Are game requirements and VRAM usage a joke today?

[Deleted member 234997]

You're not having a good faith discussion when you try to claim Cyberpunk looks like Team Fortress 2.

Textures and poly count are also....literally the same thing. High poly count is what makes a texture be high res.

Read again instead of dismissing things so you don't have to put any work in.

Poly count is not at all the same as textures.

Back to what I said. When not cherry picked, the poly count is akin to TF2 in some areas.
Up close the game is not massively detailed, hence lower Vram usage.

Condensed and easily understandable.

You've just described every 3D video game ever...

Have I?

All of these make Cyberpunk look like an N64 game in terms of what is on screen at any given time, Cyberpunk massively lacks depth and detail to visuals but also mechanically.

On the other hand it looks gorgeous from wide panning views where it looks like a city and it is sizely.

 

[Fizban]

I literally compared screenshots of things up close, as you requested. The difference in detail is massive. If you want to say it's less detailed than some other modern game, then say that. Comparing it to a game from 2007 is not a good faith statement, and is very much a meme.

 

[Deleted member 234997]

I literally compared screenshots of things up close, as you requested. The difference in detail is massive. If you want to say it's less detailed than some other modern game, then say that. Comparing it to a game from 2007 is not a good faith statement, and is very much a meme.

I don't think you get it.

 

[Fizban]

I don't think you get it.

You're right, I don't buy your bullshit. Cyberpunk looks better than half the games in your video too.

I genuinely don't think you've played the game, just watched youtube videos of people cherrypicking to try and make it look bad.

 

[Deleted member 234997]

You're right, I don't buy your bullshit. Cyberpunk looks better than half the games in your video too.

I don't consider your words bullshit, you just have a different preference for visuals, I am expressing my own on top of why Vram is not an issue in Cyberpunk as it lacks asset quality, poly count.. draw distance.. and detail that chews Vram, it instead does a painting of a big world very well.

Please don't be rude next time.

 

[Fizban]

Saying a game from 2020 looks like Team Fortress 2 is rude. It's also disingenuous and insulting to the intelligence of anyone reading it.

 

[Deleted member 234997]

Saying a game from 2020 looks like Team Fortress 2 is rude. It's also disingenuous and insulting to the intelligence of anyone reading it.

A game comes together when played, to me it is like TF2 in some places in terms of poly count and mechanically as good as some N64 games.

Technological limitations perhaps.

But if you enjoy the game, that's cool.

 

[Shihab]

10 Realistic Graphics Games You Can PLAY RIGHT NOW
All of these make Cyberpunk look like an N64 game in terms of what is on screen at any given time, Cyberpunk massively lacks depth and detail to visuals but also mechanically.

All of these also do use standard mesh budgeting practices and will use low poly models for non essential objects.

With exception to Dead Island 2, all these games render limited environments (Callisto Protocol, CoD, etc) or empty world populated by the same set of instanced plants (Call of the Wild, that drone game) or simple, textured cubes (Flight sim). So they get to allocate more polys per object because they have less objects. But that doesn't mean overall polycount is superior to Cyberpunk. And again, the budget isn't infinite.
Perhaps when Epic's Nanite picks up, we'll get close, but we're not there yet.

 

[Frick]

Saying a game from 2020 looks like Team Fortress 2 is rude. It's also disingenuous and insulting to the intelligence of anyone reading it.

Starfield has some laugh out loud-level bad textures...

 

[Fizban]

Starfield has some laugh out loud-level bad textures...

I think Starfield mostly looks fine, except for the NPC's, but I think "all" games have low res textures in places. Starfield's certainly not winning any awards for its graphics, but I have more complaints with its performance than I do with its fidelity.

I get around 90 fps in some of its more demanding areas, at 1080P, in cpu bottlenecked scenarios, and that's just....kind of a joke IMO. My CPU is pretty close to top of the line, most modern AAA's I can get 200-300 fps in cpu bottlenecked scenarios.

 

[Vayra86]

Stutters were observed in Horzon Zero Dawn on maxed settings at 1440P too but back then I had a 5800X non 3D and just 16GB RAM (Still 3733mhz) so it could be part CPU too.

No, its not the CPU, I run HZD 100% stutter free on an 8700K underclocked and undervolted using a 20GB 7900XT @ 3440x1440. The CPU barely breaks a sweat.

This is getting really silly now. It is in no way akin to TF2.

Well low poly count is certainly a thing you can accuse Cyberpunk of - but it really depends where you look. To me the game is like one of those western towns. Beautiful facades, but don't look in the backyard. If you look at the expansion content for example, that's definitely not low poly, but if you move to the less quest-populated areas in Night City, at times you feel like you're in GTA3, for a more in-character comparison. This also applies in a big way to all the highways in the city. Its flat, empty, and devoid of detail. And they're definitely also areas you do traverse many times. Those are clearly optimized for fast driving - no need to place lots of detail.

A game comes together when played, to me it is like TF2 in some places in terms of poly count and mechanically as good as some N64 games.

Technological limitations perhaps.

But if you enjoy the game, that's cool.

I think its more a case of budget/project limitations. We have to remember Cyberpunk didn't start as an open world city thing, and it shows.

On the other hand it looks gorgeous from wide panning views where it looks like a city and it is sizely.

Heh its funny you point that out, I had the exact same impression, my photo tour also contains lots of those distant views.

 

[Fizban]

First thing I played Horizon Zero Dawn on was a laptop with a i7-10875H and a RTX 2070 Super. I was only playing at 1080P, but I don't recall the game ever having any stutters. Said laptop had 32 GB RAM as well though, so that's another possible difference aside from the lower resolution.

 

[Frick]

I think Starfield mostly looks fine, except for the NPC's, but I think "all" games have low res textures in places. Starfield's certainly not winning any awards for its graphics, but I have more complaints with its performance than I do with its fidelity.

I get around 90 fps in some of its more demanding areas, at 1080P, in cpu bottlenecked scenarios, and that's just....kind of a joke IMO. My CPU is pretty close to top of the line, most modern AAA's I can get 200-300 fps in cpu bottlenecked scenarios.

Yeah sure performance is bad, but this.

Spoiler

 

[Fizban]

Comparing it to GTA 3 is weird too. I kind of wonder if people just forget how bad old games actually look. I get that they probably looked okay to you when you played them, because you probably played them when they were new, and as such at the time you didn't think, "Wow, this looks like shit.".

Cyberpunk never looks like this, and this is better than GTA 3, as this is the more modern remaster. The original would be even lower res and more aliased.

 

[Apocalypsee]

Comparing it to GTA 3 is weird too. I kind of wonder if people just forget how bad old games actually look. I get that they probably looked okay to you when you played them, because you probably played them when they were new, and as such at the time you didn't think, "Wow, this looks like shit.".

Cyberpunk never looks like this, and this is better than GTA 3, as this is the more modern remaster. The original would be even lower res and more aliased.

People just like to throw metaphor around, I just ignored such comments. They don't mean it literally nor that it made much sense to discuss.

 

[izy]

RAAAH. Super Ti RTX Ultimat0rzz
Sorry. Couldnt help mself

Help yourself

NVIDIA Readies GeForce RTX 4070 SUPER, RTX 4070 Ti SUPER, and RTX 4080 SUPER

NVIDIA is rumored to be working on a refresh of the higher end of its GeForce RTX 40-series "Ada" series, according to hongxing2020, a reliable source with NVIDIA leaks. The company could be bringing back the SUPER brand extension that it introduced with the RTX 20-series. As many as three SKUs...

www.techpowerup.com

 

[Vayra86]

Comparing it to GTA 3 is weird too. I kind of wonder if people just forget how bad old games actually look. I get that they probably looked okay to you when you played them, because you probably played them when they were new, and as such at the time you didn't think, "Wow, this looks like shit.".

Cyberpunk never looks like this, and this is better than GTA 3, as this is the more modern remaster. The original would be even lower res and more aliased.

Cyberpunk literally has a higher resolution version of this in several places. The point was made about geometry, at least from my end. There really aren't that many differences. A few objects but nowhere near what you'd expect for say, a real venue such as a café, some simple street furniture is present, that's it.

The street can be equally barren, heck even the asian lanterns check out.

 

[oxrufiioxo]

Cyberpunk literally has a higher resolution version of this in several places. The point was made about geometry, at least from my end. There really aren't that many differences. A few objects but nowhere near what you'd expect for say, a real venue such as a café, some simple street furniture is present, that's it.

The street can be equally barren, heck even the asian lanterns check out.

There's really parts of every game you can point out and say WTF the best looking game from start to finish in my book in the sense that the assets are of a high quality at all time is the Last of US 2 and that is a PS4 game although I'm talking about the Pro version of the game.

Especially with open world games expecting that level of detail throughout on any current hardware is laughable most the games people might consider best looking ever all have visual issues/trade offs there isn't a single current generation game that does everything better but I hope games continue to improve.

 

[Vayra86]

There's really parts of every game you can point out and say WTF the best looking game from start to finish in my book in the sense that the assets are of a high quality at all time is the Last of US 2 and that is a PS4 game although I'm talking about the Pro version of the game.

Especially with open world games expecting that level of detail throughout on any current hardware is laughable most the games people might consider best looking ever all have visual issues/trade offs there isn't a single current generation game that does everything better but I hope games continue to improve.

I agree. But this is really just a reality check isn't it. Apparently these things do capture our attention and they take away from the overall experience. We talk a lot about graphical improvements and horsepower... for all those GPU generations we spent, we still didn't manage to fix these simple things.

 

[Deleted member 234997]

I agree. But this is really just a reality check isn't it. Apparently these things do capture our attention and they take away from the overall experience. We talk a lot about graphical improvements and horsepower... for all those GPU generations we spent, we still didn't manage to fix these simple things.

Likely because GPU horsepower is being syphoned into mostly superficial changes like RT, and yes it is all suferficial, but an image breaks down the experience way faster when it is inconsistent.

Look at a game like Dishonoured for example, simple textures, not the most details, but the style is carried out throughout the entire game with no breaks in the way it is presented, it's much more convincing as a game than a game that cannot keep it's presentation complete.

 

[oxrufiioxo]

I agree. But this is really just a reality check isn't it. Apparently these things do capture our attention and they take away from the overall experience. We talk a lot about graphical improvements and horsepower... for all those GPU generations we spent, we still didn't manage to fix these simple things.

It will be interesting how the first Open world UE5 game looks with nanite/Lumen not really looking forward to the hardware it will require with even linear games needing upscaling at 4k with a 4090 as it is though. Guessing Witcher 4 and maybe even the Witcher 1 remake will be mighty impressive but will it matter if you need a 4090 to run it at 1080p30.

And you will still have people who will find the one random tree that looks kinda meh and go see see trash lmao.....

 

[80-watt Hamster]

And you will still have people who will find the one random tree that looks kinda meh and go see see trash lmao.....

I feel like you've captured the spirit of this entire debate in one sentence.

 

[Waldorf]

@Beginner Micro Device
that assumes everyone is interested and playing the same games, preferred AAA titles, which reality shows is not the case.

unless you are paying for it, anyone planning to buy a gpu, wont magically have more funds.
99% of folks dont have change laying around, to always buy the "biggest" version (of something), every time they upgrade.

ignoring for a moment that part of the problems is some companies focusing on the fastest card,
or not willing to spend "5 min" to "optimize" a game, incl use of vram, inflating the actual amount (really) needed.

@PumpTheKin
the thing is: what is superficial (or not), is a personal choice, not up to "you".

same with "breaks". i dont care for "continuity" (like many others), because most have a job and cant play days in a row (start to finish),
and many games where its completely irrelevant (round based shooters).

there are billions of gamers, with millions of games, never will match everyone's preferences,
but that doesn't mean "we" decide what those are (for all gamers)...

 

[Deleted member 234997]

@Beginner Micro Device
that assumes everyone is interested and playing the same games, preferred AAA titles, which reality shows is not the case.

unless you are paying for it, anyone planning to buy a gpu, wont magically have more funds.
99% of folks dont have change laying around, to always buy the "biggest" version (of something), every time they upgrade.

ignoring for a moment that part of the problems is some companies focusing on the fastest card,
or not willing to spend "5 min" to "optimize" a game, incl use of vram, inflating the actual amount (really) needed.

@PumpTheKin
the thing is: what is superficial (or not), is a personal choice, not up to "you".

same with "breaks". i dont care for "continuity" (like many others), because most have a job and cant play days in a row (start to finish),
and many games where its completely irrelevant (round based shooters).

there are billions of gamers, with millions of games, never will match everyone's preferences,
but that doesn't mean "we" decide what those are (for all gamers)...

Right but you would still advocate for your POV.

so ....

 

[Macro Device]

that assumes everyone is interested and playing the same games, preferred AAA titles, which reality shows is not the case.

I only assumed the case of a type of individuals who don't want to play at settings below maxed out.

The fact not everyone is like that is known and plain obvious. My point is, "you wanna never question if max settings are too much, get X" and not, "everyone plays the most resource heavy games at ridiculously high settings."

That's why an average 1440p Joe is more than happy to have an RTX 3060 Ti or even a less powerful solution.