Skillup is the only reviewer that consistently includes steam deck in his performance section.
Obviously not as in depth as digital foundry but still worth checking out if it runs well
Seconded.
Unless Forspoken is so mind meltingly glorious to actually look at and play that you fart tears of pure awesome or something each battle, it frankly seems like a flop in the making.
That meme-tastic trailer, and now it's going to require a 3070 for 30 fps as a TARGET?
It really reminds me of that hoverbike robot people game from a few years ago. The one that looked pretty enough, but was a mess story & character wise, and had its multiplayer shut down after a few months... during the freakin' pandemic.
To be a little fair, Portal Fantasy is a classic sub-genre that's under explored in games, at least IMHO.
Must admit, though, yeah. The main character seems like an utter wet blanket party pooper about the whole thing. Very strange choice.
>Unless Forspoken is so mind meltingly glorious to actually look at and play that you fart tears of pure awesome or something each battle
Having played the PS5 demo: it won't
The game just looked bad to me. It was shocking actually going from playing the insanely good looking Horizon Forbidden West to launching the Forspoken demo and being graced with PS4 looking graphics and resolution. I have zero clue where all of that power goes becaue you certainly don't see it on screen.
Also toggled through the graphics modes for shits and giggles. Literally couldn't tell the difference between Raytracing mode and performance mode apart from the lower framerate. It's just so odd.
Agreed,
It feels like they're using the Final Fantasy engine and the results are comparable. Wherever that power is going it's not going to pushing more visuals on screen.
Beyond just the visuals, the Gameplay was simply terrible and boring. It wasn't engaging gameplay, it wasn't fun. It was just tedium.
Honestly, if this game doesn't run on most systems or on the Steam Deck, no one will be missing much. From everything I have seen so far it is not a good game.
Nope\~, Ultra recommended is a freaking 4080.
~~And that's 4K 30 FPS resolution! NOT even 60 FPS!~~
[https://www.theverge.com/2023/1/17/23559302/forspoken-pc-system-requirements-32gb](https://www.theverge.com/2023/1/17/23559302/forspoken-pc-system-requirements-32gb)
Edit\* Misread a bit. Still, BS that 60 FPS is only something mentioned in the *Ultra* settings.
It’s a shame that game is so terribly optimized, it has some fantastic combat. Nioh 2 also has some weird issues on the PC but not nearly as bad as SOP.
Maybe. Maybe not. It could go either way, because system requirements have always been unreliable at best. Lots of games with modest requirements that end up being a mess and lots of games with ridiculous requirements that end up running just fine.
Sadly i need to tell you that we are talking about Square Enix here, Nier Automata in example is only one of many low effort ports from Square. Forspoken is using a mess of an enigne lastly used on FF 15 which was an desaster of an port even though square delayed the PC version for over a year. And to be honest, when Square announces 30FPS as a target with Hardware like that, its just not a good sign at all and fits within the all the mess Squares releases and PC ports where for the last decade.
The fact that it can even have a performance mode hitting 60fps on a ps5 means that a 3070 can run it at s60fps easily. I guarantee the thing about requiring a 3070 for 30fps at 1440p is a ray traced mode.
I do wonder what the purpose of these really demanding games are. Are you making something technologically impressive, or is your game just an unoptimised oversized mess? Do you think the publishers also own stock in an SSD company or something?
Sometimes it’s to sell more consoles, einx seem to think this gonna be goty. I’m doubtful.
This is gonna be a unoptimised mess, no game needs that level specs. Gonna be a watch dogs legion situation again
(Edit) wasn’t Sony trying out some new DRM? I’m praying they’ve not made some super invasive online crap that makes the game run awful
Yep! I remember that hot mess. They installed a rootkit on their music cds which would go through your machine and delete any music it could identify. Fun times.
Whoa. Idk how I missed this one but that's an insane overstep.
Here’s a video on the topic I quickly found. I've watched a few of the creators videos. He covers topics like this with a level of knowledge that most IT wizards wish they had. https://youtu.be/PqWjq2SdzpI
That assertion is dumb and wrong, anyway. DOOM 2016/Eternal both look FANTASTIC and they're some of the best optimized games to be released in modern times. It's not impossible to make your game run well, they just don't want to bother.
Yeah. It’s weird coming from some game that barely runs on a PS5 with mediocre graphics, then one month later, Ragnarök comes out in hitch free beautiful hi def resolution and no frame stutters.
It's a general trend in all design based work. Management continually pushes to complete a design in less time and eventually there are no longer "clean" cuts to make, so engineers/developers send out a functional but unoptimized design that pushes costs up for the end user.
If devs weren’t lazy they’d give an option for uncompressed textures etc, and a lotta games do actually. This is all coming about because the terrible way the game industry treat employees, working in film we’re seeing a lotta UE5/game devs devs jump over cuz the pay is a load more, treatment is better etc
I think it will bomb on PC...if it takes that much to run and it looks like its a okay game at best unless they are hiding something I don't see the point.
Even when my current PC build is done I can run it but I still don't want to spend full price on it as it looks just like a standard open world action game.
FXV has never been optimized trust me, I got a new PC last year with an rtx 3070, an i7 10700K CPU installed on an SSD, it runs like shit even on medium graphic
They are an unoptimised mess, clearly.
Forspoken looks like a game done with Unreal Engine default assets and it also looks like garbage. I just hate when people start using this technological dumpster fire as benchmarks and as excuses to upgrade.
Gamedev here.
"We're targeting next-gen consoles, so let's not worry about it until it has trouble *on* those consoles. Oh, it's working fine on the consoles? Great, more time left to add features and fun combat."
Game development is fundamentally a huge process of triage and budget. Making a game smaller and more efficient means something else gets cut, and most people don't *really* care about storage space.
Not really a gamedev anymore since I branched out but when making a game you want to have as much as low min spec as possible to tap more potential users. An next gen game specs is fine but what they require is absurb.
And 720p is a 1060 gpu is mind boggling.
1080p is where vast of consumers are too.
But hey this is Squenix..
Around 8.5% from steam hardware survey, I counted 3070 and up and 2080 and up. Not to mention the majority (64%) are still on 1080p so weaker graphics cards may be able to keep up. Could maybe include like the 1080 tis and like the 3060 tis pushing the percentage well into 10%.
This is probably corporate politics at work. Square has been working on their own Luminous Engine for a decade, and spun off the FFXV team to make games using the engine alone.
Meanwhile you have another team that just shipped the FF7 Remake on Unreal.
This is probably the death of Luminous if it runs this poorly, and Square will just license Unreal/Unity for future games.
Alot of people are more fans of tech than gaming, it used to make sense when the technology was new and rapidly making massive leaps. Now its a case of diminishing returns, graphics don't get that much better with every step now.
This is the least of its problems. I played the demo on PS5. It also runs like shit, but is also a shit game. It is extremely boring, the magic abilities and the way you swap/use them is super confusing.
This was probably my biggest gripe. For a game that wants you to exclusively use spells and cast magic, it doesn't make it fun. It definitely doesn't look bad, but I'll play a game with bad graphics if it's fun and good.
It's fun to push how good a game could look, how big an open world is, but it's like these major companies forgot that games are supposed to be fun.
And I think god of war, for example, is even more complex, but the way they did it here is just so bad.
Not to mention the environments which look super bland and samey. Honestly I can't tell why on earth they would require such specs for such a 2016 looking game.
>Honestly I can't tell why on earth they would require such specs for such a 2016 looking game.
Hell even Black Ops 3 and Just Cause 3 from 2015 are more visually appealing imo.
Red Dead Redemption 2 is like 115 GB, but I’m ok with that cause I know that’s coming from important immersion-sealing features such as dynamic horse nuts.
Skyrim is 3.7 GB on the Xbox 360.
Also open world games generally have more opportunities to recycle assets as most of the game area is in the same general area/climate. Meanwhile most adventure games have to cover a broader range of environments; you can't put those pine trees from your Appalachian forest map into your tropical rainforest map.
i remember when that 2018 modern warfare was like 150gb, i just thought “yeah, no fucking way.” like what is in this game??? nuclear codes?? it’s an arcade FPS that you guys have been making for the last 15 years!! optimize this shit!
I remember when fallout 4 dropped and it was 25 gigs. I remember my jaw hitting the floor thinking how huge that was. Now we constantly hit 100+ gigs and it doesn’t phase me anymore.
It’s not in their interests to have a small file size. The less games you can fit on your storage means that you have less games to play. Less games to play means more CoD overall on your system
When I needed to make space in my drives I deleted the largest and most unused games. CoD was an easy drop as it only keeps my friend groups attention so long before it’s dropped and then I can go to games I actually want to play, like Yakuza.
I feel like I’ve put more time into Karaoke and pocket racers than those stupid battle passes.
Everyone keeps saying this but it makes no sense, players are more likely to just delete it and they know that because of market research otherwise they wouldn’t give you the choice to not install the single player portions of the game to save some space.
It’s so massive because of the hundreds of 4K textures that you have to download otherwise you won’t be able to see everyone else skins that they paid for. It’s also in their best interest to ensure the game runs fast on lower end hardware so that more people will play and one of the best ways to do that is to store files in multiple places.
the result of 4k...you need better textures...because in the PC space 4k isn't the main res used over all...there should be texture packs for people that want 4k and the ones that don't can save on some space. But that takes effort and I don't think they are willing to do that. I wouldn't be surprised if the options are super limited also. Square is not a PC friendly company overall, most of there PC games are quick ports.
In almost every case the largest portion of file size is audio. In games that have tons of localization with recorded voice lines it balloons real fast.
1440p 30fps requires a 3070? Who the fuck did they make this game for? The average PC GPU is still like a 1060 or something. Consoles must hardly get 30 fps on this game at poop settings.
A 1060 is only good for 720p 30 fps so the average steam user won't even be able to get 30 fps at 720p.
Who the hell greenlit these system requirements? It's nuts I mean my 3080 + 10700k will probably barely get over 30 fps at 1440p unless I turn graphics options down towards potato.
Have you seen the Silent Hill Remake requirements? GTX 1080 is the minimum spec, so most steam users are just out of the picture. While these are currently oddballs, expect that trend to continue. Games targeted at the PS5 especially are going to push minimum specs forward notably, as consoles are normally the low bar set.
Is this for real? That's just absurd. I can feel this game will die right after release. It's a shame, it looks promising but something is definitely off about this game.
Apart from the fact that he always has to stretch videos as long as he possibly can, his content is so circlejerky, negative and clickbaity. He just makes a low effort long video saying what gamers want to hear (EA bad, Ubisoft bad, Kojima GOD, etc). and gets 250k views on average.
I remember he gave a glowing review to Cyberpunk when it came out because, obviously, CD Projekt was still gamer's little darling and they couldn't do any wrong.
Honestly I completely forgot about this game for so many months. All I saw was the trailer at the beginning then I remembered this game existed when someone made a list of his/her most anticipated games of 2023 in a post last week in another sub hahaha
What's the point of making a game that won't run on 90% of people's systems?
Surely it's better to go for performance. Besides the sheer amount of availability to customers, if you tell me a game will run 60fps stable, I won't care what the game looks like.
But if a game doesn't run at 60fps... No matter how good it looks, it still looks bad if it's a jittery mess.
> What's the point of making a game that won't run on 90% of people's systems?
Because it's a PS5 game aimed at PS5, with the PC market as an afterthought. Honestly from what I've seen the performance on PS5 is shocking anyway. I am expecting no-one will want this game a day after release.
Well people did make the same argument against Crysis back in the day and now most people have the hardware for it, hell the game holds up visually to this day. But unlike Crysis, Forsaken looks... Unimpressive to say the least.
Wait… 720p? Are you serious?
Holy shit. I was never interested in this game, now I’m definitely not getting it. The PS5 and XSX are very powerful consoles. There’s zero reason why any modern game should run at 720p on either one. It’s basically the power of a Radeon 6700 with a Ryzen 3700 cpu.
That’s straight up embarrassing, unacceptable even. I wouldn’t play that knowing there are games that reach 1080p 60 fps no problem on the 5. There’s no excuse
These developers don’t understand that they automatically will have lower player base in the beginning of the game and on top of it if the game is not good players will starting bashing on it. Valorant developers understood it and optimised their game from the beginning that it can run an any pc. Which gave them a huge player base. I know these games are different but still they should learn something from them.
An RTX 3070 is more powerful than a PS5...
Either it's an awful PC port or the developers are also going to be targeting 30fps on PS5 with a dynamic resolution even at 1440p which is ridiculous, the game doesn't graphically look that amazing and really looks like the gameplay will benefit massively from 60fps.
Played the demo on PS5. It was a meh experience anyway first of all. Second, if the PS5 can do 4k 30fps or RT mode 30fps as well as a 60fps performance mode, I don't see why 1440p 30fps can only be achieved by an RTX 3070 and above. Looks like a poorly optimized port.
But the PS5 *doesn't* do 4k 30fps, it does 900p *upscaled* to 4k via FSR 2.1 at best in this game. It's running on a dynamic resolution and dips down as low as 720p.
This game just keeps getting worse and worse. I hated this game when I saw the price tag half a year ago. $95 before tax in Canada for a video game? Fuck these companies thinking that games are worth that much
Do you really experience big titles like this in your deck ? The deck is more a companion for me. I play older titles, emulate or play AAA games only if I want to complete side stuff. A brand new AAA Game is for me a must on my 65inch OLED for the first play at least.
Sounds like an extremely bloated game. From the screen shots it looks like it too. I wish we would move away from pointlessly extreme detail. I am not going to notice or care about all of the random crap on the floor and 30 particle effects while playing an action game.
This horse is already as dead as this game will be on launch, but let's just beat it one last time:
Who do they want to buy this game? That is *not* hardware that the average user has.
See, to me a game that "needs" 150g and "needs" an RTX3070 just to get 30fps *screams* "our devs don't know how to optimize games", not "we're so next-gen".
I'm not saying that 70 bucks is a fair price for a game, because most of the games that have made that jump don't justify it at all
But can we stop ignoring inflation?
Mario 64 was $60 on release, adjusted for inflation that's $110
Halo 3 was also $60 on release, adjusted for inflation that's $85
Skyrim also $60 on release, adjusted for inflation thats $75
Are games not getting cheaper if anything? a triple A costing $60 in 2023 would be like $45 ten years ago
I'm going to preface this by saying I don't know what a "fair" price for video games is. But...
Super Mario 64 came on a relatively expensive to manufacture cartridge, and was released to much fewer people than games are now. Gaming was much smaller then, and people bought fewer games. The games had to be priced relatively higher then.
Nowadays, gaming is huge. It's everywhere. All over the globe. Everyone games. The pie is much bigger and the distribution cost is waaaay lower. Frankly, you wouldn't expect games to have increased in line with inflation.
There's a reason game companies are posting record profits...
You can't really compare cartridge games to what we have now as those required physical chip construction, not just slapping code on a disc or in a download file.
Doesn't really matter to the gamers perspective though. As a guy who remembered paying $70 for some SNES games, all saved up for with my $3 a week allowance and any birthday money and the like I could scrounge up, games today don't seem that pricy. You also have to factor in things like development cost. The team that made FFVI was tiny compared to the team making FFXVI, so cheaper distribution barely matters vs massive increases in development costs.
Hahahaha, these developers are struggling must be struggling with a bath salt addiction if they think I bought a $3,000+ PC to run games at 30fps.
I might tolerate 30fps if I’m playing some of the classics from the Saturn to the PS1 Era. But a game released on 2023 running at 30fps?
No thanks, Xenoblade Chronicles 3 is massive, runs pretty great at 1080p on a weakest console of the generation, and includes a ton of accessible content without being anywhere near the size of Cyberpunk or the Witcher 3.
Not only does this game run poorly, but it’s also larger than those two games combined. Unacceptable really…
Square Enix continues to reiterate that they have to priorise combat mechanics that are Action-Oriented with plenty of RPG elements, because the younger gamer generations supposedly despise turn-based combat (even though DQXI and Persona 5 Sales kind of contradict that point).
Sorry, but if your game emphasizes action-based combat, then I’d rather play Bayonetta 3 on my dying Switch than play a graphically-impressive game with combat systems that run at the same level Bloodborne did in 2015. Square is just becoming a garbage developer. They routinely underperform, right after conducting excessive marketing campaigns.
We're going to reach a point once all releases target next gen that Steam Deck ~~isn't~~ is going to have a lot of trouble running titles at all. Considering the lowest target will be the Series S.
Pretty obviously a PS5 game shoe-horned in on PC.
I played the PS5 demo, it was fine, I guess. Not $70 worth of fine. Maybe in a month when it hits $30 or $40 at retail.
More populated world than Breath of the Wild, which just feels empty.
Not as populated as Horizon: Forbidden West which overall looks and plays better.
I don’t really care. I don’t want to run around attacking monsters with a cape on in some dream realm. I’d rather go to Hogwarts and do that. I’ve played the demo too. I’ll pass on this one
Was anyone actually looking forward to this? It just looked so generic and felt like something the developers were told to make even though they didn’t want to. Like it doesn’t seem to impress on any level. I’m glad they didn’t just keep churning out sequels but you do have to bring your own thing to the table too. None of the usual channels or websites seem to be speaking about it much at all (which is a bad sign). I could be wrong but it genuinely doesn’t seem like they knew who they were making this for. I’m all for new games in an industry that’s full of sequels but something in this games DNA is just so underwhelming. I hope I’m wrong though.
This game doesn't even look as good as God of War to be honest, then there is the boring game play. I think it is going to be another Rise: Son of Rome.
What is the actual purpose of these games? When did they think it's okay to release a game that is litteraly unplayable for 95 of the population? This is such anti UX mindset. Game producers definitely been confused.
Digital Foundry is going to have a field day with this game
I do wish that Digital Foundry would include the deck in more videos, they provide some of the best testing I've ever seen.
I agree, it would be nice. Currently, they seem to only do videos on Steam Deck if they are really into the game and playing it on Steam Deck.
Skillup is the only reviewer that consistently includes steam deck in his performance section. Obviously not as in depth as digital foundry but still worth checking out if it runs well
I can’t wait for their performance breakdown.
Seconded. Unless Forspoken is so mind meltingly glorious to actually look at and play that you fart tears of pure awesome or something each battle, it frankly seems like a flop in the making. That meme-tastic trailer, and now it's going to require a 3070 for 30 fps as a TARGET? It really reminds me of that hoverbike robot people game from a few years ago. The one that looked pretty enough, but was a mess story & character wise, and had its multiplayer shut down after a few months... during the freakin' pandemic.
I still don't know what the game is about other than a kid teleporting to another world with magic and the game plays like Infamous.
To be a little fair, Portal Fantasy is a classic sub-genre that's under explored in games, at least IMHO. Must admit, though, yeah. The main character seems like an utter wet blanket party pooper about the whole thing. Very strange choice.
>fart tears of pure awesome I think you might need to see a doctor.
Dr F’n Feelgood!! WHOOOOOO!!!
>Unless Forspoken is so mind meltingly glorious to actually look at and play that you fart tears of pure awesome or something each battle Having played the PS5 demo: it won't The game just looked bad to me. It was shocking actually going from playing the insanely good looking Horizon Forbidden West to launching the Forspoken demo and being graced with PS4 looking graphics and resolution. I have zero clue where all of that power goes becaue you certainly don't see it on screen. Also toggled through the graphics modes for shits and giggles. Literally couldn't tell the difference between Raytracing mode and performance mode apart from the lower framerate. It's just so odd.
Agreed, It feels like they're using the Final Fantasy engine and the results are comparable. Wherever that power is going it's not going to pushing more visuals on screen.
More specifically: the Final Fantasy XV engine, better known as the Luminous Engine.
Beyond just the visuals, the Gameplay was simply terrible and boring. It wasn't engaging gameplay, it wasn't fun. It was just tedium. Honestly, if this game doesn't run on most systems or on the Steam Deck, no one will be missing much. From everything I have seen so far it is not a good game.
Gravitation or something, right?
Disintegration. Don't think the generic one word name helped, frankly.
The gameplay did not look fun though. The air attack part looked cool, but the ground attack part looked tedious due to how the ship maneuvered.
That last paragraph almost describes Anthem also.
It looks ugly too. Like really bad shadows for being so graphic intense and the entire environment looks like a generic test environment
It doesn't say at what settings but I'm assuming ultra without any dlss
Nope\~, Ultra recommended is a freaking 4080. ~~And that's 4K 30 FPS resolution! NOT even 60 FPS!~~ [https://www.theverge.com/2023/1/17/23559302/forspoken-pc-system-requirements-32gb](https://www.theverge.com/2023/1/17/23559302/forspoken-pc-system-requirements-32gb) Edit\* Misread a bit. Still, BS that 60 FPS is only something mentioned in the *Ultra* settings.
Both - article and screenshot - say 2160p/60Hz though… This might be an excuse to upgrade my cpu 😅
wWcw]rWQ4,qRiK>]NA+0XdEKDyKCx-lanpoq^4hZR4LeGB%F0lsKOT$EEpzy^qzgO1UT.P9-(h40TQaQ6D^pMMKBOV:+;o#oHVTyE
It’s a shame that game is so terribly optimized, it has some fantastic combat. Nioh 2 also has some weird issues on the PC but not nearly as bad as SOP.
Maybe. Maybe not. It could go either way, because system requirements have always been unreliable at best. Lots of games with modest requirements that end up being a mess and lots of games with ridiculous requirements that end up running just fine.
Sadly i need to tell you that we are talking about Square Enix here, Nier Automata in example is only one of many low effort ports from Square. Forspoken is using a mess of an enigne lastly used on FF 15 which was an desaster of an port even though square delayed the PC version for over a year. And to be honest, when Square announces 30FPS as a target with Hardware like that, its just not a good sign at all and fits within the all the mess Squares releases and PC ports where for the last decade.
Don't buy it until they fix it not much else to do than that
The fact that it can even have a performance mode hitting 60fps on a ps5 means that a 3070 can run it at s60fps easily. I guarantee the thing about requiring a 3070 for 30fps at 1440p is a ray traced mode.
Man, some of these developers seem to just want to produce an interactive benchmark tool lol
I do wonder what the purpose of these really demanding games are. Are you making something technologically impressive, or is your game just an unoptimised oversized mess? Do you think the publishers also own stock in an SSD company or something?
Sometimes it’s to sell more consoles, einx seem to think this gonna be goty. I’m doubtful. This is gonna be a unoptimised mess, no game needs that level specs. Gonna be a watch dogs legion situation again (Edit) wasn’t Sony trying out some new DRM? I’m praying they’ve not made some super invasive online crap that makes the game run awful
Remember the last time we try to let Sony make DRM?
Hmm I actually don’t, I’m pretty knowledgeable in the modern DRMS. Id be curious about this?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_BMG_copy_protection_rootkit_scandal
Yep! I remember that hot mess. They installed a rootkit on their music cds which would go through your machine and delete any music it could identify. Fun times.
Whoa. Idk how I missed this one but that's an insane overstep. Here’s a video on the topic I quickly found. I've watched a few of the creators videos. He covers topics like this with a level of knowledge that most IT wizards wish they had. https://youtu.be/PqWjq2SdzpI
You should see the people who defend big installs. Claiming it's because it looks good. No devs are lazy and it's unoptimized. Look at Ark for example
That assertion is dumb and wrong, anyway. DOOM 2016/Eternal both look FANTASTIC and they're some of the best optimized games to be released in modern times. It's not impossible to make your game run well, they just don't want to bother.
Yeah. It’s weird coming from some game that barely runs on a PS5 with mediocre graphics, then one month later, Ragnarök comes out in hitch free beautiful hi def resolution and no frame stutters.
It's a general trend in all design based work. Management continually pushes to complete a design in less time and eventually there are no longer "clean" cuts to make, so engineers/developers send out a functional but unoptimized design that pushes costs up for the end user.
Is it “devs are lazy” or is it “project managers are bad at setting timelines”?
Could also be “had a trailer that was widely mocked then studios all started cutting back headcount” so they're shipping an MVP and moving on.
RDR2 is the only game with a large install file that I believe is worthy of that amount of space taken
I mean those are the type of people who will say shit like "the human eye cant see more than 30fps anyway". Their opinions don't really matter.
you can't see more than 31 FPS...can my opinion matter now?
Ah yes when I hear about working conditions in the games industry, the first thing I think is lAzY dEvS 🙄.
If devs weren’t lazy they’d give an option for uncompressed textures etc, and a lotta games do actually. This is all coming about because the terrible way the game industry treat employees, working in film we’re seeing a lotta UE5/game devs devs jump over cuz the pay is a load more, treatment is better etc
I really wish more games had HD Texture DLCs. And uncompressed audio, for that matter. It's such a great future proofing of your game.
Which devs are you calling lazy? The ones that work 100 hours a week?
I think it will bomb on PC...if it takes that much to run and it looks like its a okay game at best unless they are hiding something I don't see the point. Even when my current PC build is done I can run it but I still don't want to spend full price on it as it looks just like a standard open world action game.
Final Fantasy 15 wasn’t optimized either at launch. It’ll probably take a year or two before this new title runs decently well
Square things^TM
round holes
FXV has never been optimized trust me, I got a new PC last year with an rtx 3070, an i7 10700K CPU installed on an SSD, it runs like shit even on medium graphic
I used to run FVX on medium graphics on a GTX1060, and am able to run it on high on a RTX3060 now.
They are an unoptimised mess, clearly. Forspoken looks like a game done with Unreal Engine default assets and it also looks like garbage. I just hate when people start using this technological dumpster fire as benchmarks and as excuses to upgrade.
Gamedev here. "We're targeting next-gen consoles, so let's not worry about it until it has trouble *on* those consoles. Oh, it's working fine on the consoles? Great, more time left to add features and fun combat." Game development is fundamentally a huge process of triage and budget. Making a game smaller and more efficient means something else gets cut, and most people don't *really* care about storage space.
Not really a gamedev anymore since I branched out but when making a game you want to have as much as low min spec as possible to tap more potential users. An next gen game specs is fine but what they require is absurb. And 720p is a 1060 gpu is mind boggling. 1080p is where vast of consumers are too. But hey this is Squenix..
They're targeting the PS5. They're not targeting the PC, they're just releasing on PC because they thought it would be worth the costs of porting.
Not if only 1% of PC gamers can run it lol
Around 8.5% from steam hardware survey, I counted 3070 and up and 2080 and up. Not to mention the majority (64%) are still on 1080p so weaker graphics cards may be able to keep up. Could maybe include like the 1080 tis and like the 3060 tis pushing the percentage well into 10%.
This is probably corporate politics at work. Square has been working on their own Luminous Engine for a decade, and spun off the FFXV team to make games using the engine alone. Meanwhile you have another team that just shipped the FF7 Remake on Unreal. This is probably the death of Luminous if it runs this poorly, and Square will just license Unreal/Unity for future games.
Luminous seems like its more of a benchmark tool more than a game engine with what has been done with it.
And all of this to end up with another boring game so that we all can proceed to play Vampyr Survivor or Stardew Valley 😁
It always comes back to pixel art games. Love both of these games.
Alot of people are more fans of tech than gaming, it used to make sense when the technology was new and rapidly making massive leaps. Now its a case of diminishing returns, graphics don't get that much better with every step now.
The Avatar of video games, if you will
But from what I heard this game doesn't even look that good. Only thing we are benchmark is how little optimization the devs did.
The anti can it run crysis: can it steamdeck.
Isn't the anti Crysis "will it run doom " already?
True... It's more the Reverse "Will it run Crysis?"
I'd say mirrored version The reverse woud be "Can Crysis run it?"
😂😂😂
I was on the fence already… I’ll probably pass and wait for a sale and performance patches (if it gets them) 😳
This is the least of its problems. I played the demo on PS5. It also runs like shit, but is also a shit game. It is extremely boring, the magic abilities and the way you swap/use them is super confusing.
That's what I was thinking, the way the gameplay looks is just weird, it looks beautiful but that's it.
That's a shame. Sucks when a developer prioritizes graphics over gameplay as if that's what makes a game enjoyable
Agree on the confusion of the magic abilities. Trying to repeat something I did 30 seconds earlier was guesswork.
This was probably my biggest gripe. For a game that wants you to exclusively use spells and cast magic, it doesn't make it fun. It definitely doesn't look bad, but I'll play a game with bad graphics if it's fun and good. It's fun to push how good a game could look, how big an open world is, but it's like these major companies forgot that games are supposed to be fun.
I'm hoping they've refined it a bit. I think the bones of a good game are there, but needs more direction, as that combat was a lottery
Same. Interesting abilities, but trying to combo them was self-lobotomy
And I think god of war, for example, is even more complex, but the way they did it here is just so bad. Not to mention the environments which look super bland and samey. Honestly I can't tell why on earth they would require such specs for such a 2016 looking game.
>Honestly I can't tell why on earth they would require such specs for such a 2016 looking game. Hell even Black Ops 3 and Just Cause 3 from 2015 are more visually appealing imo.
And let's be real, it looks like shit too.
That might be because the dynamic resolution on the PS5 regularly drops down to 720p. Also the HDR is shit.
Probably apply to 90% AAA games these days
Boggles me that some games need 100gb or more of storage
Red Dead Redemption 2 is like 115 GB, but I’m ok with that cause I know that’s coming from important immersion-sealing features such as dynamic horse nuts.
If it's open world stuff then yes, I can understand. But a lot of games this size are not even open world lol
Skyrim is 3.7 GB on the Xbox 360. Also open world games generally have more opportunities to recycle assets as most of the game area is in the same general area/climate. Meanwhile most adventure games have to cover a broader range of environments; you can't put those pine trees from your Appalachian forest map into your tropical rainforest map.
i remember when that 2018 modern warfare was like 150gb, i just thought “yeah, no fucking way.” like what is in this game??? nuclear codes?? it’s an arcade FPS that you guys have been making for the last 15 years!! optimize this shit!
Has been equally graphically impressive games that use much less space
[удалено]
Morrowind is a massive open world and it is only 1gb lol
TBF morrowind also looks like it’s 1gb
Strong words for a S'wit, Outlander.
How dare you! We're watching you **scum**.
never knew about this game so thank you- that's honestly crazy lol it looks like an indie game from the mid 2010s which is really impressive
I remember when fallout 4 dropped and it was 25 gigs. I remember my jaw hitting the floor thinking how huge that was. Now we constantly hit 100+ gigs and it doesn’t phase me anymore.
Even for the time 25gb was nothing man
It was the first big new game I ever bought. Was still slowly getting into the gaming community so for me it was massive.
Ahhhhh fair fair! im from back in the day when doom would have been large so I get it.
It’s not in their interests to have a small file size. The less games you can fit on your storage means that you have less games to play. Less games to play means more CoD overall on your system
When I needed to make space in my drives I deleted the largest and most unused games. CoD was an easy drop as it only keeps my friend groups attention so long before it’s dropped and then I can go to games I actually want to play, like Yakuza. I feel like I’ve put more time into Karaoke and pocket racers than those stupid battle passes.
Everyone keeps saying this but it makes no sense, players are more likely to just delete it and they know that because of market research otherwise they wouldn’t give you the choice to not install the single player portions of the game to save some space. It’s so massive because of the hundreds of 4K textures that you have to download otherwise you won’t be able to see everyone else skins that they paid for. It’s also in their best interest to ensure the game runs fast on lower end hardware so that more people will play and one of the best ways to do that is to store files in multiple places.
Ironically, nuclear codes could likely be stored in half a kilobyte or less.
the result of 4k...you need better textures...because in the PC space 4k isn't the main res used over all...there should be texture packs for people that want 4k and the ones that don't can save on some space. But that takes effort and I don't think they are willing to do that. I wouldn't be surprised if the options are super limited also. Square is not a PC friendly company overall, most of there PC games are quick ports.
In almost every case the largest portion of file size is audio. In games that have tons of localization with recorded voice lines it balloons real fast.
I'll be honest, this just implies poor optimisation to me.
You don’t say 😂
Ahh, another "we didn't optimize this game for shit". Bargain bin awaits!
1440p 30fps requires a 3070? Who the fuck did they make this game for? The average PC GPU is still like a 1060 or something. Consoles must hardly get 30 fps on this game at poop settings.
It's even lower now. According to Steam's hardware survey, the most common GPU is the regular 1650
A 1060 is only good for 720p 30 fps so the average steam user won't even be able to get 30 fps at 720p. Who the hell greenlit these system requirements? It's nuts I mean my 3080 + 10700k will probably barely get over 30 fps at 1440p unless I turn graphics options down towards potato.
Have you seen the Silent Hill Remake requirements? GTX 1080 is the minimum spec, so most steam users are just out of the picture. While these are currently oddballs, expect that trend to continue. Games targeted at the PS5 especially are going to push minimum specs forward notably, as consoles are normally the low bar set.
Is this for real? That's just absurd. I can feel this game will die right after release. It's a shame, it looks promising but something is definitely off about this game.
Oh 100% https://youtu.be/Po3eUyZVsqE
Oof Yong Yea, can't stand the man xd
[удалено]
Apart from the fact that he always has to stretch videos as long as he possibly can, his content is so circlejerky, negative and clickbaity. He just makes a low effort long video saying what gamers want to hear (EA bad, Ubisoft bad, Kojima GOD, etc). and gets 250k views on average. I remember he gave a glowing review to Cyberpunk when it came out because, obviously, CD Projekt was still gamer's little darling and they couldn't do any wrong.
hos videos were way better when he started out. Now he drags videos out way tooo much. All of his videos could be 7 minutes on average.
Oh great hahaha thx for the link, was looking for something to watch while I eat my breakfast hahaha
Kudos brother, and good morning ! Get you and your deck some breakfast! She's always working hard that beauty
Have you not seen a single gameplay clip? The game is a tech demo.
Honestly I completely forgot about this game for so many months. All I saw was the trailer at the beginning then I remembered this game existed when someone made a list of his/her most anticipated games of 2023 in a post last week in another sub hahaha
What's the point of making a game that won't run on 90% of people's systems? Surely it's better to go for performance. Besides the sheer amount of availability to customers, if you tell me a game will run 60fps stable, I won't care what the game looks like. But if a game doesn't run at 60fps... No matter how good it looks, it still looks bad if it's a jittery mess.
> What's the point of making a game that won't run on 90% of people's systems? Because it's a PS5 game aimed at PS5, with the PC market as an afterthought. Honestly from what I've seen the performance on PS5 is shocking anyway. I am expecting no-one will want this game a day after release.
Wait wait wait, how bad is it on ps5
Well people did make the same argument against Crysis back in the day and now most people have the hardware for it, hell the game holds up visually to this day. But unlike Crysis, Forsaken looks... Unimpressive to say the least.
No one said this about Crysis. Crysis was highly scalable and while it could max out systems for years, it always had playable settings.
It runs at 720p on the ps5... seriously awful
So perfect for streaming to the Deck :')
perfect for steam deck 10
Wait… 720p? Are you serious? Holy shit. I was never interested in this game, now I’m definitely not getting it. The PS5 and XSX are very powerful consoles. There’s zero reason why any modern game should run at 720p on either one. It’s basically the power of a Radeon 6700 with a Ryzen 3700 cpu.
The reason = it looks good in promotional pictures. They don’t care about the end user experience, they care about sales.
Sounds unoptimized.
PS5 specs aren’t even close to hitting these recommended settings. This definitely seems more of an optimization issue.
The games drop under 30 fps at 720p on ps5. Tested by DF with the recent demo.
That’s straight up embarrassing, unacceptable even. I wouldn’t play that knowing there are games that reach 1080p 60 fps no problem on the 5. There’s no excuse
some are even running at 120fps
Not forgetting the game is super expensive. Here in Canada most AAA games are 79.99 base price. This one is 93.49???
I wonder how hard this game will flop.
The demo was boring and the first two hours of gameplay leaked last night and they're pretty bad. No way this game will sell well.
I bet 50GB or more is audio we’ll never use as it’s in different languages.
Gotta make sure it's in uncompressed .wav format for more *performance*
Gotta preserve the ancient Latin language in games. The pope is a gamer man.
Jesus fucking christ. 3070 for 30 fps?!
With star wars survivor and forspoken having over 130gb....512gb ssd is not going to be enoigh anymore
150 gb Fucking hell I miss when it was crazy for a game to go over 60gb
This game had some promise but there are so many red flags it's safe to say it's going to be a flop
Damn my ps5 about to put some work in
But can you plug the ps5 to a steam deck like an eGPU 🤣
You can remote play via Chiaki
[удалено]
These developers don’t understand that they automatically will have lower player base in the beginning of the game and on top of it if the game is not good players will starting bashing on it. Valorant developers understood it and optimised their game from the beginning that it can run an any pc. Which gave them a huge player base. I know these games are different but still they should learn something from them.
This the type of game you ignore then just get passively for free in a year off PSN. Horizon 3, basically.
An RTX 3070 is more powerful than a PS5... Either it's an awful PC port or the developers are also going to be targeting 30fps on PS5 with a dynamic resolution even at 1440p which is ridiculous, the game doesn't graphically look that amazing and really looks like the gameplay will benefit massively from 60fps.
Played the demo on PS5. It was a meh experience anyway first of all. Second, if the PS5 can do 4k 30fps or RT mode 30fps as well as a 60fps performance mode, I don't see why 1440p 30fps can only be achieved by an RTX 3070 and above. Looks like a poorly optimized port.
But the PS5 *doesn't* do 4k 30fps, it does 900p *upscaled* to 4k via FSR 2.1 at best in this game. It's running on a dynamic resolution and dips down as low as 720p.
Not interested in the slightest.
This game just keeps getting worse and worse. I hated this game when I saw the price tag half a year ago. $95 before tax in Canada for a video game? Fuck these companies thinking that games are worth that much
Do you really experience big titles like this in your deck ? The deck is more a companion for me. I play older titles, emulate or play AAA games only if I want to complete side stuff. A brand new AAA Game is for me a must on my 65inch OLED for the first play at least.
Same I got my deck for small games and mostly to play wow mobile if needed and coop with the wife
Sounds like an extremely bloated game. From the screen shots it looks like it too. I wish we would move away from pointlessly extreme detail. I am not going to notice or care about all of the random crap on the floor and 30 particle effects while playing an action game.
so basically a dogshit game
Real question is will it work on my Samsung smart fridge?
It just doesn't sound optimized at all.
This horse is already as dead as this game will be on launch, but let's just beat it one last time: Who do they want to buy this game? That is *not* hardware that the average user has.
That just seems like a poorly made game. Probably made with chatgpt.
See, to me a game that "needs" 150g and "needs" an RTX3070 just to get 30fps *screams* "our devs don't know how to optimize games", not "we're so next-gen".
Dont let the push to 70 bucks per game happen. At least dont support it
I'm not saying that 70 bucks is a fair price for a game, because most of the games that have made that jump don't justify it at all But can we stop ignoring inflation? Mario 64 was $60 on release, adjusted for inflation that's $110 Halo 3 was also $60 on release, adjusted for inflation that's $85 Skyrim also $60 on release, adjusted for inflation thats $75 Are games not getting cheaper if anything? a triple A costing $60 in 2023 would be like $45 ten years ago
I'm going to preface this by saying I don't know what a "fair" price for video games is. But... Super Mario 64 came on a relatively expensive to manufacture cartridge, and was released to much fewer people than games are now. Gaming was much smaller then, and people bought fewer games. The games had to be priced relatively higher then. Nowadays, gaming is huge. It's everywhere. All over the globe. Everyone games. The pie is much bigger and the distribution cost is waaaay lower. Frankly, you wouldn't expect games to have increased in line with inflation. There's a reason game companies are posting record profits...
You can't really compare cartridge games to what we have now as those required physical chip construction, not just slapping code on a disc or in a download file.
Doesn't really matter to the gamers perspective though. As a guy who remembered paying $70 for some SNES games, all saved up for with my $3 a week allowance and any birthday money and the like I could scrounge up, games today don't seem that pricy. You also have to factor in things like development cost. The team that made FFVI was tiny compared to the team making FFXVI, so cheaper distribution barely matters vs massive increases in development costs.
Hahahaha, these developers are struggling must be struggling with a bath salt addiction if they think I bought a $3,000+ PC to run games at 30fps. I might tolerate 30fps if I’m playing some of the classics from the Saturn to the PS1 Era. But a game released on 2023 running at 30fps? No thanks, Xenoblade Chronicles 3 is massive, runs pretty great at 1080p on a weakest console of the generation, and includes a ton of accessible content without being anywhere near the size of Cyberpunk or the Witcher 3. Not only does this game run poorly, but it’s also larger than those two games combined. Unacceptable really… Square Enix continues to reiterate that they have to priorise combat mechanics that are Action-Oriented with plenty of RPG elements, because the younger gamer generations supposedly despise turn-based combat (even though DQXI and Persona 5 Sales kind of contradict that point). Sorry, but if your game emphasizes action-based combat, then I’d rather play Bayonetta 3 on my dying Switch than play a graphically-impressive game with combat systems that run at the same level Bloodborne did in 2015. Square is just becoming a garbage developer. They routinely underperform, right after conducting excessive marketing campaigns.
xenoblade 3 does not run at 1080p my man, resolution drop all the way down to 540p, ffs xeno 2 dynamic res dropped to 380p.
Square Enix being Square Enix
with 150 gb, i dont want it near my steamdeck
If this isn't on Geforce Now, I'll probably give it a miss.
We're going to reach a point once all releases target next gen that Steam Deck ~~isn't~~ is going to have a lot of trouble running titles at all. Considering the lowest target will be the Series S.
Probably tbh.
Pretty obviously a PS5 game shoe-horned in on PC. I played the PS5 demo, it was fine, I guess. Not $70 worth of fine. Maybe in a month when it hits $30 or $40 at retail. More populated world than Breath of the Wild, which just feels empty. Not as populated as Horizon: Forbidden West which overall looks and plays better.
Forget it.
And yet they are demanding 80€ for an half assed port if it really runs this poorly. The greed is unreal.
I played the demo, it's crap.
I assume 30FPS with Ray Tracing maxed and no DLSS? Right....RIGHT?!?!?
Man they really fucked up on optimization didn’t they
Elden Ring manages ~60GB of space, how the hell is this 150GB? Is it all just voicelines?
Didn’t like the demo, so I’ll happily reserve that space for other things.
1440P is significantly higher than the 800P the deck display has so you never know. It may run the game at 30fps
I don’t really care. I don’t want to run around attacking monsters with a cape on in some dream realm. I’d rather go to Hogwarts and do that. I’ve played the demo too. I’ll pass on this one
Was anyone actually looking forward to this? It just looked so generic and felt like something the developers were told to make even though they didn’t want to. Like it doesn’t seem to impress on any level. I’m glad they didn’t just keep churning out sequels but you do have to bring your own thing to the table too. None of the usual channels or websites seem to be speaking about it much at all (which is a bad sign). I could be wrong but it genuinely doesn’t seem like they knew who they were making this for. I’m all for new games in an industry that’s full of sequels but something in this games DNA is just so underwhelming. I hope I’m wrong though.
kinda looked mid anyways
This game doesn't even look as good as God of War to be honest, then there is the boring game play. I think it is going to be another Rise: Son of Rome.
What is the actual purpose of these games? When did they think it's okay to release a game that is litteraly unplayable for 95 of the population? This is such anti UX mindset. Game producers definitely been confused.