diffusionx
Gold Member
i love this guy because he makes so many people seethe. Absolute a-tier troll-chad
The long-awaited Oblivion Remastered patch is finally coming
- Thread starter rubik's dude
- Start date
i love this guy because he makes so many people seethe. Absolute a-tier troll-chad
Guardian Monkey
Member
This video provides a detailed and critical analysis of the GPU optimization failures in the Unreal Engine-based game Tees Oblivion Remake, focusing primarily on Nanite rendering technology, Unreal Engine's default rendering behaviors, and Lumen's lighting system. The presenter, supported by a save game provided by a viewer, investigates specific areas in the game where poor performance is evident, using frame-by-frame GPU timing data and in-depth GPU pipeline analysis.
The video begins by highlighting the excessive cost of small, seemingly insignificant renders and explains how these inefficiencies stem from suboptimal default behavior in Unreal Engine, especially concerning fog, anti-aliasing, and prepass rendering. It points out how Unreal's default velocity prepass, which uses pixel shaders unnecessarily, could be optimized by restricting velocity calculations to the base pass, leading to nearly a 30% performance gain.
A major focus is on Nanite's rendering pipeline and its reliance on a software rasterizer for small triangles, which bypasses hardware depth testing (Z testing). This results in massive overdraw and wasted GPU cycles, with Nanite's overdraw being approximately 2900% less efficient than optimized Z-tested rendering. The video refutes advice from Epic Games representatives who downplay the impact of overdraw, emphasizing that overdraw equates to wasted GPU work and directly hurts performance.
The presenter also exposes misunderstandings and conflicting advice from Epic's own Nanite developers, showing that Nanite is slower than traditional rendering for many content types and that its memory savings are often outweighed by performance penalties. The video carefully explains how clustered geometry, small triangles, and software rasterization cause inherent inefficiencies that developers cannot easily fix.
Further, the video delves into detailed analysis of the visibility buffer, showing how Nanite's cluster-based visibility culling leaks and errors cause overdraw that effectively doubles shading work. It also critiques Unreal Engine's use of large, high-resolution textures accessed simultaneously in base passes, which further degrade performance compared to optimized streaming and baking techniques used in other engines.
The video continues by examining Unreal's virtual shadow maps (VSSM) and distance field shadows, pointing out their poor anti-aliasing with noisy results and heavy reliance on Nanite, which compounds performance issues. It also highlights how decals are handled inefficiently in Unreal compared to other engines, requiring a costly full prepass that most AAA games avoid.
When examining Lumen, the video notes that despite some performance improvements in Unreal Engine 5.6, these are largely due to hardware Lumen optimizations that are not representative of what developers typically use (software Lumen). It also calls out Epic's misleading demos that omit certain elements to boost performance artificially. The presenter strongly criticizes Lumen's noisy, flickering global illumination and lack of meaningful performance gains, calling it a visual and performance embarrassment.
Finally, the video stresses the importance of proper optimization tools and workflows, dismissing the notion of "overoptimization" but warning against poorly executed, labor-intensive optimization efforts. It advocates for better developer education and more automated tools to reduce inefficiencies and improve game performance industry-wide. The video concludes with a call to support the channel to continue producing high-quality technical content that drives demand for better graphics and performance in games.
### Highlights
-
Detailed frame-level GPU timing analysis reveals massive inefficiencies in Unreal Engine's Nanite rendering pipeline.
-
Nanite's software rasterizer bypasses hardware Z testing, causing extreme overdraw and wasted GPU cycles.
-
Unreal Engine's default velocity prepass uses pixel shaders unnecessarily, reducing performance by nearly 30%.
-
Epic's official Nanite advice is often contradictory and incomplete, misleading developers about its effectiveness.
-
Overuse of micropolygon foliage and large texture atlases severely degrades performance in Nanite scenes.
-
Lumen's global illumination remains noisy, flickering, and poorly optimized despite Unreal Engine 5.6 updates.
-
Unreal's decal rendering requires inefficient full prepasses, unlike optimized mesh-based decals in other engines.
### Key Insights
-
**Nanite's Software Rasterizer is a Critical Bottleneck:** The software rasterizer in Nanite, used for small triangles, disables hardware depth (Z) testing, which is a highly optimized GPU feature designed to reject hidden geometry early. This leads to an enormous increase in pixel overdraw—up to 2900% worse than optimized hardware Z testing—directly harming performance. Developers relying on Nanite must contend with these fundamental inefficiencies that cannot be fully mitigated through content optimization alone.
-
**Unreal Engine's Default Prepass Behavior is Suboptimal:** Unreal Engine's use of pixel shaders in velocity prepass rendering is unnecessary and costly. By shifting velocity calculations to the base pass, the performance of the prepass can increase by nearly 28.5%. This reveals a systemic inefficiency in the engine's default rendering pipeline, highlighting the importance of understanding and customizing engine defaults rather than blindly accepting them.
-
**Misleading Official Guidance Undermines Developer Efforts:** Epic Games' own educators and spokespeople provide contradictory advice on Nanite usage, sometimes encouraging its use on low-poly content despite performance drawbacks. This confusion can mislead developers into adopting workflows that degrade performance rather than improve it. The video underscores the need for clear, consistent, and technically accurate guidance from engine creators.
-
**Visibility Buffer and Cluster Calling Errors Compound Overdraw:** Nanite's cluster-based visibility system cannot perfectly cull unseen geometry due to cluster bounds errors, causing "leaks" where hidden triangles are still processed. This results in cumulative overdraw equivalent to rendering the visibility buffer twice, which doubles GPU workload unnecessarily. This inherent flaw in Nanite's approach limits how much optimization can help in complex scenes.
-
**Excessive Texture Sampling Degrades Performance:** The use of multiple large, high-resolution textures in single draw calls—common in the analyzed game—exacerbates GPU load. Unlike engines that bake textures or use efficient texture streaming (MIP mapping), Unreal's approach, especially with Nanite, leads to bloated material evaluation times and increases draw cost significantly.
-
**Lumen Global Illumination is Still Impractical for Many Games:** Despite improvements in Unreal Engine 5.6, Lumen's software path—the one most developers use—shows little to no performance gain. Its noisy, flickering lighting artifacts remain problematic. Epic's demos that show improvements rely heavily on hardware Lumen, which is not widely used or supported on target platforms, creating a misleading perception of Lumen's readiness.
-
**Optimization Requires Better Tools and Workflow Improvements:** The video stresses that "overoptimization" is a myth; what exists is poorly executed optimization often due to lack of tools or workflow support. Automated or easy-to-use optimization tools are crucial to help developers avoid costly inefficiencies like those seen with Nanite and Unreal's default rendering settings. Industry-wide adoption of these tools would lead to better game performance and visual quality.
### Conclusion
This video exposes deep-rooted performance and rendering issues in Unreal Engine's Nanite and Lumen systems through meticulous technical analysis. It reveals how default engine behaviors and cluster-based rendering approaches lead to massive GPU inefficiencies and overdraw. The presenter challenges official Epic guidance and industry hype, advocating for more realistic developer expectations and better optimization tools. Ultimately, the video encourages the game development community to demand higher standards for engine performance and developer education, highlighting that current state-of-the-art techniques in Unreal Engine still fall short of optimized rendering solutions seen in other engines.
The video begins by highlighting the excessive cost of small, seemingly insignificant renders and explains how these inefficiencies stem from suboptimal default behavior in Unreal Engine, especially concerning fog, anti-aliasing, and prepass rendering. It points out how Unreal's default velocity prepass, which uses pixel shaders unnecessarily, could be optimized by restricting velocity calculations to the base pass, leading to nearly a 30% performance gain.
A major focus is on Nanite's rendering pipeline and its reliance on a software rasterizer for small triangles, which bypasses hardware depth testing (Z testing). This results in massive overdraw and wasted GPU cycles, with Nanite's overdraw being approximately 2900% less efficient than optimized Z-tested rendering. The video refutes advice from Epic Games representatives who downplay the impact of overdraw, emphasizing that overdraw equates to wasted GPU work and directly hurts performance.
The presenter also exposes misunderstandings and conflicting advice from Epic's own Nanite developers, showing that Nanite is slower than traditional rendering for many content types and that its memory savings are often outweighed by performance penalties. The video carefully explains how clustered geometry, small triangles, and software rasterization cause inherent inefficiencies that developers cannot easily fix.
Further, the video delves into detailed analysis of the visibility buffer, showing how Nanite's cluster-based visibility culling leaks and errors cause overdraw that effectively doubles shading work. It also critiques Unreal Engine's use of large, high-resolution textures accessed simultaneously in base passes, which further degrade performance compared to optimized streaming and baking techniques used in other engines.
The video continues by examining Unreal's virtual shadow maps (VSSM) and distance field shadows, pointing out their poor anti-aliasing with noisy results and heavy reliance on Nanite, which compounds performance issues. It also highlights how decals are handled inefficiently in Unreal compared to other engines, requiring a costly full prepass that most AAA games avoid.
When examining Lumen, the video notes that despite some performance improvements in Unreal Engine 5.6, these are largely due to hardware Lumen optimizations that are not representative of what developers typically use (software Lumen). It also calls out Epic's misleading demos that omit certain elements to boost performance artificially. The presenter strongly criticizes Lumen's noisy, flickering global illumination and lack of meaningful performance gains, calling it a visual and performance embarrassment.
Finally, the video stresses the importance of proper optimization tools and workflows, dismissing the notion of "overoptimization" but warning against poorly executed, labor-intensive optimization efforts. It advocates for better developer education and more automated tools to reduce inefficiencies and improve game performance industry-wide. The video concludes with a call to support the channel to continue producing high-quality technical content that drives demand for better graphics and performance in games.
### Highlights
-
Detailed frame-level GPU timing analysis reveals massive inefficiencies in Unreal Engine's Nanite rendering pipeline. -
Nanite's software rasterizer bypasses hardware Z testing, causing extreme overdraw and wasted GPU cycles. -
Unreal Engine's default velocity prepass uses pixel shaders unnecessarily, reducing performance by nearly 30%. -
Epic's official Nanite advice is often contradictory and incomplete, misleading developers about its effectiveness. -
Overuse of micropolygon foliage and large texture atlases severely degrades performance in Nanite scenes. -
Lumen's global illumination remains noisy, flickering, and poorly optimized despite Unreal Engine 5.6 updates. -
Unreal's decal rendering requires inefficient full prepasses, unlike optimized mesh-based decals in other engines. ### Key Insights
-
**Nanite's Software Rasterizer is a Critical Bottleneck:** The software rasterizer in Nanite, used for small triangles, disables hardware depth (Z) testing, which is a highly optimized GPU feature designed to reject hidden geometry early. This leads to an enormous increase in pixel overdraw—up to 2900% worse than optimized hardware Z testing—directly harming performance. Developers relying on Nanite must contend with these fundamental inefficiencies that cannot be fully mitigated through content optimization alone.-
**Unreal Engine's Default Prepass Behavior is Suboptimal:** Unreal Engine's use of pixel shaders in velocity prepass rendering is unnecessary and costly. By shifting velocity calculations to the base pass, the performance of the prepass can increase by nearly 28.5%. This reveals a systemic inefficiency in the engine's default rendering pipeline, highlighting the importance of understanding and customizing engine defaults rather than blindly accepting them.-
**Misleading Official Guidance Undermines Developer Efforts:** Epic Games' own educators and spokespeople provide contradictory advice on Nanite usage, sometimes encouraging its use on low-poly content despite performance drawbacks. This confusion can mislead developers into adopting workflows that degrade performance rather than improve it. The video underscores the need for clear, consistent, and technically accurate guidance from engine creators.-
**Visibility Buffer and Cluster Calling Errors Compound Overdraw:** Nanite's cluster-based visibility system cannot perfectly cull unseen geometry due to cluster bounds errors, causing "leaks" where hidden triangles are still processed. This results in cumulative overdraw equivalent to rendering the visibility buffer twice, which doubles GPU workload unnecessarily. This inherent flaw in Nanite's approach limits how much optimization can help in complex scenes.-
**Excessive Texture Sampling Degrades Performance:** The use of multiple large, high-resolution textures in single draw calls—common in the analyzed game—exacerbates GPU load. Unlike engines that bake textures or use efficient texture streaming (MIP mapping), Unreal's approach, especially with Nanite, leads to bloated material evaluation times and increases draw cost significantly.-
**Lumen Global Illumination is Still Impractical for Many Games:** Despite improvements in Unreal Engine 5.6, Lumen's software path—the one most developers use—shows little to no performance gain. Its noisy, flickering lighting artifacts remain problematic. Epic's demos that show improvements rely heavily on hardware Lumen, which is not widely used or supported on target platforms, creating a misleading perception of Lumen's readiness.-
**Optimization Requires Better Tools and Workflow Improvements:** The video stresses that "overoptimization" is a myth; what exists is poorly executed optimization often due to lack of tools or workflow support. Automated or easy-to-use optimization tools are crucial to help developers avoid costly inefficiencies like those seen with Nanite and Unreal's default rendering settings. Industry-wide adoption of these tools would lead to better game performance and visual quality.### Conclusion
This video exposes deep-rooted performance and rendering issues in Unreal Engine's Nanite and Lumen systems through meticulous technical analysis. It reveals how default engine behaviors and cluster-based rendering approaches lead to massive GPU inefficiencies and overdraw. The presenter challenges official Epic guidance and industry hype, advocating for more realistic developer expectations and better optimization tools. Ultimately, the video encourages the game development community to demand higher standards for engine performance and developer education, highlighting that current state-of-the-art techniques in Unreal Engine still fall short of optimized rendering solutions seen in other engines.
mckmas8808
Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
This video provides a detailed and critical analysis of the GPU optimization failures in the Unreal Engine-based game Tees Oblivion Remake, focusing primarily on Nanite rendering technology, Unreal Engine's default rendering behaviors, and Lumen's lighting system. The presenter, supported by a save game provided by a viewer, investigates specific areas in the game where poor performance is evident, using frame-by-frame GPU timing data and in-depth GPU pipeline analysis.
The video begins by highlighting the excessive cost of small, seemingly insignificant renders and explains how these inefficiencies stem from suboptimal default behavior in Unreal Engine, especially concerning fog, anti-aliasing, and prepass rendering. It points out how Unreal's default velocity prepass, which uses pixel shaders unnecessarily, could be optimized by restricting velocity calculations to the base pass, leading to nearly a 30% performance gain.
A major focus is on Nanite's rendering pipeline and its reliance on a software rasterizer for small triangles, which bypasses hardware depth testing (Z testing). This results in massive overdraw and wasted GPU cycles, with Nanite's overdraw being approximately 2900% less efficient than optimized Z-tested rendering. The video refutes advice from Epic Games representatives who downplay the impact of overdraw, emphasizing that overdraw equates to wasted GPU work and directly hurts performance.
The presenter also exposes misunderstandings and conflicting advice from Epic's own Nanite developers, showing that Nanite is slower than traditional rendering for many content types and that its memory savings are often outweighed by performance penalties. The video carefully explains how clustered geometry, small triangles, and software rasterization cause inherent inefficiencies that developers cannot easily fix.
Further, the video delves into detailed analysis of the visibility buffer, showing how Nanite's cluster-based visibility culling leaks and errors cause overdraw that effectively doubles shading work. It also critiques Unreal Engine's use of large, high-resolution textures accessed simultaneously in base passes, which further degrade performance compared to optimized streaming and baking techniques used in other engines.
The video continues by examining Unreal's virtual shadow maps (VSSM) and distance field shadows, pointing out their poor anti-aliasing with noisy results and heavy reliance on Nanite, which compounds performance issues. It also highlights how decals are handled inefficiently in Unreal compared to other engines, requiring a costly full prepass that most AAA games avoid.
When examining Lumen, the video notes that despite some performance improvements in Unreal Engine 5.6, these are largely due to hardware Lumen optimizations that are not representative of what developers typically use (software Lumen). It also calls out Epic's misleading demos that omit certain elements to boost performance artificially. The presenter strongly criticizes Lumen's noisy, flickering global illumination and lack of meaningful performance gains, calling it a visual and performance embarrassment.
Finally, the video stresses the importance of proper optimization tools and workflows, dismissing the notion of "overoptimization" but warning against poorly executed, labor-intensive optimization efforts. It advocates for better developer education and more automated tools to reduce inefficiencies and improve game performance industry-wide. The video concludes with a call to support the channel to continue producing high-quality technical content that drives demand for better graphics and performance in games.
### Highlights
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
### Key Insights
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
### Conclusion
This video exposes deep-rooted performance and rendering issues in Unreal Engine's Nanite and Lumen systems through meticulous technical analysis. It reveals how default engine behaviors and cluster-based rendering approaches lead to massive GPU inefficiencies and overdraw. The presenter challenges official Epic guidance and industry hype, advocating for more realistic developer expectations and better optimization tools. Ultimately, the video encourages the game development community to demand higher standards for engine performance and developer education, highlighting that current state-of-the-art techniques in Unreal Engine still fall short of optimized rendering solutions seen in other engines.
Wow! Thanks to A.I. here.
Guardian Monkey
Member
MacReady13
Member
Excellent work. Now, why didn't they just wait until all this shit was fixed until releasing the game in the state it was released in? I get it- big boss Microsoft demands content for their sub service but for the others of us who purchased, we get to be beta testers for you greedy cunts...?
Zathalus
Member
[
I'm not sure who is the biggest whiner these days, him or Vex.
His Nanite criticisms have some merit but his complete lack of pointing out the benefits is telling. That he is also doesn't focus on how much the cost of hardware lumen has been reduced goes to show he simply has an axe to grind. "Most developers use software lumen", that because hardware lumen has been too expensive on consoles, of course performance benefits to hardware lumen are a boon and would allow for more usage thereof.This video provides a detailed and critical analysis of the GPU optimization failures in the Unreal Engine-based game Tees Oblivion Remake, focusing primarily on Nanite rendering technology, Unreal Engine's default rendering behaviors, and Lumen's lighting system. The presenter, supported by a save game provided by a viewer, investigates specific areas in the game where poor performance is evident, using frame-by-frame GPU timing data and in-depth GPU pipeline analysis.
The video begins by highlighting the excessive cost of small, seemingly insignificant renders and explains how these inefficiencies stem from suboptimal default behavior in Unreal Engine, especially concerning fog, anti-aliasing, and prepass rendering. It points out how Unreal's default velocity prepass, which uses pixel shaders unnecessarily, could be optimized by restricting velocity calculations to the base pass, leading to nearly a 30% performance gain.
A major focus is on Nanite's rendering pipeline and its reliance on a software rasterizer for small triangles, which bypasses hardware depth testing (Z testing). This results in massive overdraw and wasted GPU cycles, with Nanite's overdraw being approximately 2900% less efficient than optimized Z-tested rendering. The video refutes advice from Epic Games representatives who downplay the impact of overdraw, emphasizing that overdraw equates to wasted GPU work and directly hurts performance.
The presenter also exposes misunderstandings and conflicting advice from Epic's own Nanite developers, showing that Nanite is slower than traditional rendering for many content types and that its memory savings are often outweighed by performance penalties. The video carefully explains how clustered geometry, small triangles, and software rasterization cause inherent inefficiencies that developers cannot easily fix.
Further, the video delves into detailed analysis of the visibility buffer, showing how Nanite's cluster-based visibility culling leaks and errors cause overdraw that effectively doubles shading work. It also critiques Unreal Engine's use of large, high-resolution textures accessed simultaneously in base passes, which further degrade performance compared to optimized streaming and baking techniques used in other engines.
The video continues by examining Unreal's virtual shadow maps (VSSM) and distance field shadows, pointing out their poor anti-aliasing with noisy results and heavy reliance on Nanite, which compounds performance issues. It also highlights how decals are handled inefficiently in Unreal compared to other engines, requiring a costly full prepass that most AAA games avoid.
When examining Lumen, the video notes that despite some performance improvements in Unreal Engine 5.6, these are largely due to hardware Lumen optimizations that are not representative of what developers typically use (software Lumen). It also calls out Epic's misleading demos that omit certain elements to boost performance artificially. The presenter strongly criticizes Lumen's noisy, flickering global illumination and lack of meaningful performance gains, calling it a visual and performance embarrassment.
Finally, the video stresses the importance of proper optimization tools and workflows, dismissing the notion of "overoptimization" but warning against poorly executed, labor-intensive optimization efforts. It advocates for better developer education and more automated tools to reduce inefficiencies and improve game performance industry-wide. The video concludes with a call to support the channel to continue producing high-quality technical content that drives demand for better graphics and performance in games.
### Highlights
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
### Key Insights
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
### Conclusion
This video exposes deep-rooted performance and rendering issues in Unreal Engine's Nanite and Lumen systems through meticulous technical analysis. It reveals how default engine behaviors and cluster-based rendering approaches lead to massive GPU inefficiencies and overdraw. The presenter challenges official Epic guidance and industry hype, advocating for more realistic developer expectations and better optimization tools. Ultimately, the video encourages the game development community to demand higher standards for engine performance and developer education, highlighting that current state-of-the-art techniques in Unreal Engine still fall short of optimized rendering solutions seen in other engines.
I'm not sure who is the biggest whiner these days, him or Vex.
ZehDon
Member
I tend to agree. I watched one of his older videos where he broke down Nanite's overdraw issues, which was actually very good, but he's slanted far too negative for clicks and headlines now, and outright ignores the very real of trade offs developers have to make to actually ship a game.
I'll say this: if and/or when he finally presents his game, it'll need to have Carmack-levels of wizardry to justify his rage-baiting.
Dr.Morris79
Member
New patch~
www.pushsquare.com
Oblivion Remastered Patch 1.2 Detailed, Adds New Difficulty Options, Improves Performance, More
It's about bloody time
www.pushsquare.com
Trogdor1123
Member
Doesn't really say it fixes the goofy performance does it? Or am I just missing it in the notes? It's a good amount of changes though.New patch~
Oblivion Remastered Patch 1.2 Detailed, Adds New Difficulty Options, Improves Performance, More
It's about bloody time
UltimaKilo
Gold Member
About freakin time. I may just jump back into the game after all.
Dr.Morris79
Member
From the Steam page~
I would've linked to the Steam page, but you'd probably get a sign in error.
Guardian Monkey
Member
Downloading again now. Hopefully the performance isn't complete ass but just kinda ass.New patch~
Oblivion Remastered Patch 1.2 Detailed, Adds New Difficulty Options, Improves Performance, More
It's about bloody time
Trogdor1123
Member
Thanks! I did miss it. Appreciate it.From the Steam page~
I would've linked to the Steam page, but you'd probably get a sign in error.
Gonzito
Gold Member
Just tried the patch on pc, there is a noticeable improvement but there still some stutter
One thing that annoyed me so much is the transition between doors, the whole map loads in front of the player for a second or two when you enter or exit interiors. This hasn't been fixed
One thing that annoyed me so much is the transition between doors, the whole map loads in front of the player for a second or two when you enter or exit interiors. This hasn't been fixed
SomeNorseGuy
Gold Member
Sweet, getting closer to the level of optimization it should've had at release.
Guardian Monkey
Member
Agreed, its playable now at least.
My cloud saves are gone though, so thats rad. I didnt put much time into it though, spent more time messing with settings.
rubik's dude
Member
Glad to hear it's improved. Even if it still stutters, I'm not gonna let perfect be the enemy of good enough. Hopefully the memory leak thing is fixed as well.
sloppyjoe_gamer
Gold Member
Not on consoles yet? (The new patch)
Last edited:
Guardian Monkey
Member
Too be fair it is much better, closer to micro stutters ~100 fps opposed to hey let me stop here for second and figure out what's going on. But yes, it probably wont be solved fully until brute forced.
Tarkus
Member
Butt post
Last edited:
Gonzito
Gold Member
roosnam1980
Member
Hero of Spielberg
Member
Last edited:
Tarkus
Member
I was looking at the thread and put my phone away in my pocket. Picked it back up and saw I had made a blank post.
IbizaPocholo
NeoGAFs Kent Brockman
Last edited:
Buggy Loop
Gold Member
His nanite videos have been so heavily debunked to oblivion by actual devs that he copyright strikes them without merit and repeatedly and acts petty as fuck. He can't even challenge a dev face to face and many have tried.
He's a hack
He opened unreal 5 engine and followed some tutorials
anyone can do this shit right now. Make the most basic fucking modification of a demo, don't explain the benefits of said technology, make FPS go VROOM and voila, you have a bunch of brainlet followers that think you're the next Carmack and then you grift for $900k for an engine mod that you need to hire actual devs for because you don't have the talent for it and devs are telling you wtf are you doing man?
roosnam1980
Member
sloppyjoe_gamer
Gold Member
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
New patch~
Oblivion Remastered Patch 1.2 Detailed, Adds New Difficulty Options, Improves Performance, More
It's about bloody time
PERFORMANCE
- Fixed frame rate drop in Deepscorn Hollow
- Fixed frame rate drops in Black Rock Caverns
- Fixed frame rate drop between Skingrad and Skingrad Castle
- Fixed frame rate drop south of Bravil Castle courtyard
- Reduced the frequency of hitches in the open world.
- General improvements to frame time in many locations.
- Optimize updating of character attachments.
- Optimize rendering of water volumes in the open world.
- Optimize light/shadow updates in several lairs.
- Optimize waterfall particle FX and rendering.
- Optimize the weather system.
- Optimize character animation system.
This is the patch folks have been waiting for.
I enjoyed my time with the game regardless and wouldn't take it back for anything, but with this I can already see a second playthrough soon.
Chuck Berry
Gold Member
Still my GOTY. Probably will jump again before the end of the year just to be there and wipe out some sidequests.
ComputerBlue
Member
I had a great time replaying this game after so many years and I didn't find the performance to be that terrible, after a while I didn't even notice the stuttering most of the time, but I have not played since a couple weeks after release, waiting for an update that allows you to remove the HUD on console.
Audiophile
Member
Gotta love how they shadow-drop a game and it still isn't fully functional or polished.
Dr.Morris79
Member
Yeah I erm, literally posted that under the post you quoted..
From the Steam page~
I would've linked to the Steam page, but you'd probably get a sign in error.
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
Yeah I erm, literally posted that under the post you quoted..
I wasn't undercutting your post lol, just copy pasting the relevant text from the patch notes imo.
Dr.Morris79
Member
No, I didn't know if people could see it anymore
Gaiff
SBI’s Resident Gaslighter
It's still in beta on PC, so no console version yet.
Dr.Morris79
Member
Tried it, still hitches a tad. Nothing major.
Still whacks my gpu to 100% in spots, 1440p resolution, DLSS performance, rtx 4070, yada yada
Still the only UE5 to do that, and it's running less onscreen than Stalker 2
But I'll give it a proper run through now.
Still whacks my gpu to 100% in spots, 1440p resolution, DLSS performance, rtx 4070, yada yada
Still the only UE5 to do that, and it's running less onscreen than Stalker 2
But I'll give it a proper run through now.
sloppyjoe_gamer
Gold Member
Trogdor1123
Member
I can finally jump back in ! Exciting
rubik's dude
Member
Excited to hear feedback on how the game runs on PS5. Although I'll probably wait for that physical edition now anyway.
Gaiff
SBI’s Resident Gaslighter
Lol you think this fixes anything?
sloppyjoe_gamer
Gold Member
I'll try it tonight and report back.....im not sure if it's live yet. My biggest issue i saw when i got patch 1 was that it immediately caused hitching while walking every 20 seconds or so, and that was NOT there before patch 1. If that's fixed, and if i dont see the world loading as i exit caves and stuff, ill be happy.
Markio128
Member
Gave it a try on Pro. I think it's fair to say that all the same issues as before exist but to a lesser extent. The world still loads in before your eyes, but much quicker than before. The hitches are less frequent and less distracting. It's at the point where I think I can live with it now.
sloppyjoe_gamer
Gold Member
Played some with the new patch on base PS5 tonight.
It resolved all my issues i had, im very happy! Zero hitches for me at all in the open world and i was getting them every 30 seconds or so after patch 1. I walked to several places far away to test it too. Also, leaving areas that would then show the next part loading are VERY minimal now. I sunk about 2hrs tonight doing quests and having fun.
Patch 2 was great for base PS5, based on my experience tonight.
It resolved all my issues i had, im very happy! Zero hitches for me at all in the open world and i was getting them every 30 seconds or so after patch 1. I walked to several places far away to test it too. Also, leaving areas that would then show the next part loading are VERY minimal now. I sunk about 2hrs tonight doing quests and having fun.
Patch 2 was great for base PS5, based on my experience tonight.
existensmaximum
Member
Hmm my game has been crashing like crazy since this patch.. I wonder if it's the patch or my PC.