I have a 1X and I literally couldn't find a ranked match for the first 3-4 days.. what do server issues have to do with PC gaming?
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
OPINION: Red Dead Redemption 2 on PC is exactly the reason why some people still HATE gaming on PC
- Thread starter krg
- Start date
I have a 1X and I literally couldn't find a ranked match for the first 3-4 days.. what do server issues have to do with PC gaming?
Yeah I get what you mean op. I'm thinking to just wait for the next psn sale for my base ps4 because idk how the fuck it'll perform on my 980ti and i54690k.
Seems like a super borked port in general with all crashing and start-up issues.
Seems like a super borked port in general with all crashing and start-up issues.
Last edited:
Vapor chamber is featured in reference design of RTX 2080.
Heck, take GALAX for exemple. The only model using vapor chamber is... The cheaper one.
Heck, same for Gigabyte. Reference design use a vapor chamber... And the more expensive ones use heat pipes. Are they incompetent to use a "worse" solution on their most expensive, performance oriented models ?
Most console games have some sort of performance issue as well. At least here you can do something about it.
So if we made the mile long list of sub 30fps, variable resolution games for consoles, we could say developers don't care about them either?
By the way, all of those games run great for me. Far better then the console versions.
But you love wasting your time on far longer loading screens. Got it.
People have different PC configurations, so there's bound to be issues with some setups; this is a no-brainer. At least on PC you can tweak certain settings in-game, or change your CPU/GPU voltage, RAM timings and overclock settings to gain better performance. For the most part, you can get any PC game to work and function properly depending on your build. I haven't played on consoles in almost 2 years and I never looked back, despite minor issues with PC games I've played.
idk it's pretty easy to adjust settings, about as easy as adjusting your hardware expectations.
I respect your opinion but I have to disagree. I started playing on PC 3 years ago and haven't turned on my console in a year and half. I know nothing about editing files or what different graphic options mean. Thankfully, I've never needed to. I just click steam launcher and the game and boom, I'm playing games. I can't think of a single game where I had to go into any file and change something to make it work.
I just really dislike troubleshooting PC games. I hate it. Its why i left PC gaming behind and i dont regret it.
Sounds to me like the issue is with either (a) Rockstar's optimization of the game and/or (b) them posting "recommended specs" that are actually too low for the kind of experience that players expect meeting "recommended" specs to provide.
In the case of A - I mean, that's on Rockstar to fix.
In the case of B - That's Rockstar either lying to try to get more sales or them framing "recommended" purely based on 1080p/30. Maybe a bit of both.
Does the game not have a performance testing tool to automate settings for people who don't want to be bothered? That's something a lot of games like Gears of War 5, Killer Instinct, and the Tomb Raider games have and it was really helpful for finding settings that would give you the performance (fps) you want.
///
Either way, such is life. If setting a game to all "low" still shows performance issues, it's not the platform; it's the developer. "Best practices" settings will be released by people who enjoy tinkering so you can always wait for that. The luxury of playing on PC is that regardless of all of this, once you dial in the settings that will be best for you, you're done with it forever and you'll be enjoying a demonstrably better experience than those playing on a console.
That said, this doesn't need to be framed as a "this is why people hate gaming on PC" issue. Lest we consider all of the console games that fail to reach 30fps and have no ability to adjust settings to get some performance lift at all. Remember the Control PS4/XOX performance discussions? Those didn't spawn a "Control is exactly the reason why some people still hate gaming on console" thread. Funny how that works.
Eh. A few minutes to adjust some settings, preceding dozens or hundreds of hours of a superior performance experience, free online play, and the ability to use any controller/input peripheral I want seems a fair trade to me.
But enjoy those 30fps locks.
Me too. Lucky me that I need to do this for less than 1% of the PC game library and takes less time than some loading screens on consoles ;)
Yeah - this is roughly what anyone has to do if the settings have no explanation - because we all know that "ultra" in one game is not the equivalent to other games, and why would it be. It makes so many of these post so ridiculous.
For me, I have a 144hz gsync compatible display, and I'm looking for about 90hz.
I try the default settings, play for a bit, see what I think and how performance is, and prioritise increasing / decreasing settings as I see fit - so usually IQ needs to be as high as possible while supporting performance, everything else can be flexible.
I love that process, fine tuning everything how I want, for the results I want
GTX 1060 isn't a perfect match for One X if that is what you were going for, sometimes it's better, sometimes it isn't.. depends on the game. I'd say go with low settings and vulkan, considering you have a low end GPU and you'll likely get the experience you thought you were going to get.
You have a PC FFS, you can tweak settings and resolution and get the performance you want. If you want the best graphics on PC, you pay for that, not with a cheap GPU. If you want whatever they throw at you and maybe okay performance, get a console.
You have a PC FFS, you can tweak settings and resolution and get the performance you want. If you want the best graphics on PC, you pay for that, not with a cheap GPU. If you want whatever they throw at you and maybe okay performance, get a console.
I can understand the frustration but i think that frustration is causing a lot of hyperbole in the thread. When was the last time we had so many complaints about a pc version, Arkham Knight 4 years ago?
Sure there is more tinkering with pc and it is a legitimate reason for someone to move to consoles but it is not nearly as often as implied by a lot of people here. Haven't we had console games with bad performance like Control that you can't do nothing about, or games that crashed etc on consoles as well?
Rockstar and most companies with graphical demanding games should give a lot more details about the requirements, like Ubisoft is doing but (correct me if i am wrong) doesn't the game look better than most games out there, is the performance really unreasonable?
The 1060 is a midrange card more than 3 years old and from the benchmarks it can play the game with a combination of mid high settings. That doesn't sound so bad considering how the game looks.
Sure there is more tinkering with pc and it is a legitimate reason for someone to move to consoles but it is not nearly as often as implied by a lot of people here. Haven't we had console games with bad performance like Control that you can't do nothing about, or games that crashed etc on consoles as well?
Rockstar and most companies with graphical demanding games should give a lot more details about the requirements, like Ubisoft is doing but (correct me if i am wrong) doesn't the game look better than most games out there, is the performance really unreasonable?
The 1060 is a midrange card more than 3 years old and from the benchmarks it can play the game with a combination of mid high settings. That doesn't sound so bad considering how the game looks.
Yeah that's a sure fire endorsement of PC gaming. Let the community fix it like Dark Souls.
I love pc gaming for the mods. But I hate the idea that a game has to be fixed a month after launch by the modding community.
That's not acceptable for people sold on these games being functional at launch and paid at least 20% off to full price depending on the store they used.
I honestly don't get this idea that "Ultra" is only for people with high end machines and that the lower settings are REALLY what is intended; the Ultra setting for textures is what the game should look like. Drop that done and things like river banks and Arthur's jacket look muddy and awful. PS4 Pro (and I imagine XBX) didn't look like that in the slightest.
It's honestly going to take the folks at DF doing like-for-like comparisons to see what is going on here I imagine.
It's honestly going to take the folks at DF doing like-for-like comparisons to see what is going on here I imagine.
I mean, it kinda is?
If developers release a broken game, which is common on console as well as PC, at least on PC it's possible someone in the community will fix the error/bug if the developers won't.
The discourse in this thread about how this is an inherent problem with the PC platform rather than an inherent problem with game development in general showcases the anti-PC bent of this forum. The fact that plenty (majority) of games release on PC with no issues and requiring no tweaking proves that this is an issue squarely on the shoulders of game developers who release games with technical problems. We are giving these subpar developers an easy out by chalking incidents like the RDR2 release up as a failure of PC gaming. Rockstar is the failure here.
If you are going to pick an example, at least choose one that isn't from over a 8 years ago, from a Japanese developer that at the time had no experience with PC games. Since 2011, JP PC ports have exponentially improved in quality, for which you can look no further than the latest release from the same developer
Obviously the person has no problem playing on consoles and doesn't give a fuck about your points, otherwise they'd be on PC. Stupid ass comments like this that try to guilt people for not doing what you do.
Community fixing console games is also a thing. But years later on emulation (like SotC not running at 10fps). Far more unacceptable.
We should not expect much sense from people who have little to no idea about pc gaming coming here posting misinformation while waiting 1+ minute for their Monster Hunter World finish loading.
Last edited:
If the person doesn't give a fuck about his/her points than let the game run on whatever setting it chooses by defaut and play at whatever performance he/she get?
Or perhaps stop giving a fuck about someone's choice to play on consoles
There are multiple problems with these discussions.
1. Some people have no personal experience with the PC platform and rely on a sequence of broken telephones to form an opinion.
2. Some people dabbled in PC gaming in the distant past, experienced issues and judge the state of the platform today based on outdated information.
3. Some people lack the knowledge to understand important facts about PC gaming and cannot distinguish between an actual issue and intended behavior. Based on some things that Alex Battaglia from Digital Foundry hinted at, RDR2 may be such a case regarding the game's performance.
4. Some people have the preconceived notion that any issue with a game is the fault of the platform instead of the game itself. Digital Foundry articles have demonstrated that there is no shortage of console games with subpar performance or technical issues.
5. Some people do not realize that everything in PC gaming is a matter of choice. They see PC gamers talk endlessly about settings and tweaks and they think that this sort of process is mandatory. The truth is that people tweak their games because they enjoy squeezing out every bit of performance or image quality from their game and they do it because they want to. You can just as easily fire up the game, leave everything at the default settings and just play.
After people stop talking non sense about pc gaming.
Are you dense? The person only said they don't like to troubleshoot games which is why they prefer consoles and you're going to whine and give him shit for it? Get a clue.
Its scary that this needs to be even explain. There are Quality Presets in settings just for that. Most games doesnt even allow to modify options before selecting Custom preset or going to separate settings menu called "Advanced" .
I mean you have to have the situational awareness to realize this is happening in a thread designed to dunk on a platform. This wouldn't be permitted for anything other than PC. It's an anti-PC forum (on the aggregate) and that's tolerated if not encouraged.
Last edited:
Seriously, the time and effort I spend "troubleshooting" the worst PC game nowadays is much less than the average time that it takes to download an update on consoles.
User Warned: Hostility
I don't give a shit about what anyone else has said. I specifically responded to that post that took issue with simply suggesting they prefer consoles because they don't like to troubleshoot. That's fucking dumb.
i think tweaking your setting to get the best performance is most of the appeal for me. i just get annoyed because of all the launch driver issues on pc versions of games.
Because there is no problems with console games, right? How do you fix the 20~30fps and input lag on RDR2 on consoles? Oh you don't, because you don't have option to fix those problems and you can't hate something that doesnt exist on consoles (troubleshoot), right?
This is precisely why I love gaming on PC. You have to beg publishers to port/remaster your favorite console games, but on PC "remasters" are baked right in. And unlike even "the world's most powerful console," on PC you have the option to adjust graphics settings to prioritize your own performance standards.
And dealing with frustrating technical launch issues aside, let's say optimizing a 60-100 hour game like RDR2 could mean obsessive players with mid-range specs spending an average of an hour or so just dicking around with settings. That's roughly 1% of your time with the game spent to achieve at least a 100% or higher performance improvement over the console version at higher fidelity. I'd say that's a worthwhile investment of any gaming enthusiast's time.
And dealing with frustrating technical launch issues aside, let's say optimizing a 60-100 hour game like RDR2 could mean obsessive players with mid-range specs spending an average of an hour or so just dicking around with settings. That's roughly 1% of your time with the game spent to achieve at least a 100% or higher performance improvement over the console version at higher fidelity. I'd say that's a worthwhile investment of any gaming enthusiast's time.
Imagine if I create a thread about the bad optimized games on consoles naming one of them(PS4, Switch or Xbox) like RDR2 with sub 30 fps or Zelda AW, or Control, or Dishonored 2, or any other and say that's why some people hate to play on consoles?
I will probably be banned.
It's why I love gaming on a PC. Plenty of settings, a superior version of a game that runs like -- pretty much -- shit on its initial release. Mods down the line. What could anyone want more of a release?
I can't remember the last time I had to tinker with graphic settings (except when going for some modded games, min-maxing the graphics --- and this is more fun then work). You people are probably doing something wrong.
I can't remember the last time I had to tinker with graphic settings (except when going for some modded games, min-maxing the graphics --- and this is more fun then work). You people are probably doing something wrong.
They said they don't like to troubleshoot. That's all. Get over it.
Okay cool, I don't care. Once again I was defending someone for not enjoying having to troubleshoot if needed and would prefer to accept playing on consoles. It's that simple.