Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
agree
The lighting/shadow quality is also a little different on Extreme: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pYspV4SsWZ4
Use the benchmark: https://steamcommunity.com/app/412020/discussions/0/1779388024846867608/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pYspV4SsWZ4
Nice find, thank you!
Quick question, High + Tessellation or Ultra?
That's because it's using double the shaders per pixel.
For me it has to be Ultra as i prefer the darker look as explained in the video and the draw distance is very noticeable, especially on the Caspian desert area. If you have an AMD gpu you can limit the amount of tessellation in the drivers, drastically increasing .1% lows, resulting is a smoother experience without losing the effect entirely.
The main thing I've noticed is texture/lighting resolution increase, render fog reduced/removed, and global LOD. On Extreme it doesn't optimize textures with mipmaps: everything on your screen is fully detailed regardless of distance.
That's why it is so much slower even with DLSS on Balanced
I for one notice an unimaginably massive difference visually between Ultra and Extreme but most people seem incapable of perceiving anything that is not naked or bleeding so their words are probably as worthless as meaningless.