Most demanding game overall ?

[Peterg]

What pc game do you think is most demanding in hardware ?

[luciferous]

I'd have to go with Shadow Of The Tomb Raider.

[Peterg]

I have to go with Planet Coaster.

[Ogami]

At the moment? Microsoft Flight Simulator.
Only 30 FPS on a 2080Ti in many situations is not a rare occurance in that game when you crank up all the graphical bells and whistles.
But it also looks stunning.

[Peterg]

Originally posted by Ogami:

At the moment? Microsoft Flight Simulator.
Only 30 FPS on a 2080Ti in many situations is not a rare occurance in that game when you crank up all the graphical bells and whistles.
But it also looks stunning.

True but Planet Coaster looks stunning too when you maximum graphics.

[hawkeye]

One of those huge multi-player online games. Needs server hardware, a pc for each player, and a lot of network infrastructure.

[Vulkan]

Microsoft's flight simulator 2020 is the new crisis .

[xSOSxHawkens]

MSFS 2020.

On ultra it will easily make use of a 12c-24t build, will make good use of 32GB of ram, will peg out most 8GB graphics cards and makes good use of 11-16GB cards... Makes good use of highspeed storage (have seen it load data in excess of 1GB/s)...

And still struggles to pull a solid 60 if you are lucky.

[Lazy Girl]

Has anyone played the MSFS 2020 on the xBox one x. If so please tell us of your experience!

[Wisman]

Originally posted by petergg26:

I have to go with Planet Coaster.

Gotta agree with this. This game looks phenomenal even on medium.

[Magma Dragoon]

Definitely Microsoft Flight Simulator, it's not even possible to completely install the game on consumer hardware because of the sheer quantity of terrain data. And on top of the hardware requirements, it is impossible to convince friends or family to sit behind me for 8 hours while I fly them from EWR to LHR.

[Bing Chilling]

Originally posted by Ogami:

At the moment? Microsoft Flight Simulator.
Only 30 FPS on a 2080Ti in many situations is not a rare occurance in that game when you crank up all the graphical bells and whistles.
But it also looks stunning.

idk honestly RDR2 and ARK run worse tbf
and atleast ark is far more demanding then both of them
by alot, especially when you're in a base with 100's of dino's

Originally posted by Magma Dragoon:

Definitely Microsoft Flight Simulator, it's not even possible to completely install the game on consumer hardware because of the sheer quantity of terrain data. And on top of the hardware requirements, it is impossible to convince friends or family to sit behind me for 8 hours while I fly them from EWR to LHR.

thats just literally wrong, its not as demanding as the IGN reviews said it was going to be
actually if you "actually" play the game, it will never use more then 13gb of memory on its own,
32gb is overkill for the game actually. and it's graphics performance is just terrible
wouldn't even call it demanding, i'd just call it trash optimization.

[Magma Dragoon]

I didn't say anything about RAM

[Bing Chilling]

Originally posted by Magma Dragoon:

I didn't say anything about RAM

Originally posted by Magma Dragoon:

Definitely Microsoft Flight Simulator, it's not even possible to completely install the game on consumer hardware because of the sheer quantity of terrain data. And on top of the hardware requirements, it is impossible to convince friends or family to sit behind me for 8 hours while I fly them from EWR to LHR.

didn't say you did, actually if you read my post properly you'd know it was a reference
but i guess your brain is to small to realize.

[_I_]

Originally posted by ꧁꧂StoneYoda꧁꧂:

Originally posted by Ogami:

At the moment? Microsoft Flight Simulator.
Only 30 FPS on a 2080Ti in many situations is not a rare occurance in that game when you crank up all the graphical bells and whistles.
But it also looks stunning.

idk honestly RDR2 and ARK run worse tbf
and atleast ark is far more demanding then both of them
by alot, especially when you're in a base with 100's of dino's

rockstar has never made a good port

ark was also very poorly ported to pc

they are demanding titles on pc, but also designed to run on consoles

cities skyline, fs2020, are demanding
but fallout engine games with loads of mods can be way more demanding

[Bing Chilling]

Originally posted by _I_:

Originally posted by ꧁꧂StoneYoda꧁꧂:

idk honestly RDR2 and ARK run worse tbf
and atleast ark is far more demanding then both of them
by alot, especially when you're in a base with 100's of dino's

rockstar has never made a good port

ark was also very poorly ported to pc

they are demanding titles on pc, but also designed to run on consoles

cities skyline, fs2020, are demanding
but fallout engine games with loads of mods can be way more demanding

cities skylines is on console (pretty sure it's on switch too)

ill give you RDR2 yeah that game was primarily optimized for console
the pc port port is laughable

but ark was a pc game until like 3 years after it released in beta/alpha. while yes it's unoptimized it's by far more demanding then RDR2 and FS2020 because it allows you to be creative and place stuff. any game that allows you to place buildings and items and what not with no limit can't really be included because there's no "limit" on how demanding it can be
look at minecraft these days with 200 mods and RTX ♥♥♥♥ on lol.

ark is more demanding then planet coaster and cities skyline because they both have a limit, yes it's massive. but thats not the point,

minecraft is probably the most demanding game
actually because it's literally doesn't have a limit
technically you could fill up the maps in ark, cities skylines and planet coaster
but you can't in minecraft, it's impossible since the world is infinite.

fs2020 is unoptimized honestly. it doesn't even look that good on maxed out settings.
runs like actual garbage. a 3600 is bottlenecked in NewYork with 30 ish fps and large drops into the high teens.
considering there's no traffic or anything that actually moves. yah no that game runs like trash,