the past few years.

Visuals comparable to games from up to 8+ years ago, gameplay from 15+ years ago, but the system requirements and prices (especially if you include DLCs, "deluxe" editions and MTX) are rising exponentially. That's modern AAA gaming for you.

Quick Edit:
And to clarify my Cyberpunk perf at launch, it would occasionally dip to 40-50s FPS, but it still ran at 60 most of the time on my low budget PC that I've had back then.

Yeah, I will admit that CP2077 was UNPLAYABLE on the PS4 Pro, which I had to refund and go buy it on PC, but on a 3070, it ran completely fine. There were certain sections that would tank me, like Jig-Jig Street, but for the most part it was completely playable. I beat it in its worse state and loved the game despite all the bugs and issues i had with it. Fast forward 3-4 years and the games amazing and probably one of the best new gen games I've played next to Elden Ring and Baldur's Gate 3.

A game that was much worse and to this day is still bad was Fallout 76. That was unbearable on every angle you could think of.

I'm sure Wilds is a fun game, as I trust CAPCOM to at least do that. But trusting them to optimize? Why because Worlds got optimized? A hub based game vs a open world on the REengine? Look at Dragon's Dogma 2 nearly a year later, the game is less stable for me I can't even be bothered playing it.

Not falling for that again, CAPCOM is on my ♥♥♥♥ list until this game is fully fixed I won't be giving them money.

[Jobko]

İlk olarak Virgo tarafından gönderildi:

HEELLLLLLOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO??????????? ARE WE ALL IGNORING DRAGONS DOGMA 2? IT NMEVER GOT OPTIMIZED

Exactly. It's even worse for me. I get huge artifacts with textured triangles appearing everywhere, and then the game crashes constantly. It went from like gold to silver on ProtonDB. The game is functionally worse for me. Cities still run sub 60 fps. They never fixed it. I could at least play it for hours at launch, now I can't even do that.

[Jobko]

İlk olarak GamingWithSilvertail tarafından gönderildi:

İlk olarak Gigadesu! tarafından gönderildi:

Why are people defending terrible optimization? Do people just like going against their best interest? I don't understand feels like people are being dishonest or just ignorant. Some of it feels like cope otherwise people would just not engage with these topics and argue so much about what many of us know to be a fact.

Look, If you're gonna list a bunch of games that definiatly where not optimised you're going to get called on it. It's a forum.

I fail to see how RDR2 ran proper on a gtx 1060....

https://www.techpowerup.com/review/red-dead-redemption-2-benchmark-test-performance-analysis/4.html
You litterally had to have a 2070 super (That wasnt even released yet) to achieve 60...

Changing settings from high to low did nothing on that game.


Sure everyone can use the tutorial to benchmark but that area is very light and a seperate instance compared to the main map... XD

This is a made up reality. RDR2 was on consoles and ran fine on consoles and the PC port came in 2019, the same year we have the Titan RTX, 2080 Ti, 1080 Ti, 2060.

[Jobko]

İlk olarak KingOfFriedChicken tarafından gönderildi:

İlk olarak Gigadesu! tarafından gönderildi:

Why are people defending terrible optimization? Do people just like going against their best interest? I don't understand feels like people are being dishonest or just ignorant. Some of it feels like cope otherwise people would just not engage with these topics and argue so much about what many of us know to be a fact.

Because not all of us consider 60fps stable "terrible" it's pretty subjective honestly lol I'm not trying to get 240fps I'm not playing COD or fortnite

I don't get 60 fps stable though. I get 60 fps average, and fluctuate between 20-80 fps, that averages out to 60 fps. Some areas I was below 60 the entire time. The start I was above. The city areas were ridiculously low.

This is also using DLSS ULTRA PERFORMANCE