Sorry if I’m not the first to bring this up. It seems like a simple enough solution.

  • bleistift2@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    1 year ago

    There are also games that don’t render a square mile of a city in photorealistic quality.

    • Valdair@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      Graphical fidelity has not materially improved since the days of Crysis 1, 16 years ago. The only two meaningful changes for how difficult games should be to run in that time are that 1440p & 2160p have become more common, and raytracing. But consoles being content to run at dynamic resolutions and 30fps combined with tools developed to make raytracting palatable (DLSS) have made developers complacent to have their games run like absolute garbage even on mid spec hardware that should have no trouble running 1080p/60fps.

      Destiny 2 was famously well optimized at launch. I was running an easy 1440p/120fps in pretty much all scenarios maxed out on a 1080 Ti. The more new zones come out, the worse performance seems to be in each, even though I now have a 3090.

      I am loving BG3 but the entire city in act 3 can barely run 40fps on a 3090, and it is not an especially gorgeous looking game. The only thing I can really imagine is that maxed out the character models and armor models do look quite nice. But a lot of environment art is extremely low-poly. I should not have to turn on DLSS to get playable framerates in a game like this with a Titan class card.

      Nvidia and AMD just keep cranking the power on the cards, they’re now 3+ slot behemoths to deal with all the heat, which also means cranking the price. They also seem to think 30fps is acceptable, which it just… is not. Especially not in first person games.

      • Thrashy@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        W/r/t Baldur’s Gate 3, I don’t think the bottleneck is the GPU. Act 3 is incredibly ambitious in terms of NPC density, and AI is one of those things that’s still very hard to parallelize.

      • SenorBolsa@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Graphical fidelity has not materially improved since the days of Crysis 1

        I think you may have rose tinted glasses on this point, the level of detail in environments and accuracy of shading, especially of dynamic objects, has increased greatly. Material shading has also gotten insanely good compared to what we had then. Just peep the PBR materials on guns in modern FPS games, it’s incredible, Crysis just had normals and specular maps all black or grey guns that are kinda shiny and mottled. If you went inside of a small building or whatever there was hardly any shading or shadows to make it look right either.

        Crysis is a very clever use of what was available to make it look good, but we can do a hell of a lot better now (without raytracing)

        I could see the argument that the juice isn’t worth the squeeze to you, but graphics have very noticeably advanced in that time.

    • metaStatic@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’m currently part of the problem and this is so fucking true. Games have really stopped pushing the envelope because they either have to be cross platform compatible or they’re not even PC first.

      3D mark is the only thing I could find to put a dent in my 3060ti