• Scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.tech
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    30
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    1 year ago

    There’s a lot of entitled people who are upset because they kicked everything to ultra and yeah , that’s where that 7-12 fps is. Most people can’t fathom fiddling with the settings a bit and maybe lowering them.

    The dev sent out a forum post on what settings are causing the biggest lag. I followed their advice and it is completely playable. I’m about 10 hours in and I’m loving it

    • ougi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Can you send that forum post? It would have been cool for Paradox to have put a link in their useless launcher, or the steam news, or in the launch announcement, or wherever else. My observation is that Volumetrics and Global Illumination make the game run like garbage, but with global illumination off entirely, the game looks flaaaaaaat.

    • whereBeWaldo@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      15
      ·
      1 year ago

      I am a firm believer that if you have a bleeding edge system you are 100% entitled to playing stuff in max settings (at least in reasonable resolution). I don’t see the point in blaming the customers when there is clearly a faulty product here.

      Just to clear things up I am definitely not one of those people with the bleeding edge system with my 3060.

      • Thekingoflorda@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        1 year ago

        I feel like some games want to future proof, so I could understand how there are graphic modes which are not feasible with current hardware.

      • Dudewitbow@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        So youre not part of the “Can it run Crysis” where the game was essentially designed to run on hardware that didnt exist yet?

        • Send_me_nude_girls@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          1 year ago

          Difference here is, Crysis had graphics never seen before. C:S2 on max settings is nothing groundbreaking, it doesn’t even have raytracing. In this case there’s performance issues, not futuristic technologies.

      • BURN@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        100% a top of the line cpu and gpu should not have problems running the game on max settings. It’s so weird seeing everyone defend a game with terrible performance if you want to exercise any of the graphics options

      • NAS89@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        I don’t have a dog in this fight but bleeding edge literally implies that unreliability is to be expected. That’s why it’s bleeding edge and not leading edge.

        • whereBeWaldo@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          English is not my native language so I may have used the term wrongly, I meant “bleeding edge” as basically very high end.

          • Kedly@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Buddy is being pedantic, in casual use most people will use bleeding edge in exactly the same use case as you are using it.

            • NAS89@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              It’s not being pedantic; I’m not correcting their use of an incorrect word that doesn’t matter. There’s a pretty big distinction between leading edge and bleeding edge, especially when it comes to stated disappointment that a software or program isn’t as stable as expected.

              No need to toss insults just to jump to the defense of someone in a pretty simple misunderstanding.

              • Kedly@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                There isnt jack shit difference in the colloquial sense, except for the fact that one word people generally know, and the other people dont. If you were telling this to a native english speaker I wouldnt care, but to an ESL person I feel the need to step in and say “Yeah no, everyone will understand what you mean with the phrasing you chose, the person correcting you is being hyper literal”

                • NAS89@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  1- they didn’t mention being ESL until after the response, so congratulations on the foresight of other’s hindsight.

                  2- have a good night and stay blessed, bud.

          • NAS89@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            No worries; that would be leading edge, which you’re probably correct in your original statement with that in mind.

            Bleeding edge in English generally refers to day zero hardware, software, or services, in which mainstream support most likely doesn’t exist and it is generally anticipated that issues will be encountered.