Support NeoGAF

[MikeM]

8GB cards are just fine with well made games.
this port is a joke

Sure but progress always happens. At some point, they won’t be usable no more.

Just like how PC is moving to a 32gb RAM standard now. 16GB is starting to run into issues with some games.

 

[Buggy Loop]

Well they designed the remake with PS5 hardware in mind and then ported it over to PC retrosoectively.

It was never originally made with PC's in mind and the port isn't great so brute force is required. This is nothing new, we've all been here before.

Nobody has to upgrade their PC, even the steam deck will run it at appropriate settings. There's an options menu for a reason, people should put their egos to the side and learn to use them instead of crying "unoptimised" without having any idea about what's going on under the hood and why things are running the way they are.

GHG, there's no amount of convincing me that this is brute force required



Time-stamped to the issue.

1080p LOW textures who are not even close to original PS3 game and runs worse than the emulated Last of Us PS3 version on PC, takes 6.2 GB.

Ultra settings @ 4k, not 1080p, for plaque tale requiem, uses that!

Do i even need to bring up screenshots of plague tale requiem at ultra settings to show how good it looks comparatively? I don't think i need to.

 

[Gaiff]

RTX 2070S isn't at PS5's level spec wise to begin with (besides the RT hardware which is irrelevant here), why the hell they are insisting to be so? That is baffling. Just to mention some basics: RTX 2070S is at 9 TF, 113 Gpixel/s, 283 Gtexel/s not to mention its significantly lower geometry throughput and lower bandwidth caches. Now compare it with PS5: 10.28 TF, 142 Gpixel/s, 320 Gtexel/s besides customizations such as cache scrubbers. Are they that clueless?

Don't read the specs sheets of Techpowerup, it uses the base/boost clocks which are much lower than the in-game clocks. The base clock is rated at 1605MHz and the boost clock at 1770MHz but your 2070S is essentially broken if it runs at those speeds. Most run at 1950MHz+

It's not 9TF. Most will run at clocks approaching 10TF. It's the same thing for the 2080 Ti rated with a boost clock of 1545MHz. Once again, most will blow past 1800 with ease. Aftermarket models will do 2000+ and a good overclocker will do over 2100. It's NVIDIA putting much lower clocks on the specs sheets than the actual results. With the real world clocks, yes, the 2070S is a match for the PS5's GPU.

 

[Black_Stride]

Crying that an older 6 core CPU and 8GB VRAM GPU is struggling to keep up when faced with a next gen port that was made with a next gen console in mind.

Equal parts sad and hilarious. More to come as the generation goes on. I'm so sick and tired of PC gamers with overinflated ideas about what their hardware is capable of. Either put the money down for the best hardware and have a good time or accept that your mid-low tier hardware is exactly that and adjust your expectations accordingly.

No this time they are actually right.

The Oodle Library that came packaged with the game is broken or something and unnecessarily hammers the CPU.
Theres an unofficial fix for that atleast and it eases the strain on the CPU (proof its not the CPUs fault).....but I believe patch 2 already kinda fixed that so you might not need the unofficial fix depending on your system.....youll have to test yourself.
The fact the community got that fixed early tells you that its something ND missed in the port, its not that the 3600 is ancient and couldnt possibly handle this game.
Because, if watched the video you will see, that once the "loading" is done, the game runs "well" on the 3600.


And as for 8GB of VRAM.
Locking players to medium is fine....im all for that even(not really, let me suffer)....if you want Ultra textures build a machine that can handle Ultra settings.....................................but what they call medium is a farce.

There is no excuse for this level of texture quality and they should feel bad.

 

[Art The Clown]

 

[yamaci17]

If you have a 8gb card i'd just recommend playing at 1080p.

I'm playing at 1080p with a mix of High and Ultra settings, with Enviroment textures set to High, and all the other texture settings set to Ultra, and i'm averaging only around 0.5gb more vram usage compared to Alex -

Imo textures are argubaly one of, if not the biggest, factor in terms of how good a game looks. So yeah i'd rather play at 1080p with good textures to be honest.

You can push high textures at 1440p or 4K DLSS balanced/performance

- Disable hardware accerelation for Steam (400-600 mb vram saved, boom)
- If you're on Epic tough luck. It will always use upwards of 350 mb vram. more so if you're at 1440p or 4K
- Kill dwm.exe to reset bloated VRAM usage for desktop compositor
- Turn off all background applications that use hardware accerelation (or turn hw accerelation off for them), Such as discord, chrome or stuff. or simply turn them off. up to you.

Result;

Native1440p


1440p dlssquality , mostly locked 60 fps operation. very rare hitches here and there


4k dlss perf high textures , locked 50 fps operation



If you can make the game use 7400-7500 mb; ignore the 1.6 GB part. Not many stutters or problems, aside from the ones happen when specific actions happen, or a new map is loaded.

If you can get the game to use 7400 7600 mb vram, you will be able to play 1440p/high textures or 4k dlss high textures (only visual effects and volumetrics set to low. these two are crucial.)

You can see my exact settings in the video as well.

In the irvideo, VRAM is only used per dedicated 6.4 gb and total 7.2 gb. if you do background optimizations, you can make the game use 7.4-7.6 gb and total 7.9-8 GB.

8 GB is not stranded to medium textures. Just use an appopriate framecap based on your CPU capabilities and that will iron out most of the problems. (I use 48-50 FPS cap usually)

IDEALLY, you can reduce your IDLE VRAM usage to 250-300 mb on a 1440p screen. If you can do that, YOU CAN SAFELY PUSH 7400 mb worth of "game application" usage in game. DF thinks game stutters or crashes when you go past the threshold, but it never happens with me. There are slight hitches here and there but as I said, most of them go away with a frame cap (gotta be a bit aggresive here, I have to admit). But no crashes. I'm literally near the end, played at 4K/DLSS perf GAME APPLICATION at 7600 MB VRAM usage, only had 4 crashes in 12 hours.

 

[01011001]

Sure but progress always happens. At some point, they won’t be usable no more.

Just like how PC is moving to a 32gb RAM standard now. 16GB is starting to run into issues with some games.

well and people should call it out when it happens with zero tangible graphical improvements

 

[Stuart360]

You can push high textures at 1440p or 4K DLSS balanced/performance

- Disable hardware accerelation for Steam (400-600 mb vram saved, boom)
- If you're on Epic tough luck. It will always use upwards of 350 mb vram. more so if you're at 1440p or 4K
- Kill dwm.exe to reset bloated VRAM usage for desktop compositor
- Turn off all background applications that use hardware accerelation (or turn hw accerelation off for them), Such as discord, chrome or stuff. or simply turn them off. up to you.

Result;

Native1440p


1440p dlssquality , smooth 60 fps operation


4k dlss perf high textures , locked 50 fps operation



If you can make the game use 7400-7500 mb; ignore the 1.6 GB part. Not many stutters or problems, aside from the ones happen when specific actions happen, or a new map is loaded.

If you can get the game to use 7400 7600 mb vram, you will be able to play 1440p/high textures or 4k dlss high textures (only visual effects and volumetrics set to low. these two are crucial.)

You can see my exact settings in the video as well.

In the irvideo, VRAM is only used per dedicated 6.4 gb and total 7.2 gb. if you do background optimizations, you can make the game use 7.4-7.6 gb and total 7.9-8 GB.

8 GB is not stranded to medium textures. Just use an appopriate framecap based on your CPU capabilities and that will iron out most of the problems. (I use 48-50 FPS cap usually)

Well i'm on a 1080ti with 11gb vram. I was just trying to show that you can use high textures (high enviroment and Ultra textures with all the other texture options) with 8gb vram.

I think sometimes people forget we are talking about PC, where we can turn down settings, resolution, etc, to get games working.

 

[DenchDeckard]

What set of amateurs made this port?

Has naughty dog lost a load of staff or something?

 

[T4keD0wN]

Crying that an older 6 core CPU and 8GB VRAM GPU is struggling to keep up when faced with a next gen port that was made with a next gen console in mind.

Equal parts sad and hilarious. More to come as the generation goes on. I'm so sick and tired of PC gamers with overinflated ideas about what their hardware is capable of. Either put the money down for the best hardware and have a good time or accept that your mid-low tier hardware is exactly that and adjust your expectations accordingly.

Isnt ryzen 3600 a few % faster than PS5 CPU and 2070 super about equal in like 90% of the games? Its a pretty fair comparison and the end result should be around equal.

My biggest gripe with this game is that for some reason i get 80-100% CPU usage on my 12600k while my gpu usage rarely passes 70%. Absolutely baffling CPU optimization.

 

[01011001]

Isnt ryzen 3600 a few % faster than PS5 CPU and 2070 super about equal in like 90% of the games?

they are yes

 

[Kilau]

You can push high textures at 1440p or 4K DLSS balanced/performance

- Disable hardware accerelation for Steam (400-600 mb vram saved, boom)
- If you're on Epic tough luck. It will always use upwards of 350 mb vram. more so if you're at 1440p or 4K
- Kill dwm.exe to reset bloated VRAM usage for desktop compositor
- Turn off all background applications that use hardware accerelation (or turn hw accerelation off for them), Such as discord, chrome or stuff. or simply turn them off. up to you.

Result;

Native1440p


1440p dlssquality , mostly locked 60 fps operation. very rare hitches here and there


4k dlss perf high textures , locked 50 fps operation



If you can make the game use 7400-7500 mb; ignore the 1.6 GB part. Not many stutters or problems, aside from the ones happen when specific actions happen, or a new map is loaded.

If you can get the game to use 7400 7600 mb vram, you will be able to play 1440p/high textures or 4k dlss high textures (only visual effects and volumetrics set to low. these two are crucial.)

You can see my exact settings in the video as well.

In the irvideo, VRAM is only used per dedicated 6.4 gb and total 7.2 gb. if you do background optimizations, you can make the game use 7.4-7.6 gb and total 7.9-8 GB.

8 GB is not stranded to medium textures. Just use an appopriate framecap based on your CPU capabilities and that will iron out most of the problems. (I use 48-50 FPS cap usually)

IDEALLY, you can reduce your IDLE VRAM usage to 250-300 mb on a 1440p screen. If you can do that, YOU CAN SAFELY PUSH 7400 mb worth of "game application" usage in game. DF thinks game stutters or crashes when you go past the threshold, but it never happens with me. There are slight hitches here and there but as I said, most of them go away with a frame cap (gotta be a bit aggresive here, I have to admit). But no crashes. I'm literally near the end, played at 4K/DLSS perf GAME APPLICATION at 7600 MB VRAM usage, only had 4 crashes in 12 hours.

 

[yamaci17]

Well i'm on a 1080ti with 11gb vram. I was just trying to show that you can use high textures (high enviroment and Ultra textures with all the other texture options) with 8gb vram.

I think sometimes people forget we are talking about PC, where we can turn down settings, resolution, etc, to get games working.

In this case, Df themselves somehow fixated on using medium textures for 8 GB. Having small and unintteruptive hitches here and theree should not take away much from the experience but I still am happy that they brought the issue to light. However, some kind of solution is also there.

 

[Stuart360]

In this case, Df themselves somehow fixated on using medium textures for 8 GB. Having small and unintteruptive hitches here and theree should not take away much from the experience but I still am happy that they brought the issue to light. However, some kind of solution is also there.

Yeah i have the Xbox controller bug, meaning i'm just fumbling through the game, checking the environments and testing different settings.
Alex probably hasnt put the time in to do some proper testing, and doesnt realize you can actually use High environment textures, and ultra textures with the other texture settings, with 8gb vram.

Still the vram usage is messed up on this game. There are other games that have FAR better looking textures that use half the vram, less even.

 

[MisterXDTV]

This guy keeps whining because he thinks that games should be made for PC and not consoles...

You can have a $4000 PC, you will still be begging for console ports and then blaming the devs because it's not a good port

Nothing will ever change that

 

[Tomi]

I hope naughty dog sill fix this

 

[faraany3k]

Absolutely shameful for all the people who are involved in the release of this broken mess and asking $60 for it.

Sony should stick to their consoles at this point.

 

[MikeM]

Isnt ryzen 3600 a few % faster than PS5 CPU and 2070 super about equal in like 90% of the games? Its a pretty fair comparison and the end result should be around equal.

My biggest gripe with this game is that for some reason i get 80-100% CPU usage on my 12600k while my gpu usage rarely passes 70%. Absolutely baffling CPU optimization.

Things to consider:
Ps5 has decompression and i/o completely off the processor. Saves something like 6 cores if I remember correctly.
While the 3600 may be close enough to PS5 performance raw, its omitting a lot that is not a burden to the PS5’s CPU. Then there is a more efficient console OS, API and other overhead items.

 

[Lysandros]

Isnt ryzen 3600 a few % faster than PS5 CPU and 2070 super about equal in like 90% of the games? Its a pretty fair comparison and the end result should be around equal.

And what happens to fixed platform optimization and lower level API in this scenario, collateral casualty? A console isn't a PC, Carmack isn't a lunatic. A properly optimised console game should always run better than a PC with similar spec.

 

[MisterXDTV]

Sony should stick to their consoles at this point.

Then people will cry again because those games are not on their incredible hardware that is so much better than consoles...

It's a neverending loop

 

[Tqaulity]

Key Takeaways:

1. PC Background streaming thrashes 3600x CPU performance and results in PS5 with Native 1440p and high/ultra settings is performing ~30% faster than 2070S with 1440p DLSS with Medium textures and High settings

I think the direct comparison they showed of PS5 vs PC w/o DLSS (more fair to PS5) running at native 1440p saw perf being closer to ~50% and higher on the PS5. Don't know why they are surprised by this as we've seen this numerous times particular with PlayStation ports to PC in the past. Games optimized for PlayStation are going to be very difficult to get the same utilization and efficiency from similar HW on PC.

 

[Lysandros]

I think the direct comparison they showed of PS5 vs PC w/o DLSS (more fair to PS5) running at native 1440p saw perf being closer to ~50% and higher on the PS5. Don't know why they are surprised by this as we've seen this numerous times particular with PlayStation ports to PC in the past. Games optimized for PlayStation are going to be very difficult to get the same utilization and efficiency from similar HW on PC.

Yeah, 1440P DLSS is 960P internal resolution. PS5 is exactly 50% faster than 2070S at 1440P native even with later using lower quality textures.

 

[onQ123]

8GB cards are just fine with well made games.
this port is a joke

Nope I warned people

https://www.neogaf.com/threads/peop...the-ssd-is-going-to-be-its-life-line.1536804/

 

[01011001]

I think the direct comparison they showed of PS5 vs PC w/o DLSS (more fair to PS5) running at native 1440p saw perf being closer to ~50% and higher on the PS5. Don't know why they are surprised by this as we've seen this numerous times particular with PlayStation ports to PC in the past. Games optimized for PlayStation are going to be very difficult to get the same utilization and efficiency from similar HW on PC.

it would be fair if the port wasn't pure garbage. as it is, there's no fair comparison

 

[Nocturno999]

RTX 2070S isn't at PS5's level spec wise to begin with (besides the RT hardware which is irrelevant here), why the hell they are insisting to be so? That is baffling. Just to mention some basics: RTX 2070S is at 9 TF, 113 Gpixel/s, 283 Gtexel/s not to mention its significantly lower geometry throughput and lower bandwidth caches. Now compare it with PS5: 10.28 TF, 142 Gpixel/s, 320 Gtexel/s besides customizations such as cache scrubbers. Are they that clueless?

You can say whatever you want, with my 2070S I play Resident Evil 4 RE @ 2k 60~120 FPS while in PS5 the game is a blurry mess.
People need to stop eating that DF propaganda that the PS5 is comparable to a gaming PC. IT IS NOT.

Every fng generation is the same BS narrative.

 

[Buggy Loop]

This guy keeps whining because he thinks that games should be made for PC and not consoles...

He's praising the good ports and pointing fingers are the not so good ports.

Isn't that DF's whole schtick?

You can have a $4000 PC, you will still be begging for console ports and then blaming the devs because it's not a good port

Nothing will ever change that

Are we not supposed to blame the dev when it's not a good port for $60? What are we supposed to do? Oh right, fucking script kiddies already made some changes to the game improving performances. Wow Naughty Dog, superb dev. Begging must be some huge delusion of grandeur on Sony boys' part, these games barely crack top 100 concurrent players on Steam.

Can't forget the irony with Cyberpunk 2077 being removed from Sony's store for being a shit port. I saw a lot of peoples jumping in joy for justice when Sony pulled that move.

I mean, your $500 console can beg for these huge open world games ports and then blaming the devs because it's not a good port, nothing will ever change that. /s

It's also a $4000 PC now? I swear every drive-by posts by insecure Sony boys keeps inflating that number. I think we went from $3k to $4k in a week.

Plenty of current gen games have been ported more than successfully on PC on hardware ranging in the ~$800 range. The outliers are where we question things, especially when the LOW setting texture of the port looks worse and performs worse than the emulated PS3 game. Sit on that for a bit warrior.

 

[Lysandros]

You can say whatever you want, with my 2070S I play Resident Evil 4 RE @ 2k 60~120 FPS while in PS5 the game is a blurry mess.
People need to stop eating that DF propaganda that the PS5 is comparable to a gaming PC. IT IS NOT.

Every fng generation is the same BS narrative.

All right mate.

 

[Stuart360]

it would be fair if the port wasn't pure garbage. as it is, there's no fair comparison

Yeah i mean its fine to expect to need slightly higher than equivelant PC hardware to match console settings, its always been liked that. An example would be the PC port of GOW where at console settings the GTX 1060 averages 45-55fps (although it can hit 60fps at times), vs 30fps on PS4, even though the 1060 is slightly more than twice as powerful as the PS4 gpu.

Thats fine and expected when you are talking about a console version where the devs are targeting one spec and can optimize for that one spec, vs PC where there are literally thousands of combinations of hardware to optimize for..

Its different with this game though, you need considerably more powerful PC hardware to match PS5. The port just isnt very good, and this will be proven in the coming months when patches will almost certainly improve performance considerably.

 

[Skifi28]

People need to stop eating that DF propaganda that the PS5 is comparable to a gaming PC. IT IS NOT.

Yeah, I always thought of it as a chromebook.

 

[Gaiff]

People need to stop eating that DF propaganda that the PS5 is comparable to a gaming PC. IT IS NOT.

Lol, "gaming PC" doesn't mean much. You think the PS5 isn't comparable to this?

The PS5 is a nice piece of technology and should absolutely outperform an equivalent PC if competently managed. It's a dedicated gaming machine while the PC is a general purpose one. A specialist should always outperform an equally competent generalist in the former's field of expertise.

 

[Captain Toad]

Iron Galaxy once again

 

[Lysandros]

For anyone who genuinely refuse to accept that you can get more performance of the hardware within the confines of a fixed spec SKU with low level access, just ask any proper game developer about what you think and prepare to digest their answers. I'll leave at that.

 

[kingyala]

Key Takeaways:

1. PC Background streaming thrashes 3600x CPU performance and results in PS5 with Native 1440p and high/ultra settings is performing ~30% faster than 2070S with 1440p DLSS with Medium textures and High settings . This is applicable to all CPUs (albeit with differing performance impact) as PS5 decompression hardware alleviates this issue on console.

2. PS5 shadow quality appears to scale higher than PC Ultra. (Alex gets really frustrated here, as this was unexpected for him lol).


3. Per Alex, there is no meaningful difference between high and ultra settings (curious that he/they call PS5 textures high vs PC Ultra even though they don't perceive any difference).

4. If you have a powerful enough PC setup, you can have a good experience playing TLOU Pt. 1, however texture and overall performance degredation particularly for 8GB GPUs is disheartening.

a;ex pc fanboyism! has just been exposed for all to see today.. hes always been fraud and cant help himself when a console beats a pc.. it was just about time

 

[aries_71]

What a disaster. I hope they apologize or even offer a refund as Cyberpunk did.

 

[Buggy Loop]

Nope I warned people

https://www.neogaf.com/threads/peop...the-ssd-is-going-to-be-its-life-line.1536804/

It's literally a redux of Last of Us part II's engine that looked better and ran on PS4. You can play that game on PS5 with 60fps patch on external HDD.

Please, this ain't your SSD jesus.

 

[T4keD0wN]

Things to consider:
Ps5 has decompression and i/o completely off the processor. Saves something like 6 cores if I remember correctly.
While the 3600 may be close enough to PS5 performance raw, its omitting a lot that is not a burden to the PS5’s CPU. Then there is a more efficient console OS, API and other overhead items.

Oh, you mean something like directstorage that they didnt bother utilising?

And what happens to fixed platform optimization and lower level API in this scenario, collateral casualty? A console isn't a PC, Carmack isn't a lunatic. A properly optimised console game should always run better than a PC with similar spec.

Theyre comparable in most stuff otherwise this situation would be the rule and not an exception, which is what this situation is. Why isnt there more games affected by these advantages then? Like Returnal, Gotham Knights, Dead Space Remake, Deathloop or the Spider-man nixxes ports which are pretty comparable on similar HW. IG and ND obviously didnt properly optimise this for pc and just pushed it out to capitalise on the popularity of the show. You cant compare one thing that is properly optimized for 1 platform and poorly for the other.

Obviously theres advantages and disadvantages to both platforms, devs resposibility is to optimize it for every platform its released on. If they ever manage to improve it with further updates youll be able to take it as a proof that youre wrong. If they wont i am wrong.

 

[Zathalus]

For anyone who genuinely refuse to accept that you can get more performance of the hardware within to confines of a fixed spec SKU with low level access, just ask any proper game developer about what you think and prepare to digest their answers. I'll leave at that.

Of course you can get more performance, but 50% more? No, unless (as is obviously the case here) the game is a shit port.

 

[Fake]

What a disaster. I hope they apologize or even offer a refund as Cyberpunk did.

Cyberpunk was a easy target because bruh 'social justice'.

Just look at the state of Pokemon Scarlet/Violet and see someone asking for refund. Many games have shit release, but only some get backlash for differents reasons, aka discord mob.

 

[diffusionx]

PS5 chads just can't stop winning lol

 

[Stooky]

GHG, there's no amount of convincing me that this is brute force required



Time-stamped to the issue.

1080p LOW textures who are not even close to original PS3 game and runs worse than the emulated Last of Us PS3 version on PC, takes 6.2 GB.

Ultra settings @ 4k, not 1080p, for plaque tale requiem, uses that!

Do i even need to bring up screenshots of plague tale requiem at ultra settings to show how good it looks comparatively? I don't think i need to.

Comparing it to ps3 Tlou is a waist of time because it was obviously designed for ps5. It’s completely new code new art.

 

[Calverz]

I have a 4090 and ryzen 5800x3d and I'm waiting because of that dumb loading period rich talks about makes it stuttery when loading into new area. Also there is sound issues when using headphones.

 

[Buggy Loop]

There is no point in comparing it to ps3 Tlou because it was obviously designed for ps5.

This is a screenshot of the Last of Us part I ported on PC buddy, not PS3 TLOU, but thanks, proving my point.

I have a 4090 and ryzen 5800x3d and I'm waiting because of that dumb loading period rich talks about makes it stuttery when loading into new area. Also there is sound issues when using headphones.

Clearly missing cache scrubbers on your PC to make sound stream fast.

 

[Braag]

I just finished the part where Joel and Ellie leave Bill with a car.
As I said in another thread, I'm running this maxed at 1440p without issues but honestly this game has no business being this demanding, it's weird seeing ND stumble so hard and release such a shoddy port after all the praise they've got.
I just finished RE4 remake and that game ran buttery smooth and impressed me visually more than TLoUP1 has.

 

[Stooky]

This is a screenshot of the Last of Us part I ported on PC buddy, not PS3 TLOU, but thanks, proving my point.

You referenced emulated ps3 tlou that what I’m talking about buddy

 

[Calverz]

This is a screenshot of the Last of Us part I ported on PC buddy, not PS3 TLOU, but thanks, proving my point.



Clearly missing cache scrubbers on your PC to make sound stream fast.

I have no idea what that means but it's limited to tlou. So pretty sure it's the game.

 

[Buggy Loop]

You referenced emulated ps3 tlou that what I’m talking about buddy

Emulation of PS3 is hard. Porting a "PS5" *cough Last of us part 2 PS4 engine cough* and making it look and perform worse than the emulated PS3 version is a fucking shame. This is MEME port territory at this point. An award should be given to them as the worst technical studio of the year.

 

[MikeM]

Oh, you mean something like directstorage that they didnt bother utilising?

Theyre comparable in most stuff otherwise this situation would be the rule and not an exception, which is what this situation is. Why isnt there more games affected by these advantages then? Like Returnal, Gotham Knights, Dead Space Remake, Deathloop or the Spider-man nixxes ports which are pretty comparable on similar HW. IG and ND obviously didnt properly optimise this for pc and just pushed it out to capitalise on the popularity of the show. You cant compare one thing that is properly optimized for 1 platform and poorly for the other.

Obviously theres advantages and disadvantages to both platforms, devs resposibility is to optimize it for every platform its released on. If they ever manage to improve it with further updates youll be able to take it as a proof that youre wrong. If they wont i am wrong.

Why would Sony use a windows-based solution when their OS is not windows?

 

[Stuart360]

a;ex pc fanboyism! has just been exposed for all to see today.. hes always been fraud and cant help himself when a console beats a pc.. it was just about time

Because it just doesnt happen with a decently made port.

Name me some games where no matter how powerful the PC is, the console version is better?

 

[Juza]

What a disaster. I hope they apologize or even offer a refund as Cyberpunk did.

Apparently Steam accepts refunds regardless of playtime for this game, some got a refund after 4 hours playtime.

Valve will, upon request via help.steampowered.com, issue a refund for any reason, if the request is made within the required return period, and, in the case of games, if the title has been played for less than two hours.
There are more details below, but even if you fall outside of the refund rules we’ve described, you can ask for a refund anyway and we’ll take a look. Consumers in some jurisdictions may have additional rights to a refund in circumstances where the game is faulty.

 

[Gaiff]

Why would Sony use a windows-based solution when their OS is not windows?

Huh, weird take. It's a Windows port man. It's also using DX12, a Windows-based collection of APIs.

Nixxes also expressed interest in using DirectStorage in the future. I seriously think Naughty Dog should have given it a shot. The load times are absolutely horrendous on PC.