At the same time, game refuses to use last free 900 mb chunk of free VRAM. This is a recent trend with a lot of AAA games. They refuse to use the final %10-15 of the total available VRAM. That 9235 MB usage is actually total VRAM usage, per game allocation is even lower (around 8.7 GB max). This game also follows the same %87-89 VRAM rule Forspoken and other games followThe consoles only have traversal stutter, which the PC also has on top of the shader compilation stutter, which the consoles don't. It's not the same thing.
Also, the PC version can have issues where frame rate tanks to 10's in certain scenarios where the VRAM seems like it maxes out.
I would be okay with this too. But make it an option. Hell, make the initial shader compile an option too. Make it a graphics option. Do not make it mandatory. Let us pick how long or extensive the compilation might be. Give people some options.
very pathetic with this nearly perfect visuals and non retard non deficient gameplay:
I don't like very much, but would like much less on console.
Let me guess.
Shader Comp aint an issue in this game......unless for some reason you change your GPU mid game.
Console wins what?
At the number of tries to downplay the pc version.
No stutter there so it's automatically better.
Imagine in 2023 using native resolution as a weapon when DLSS has existed for years and sub 1080p resolutions can look impressive. FSR on consoles is fine. We've been praising this stuff for a while now.
The stutter will happen regardless of your frame rate.
Its a loading stutter that occurs on all platforms.
On console the animations literally stop for that frame.
Imagine giving the W to a sub 1080p game in 2023 vs having a loading stutter that last a frame that also occurs on the sub 1080p version of the game.
Mate are you playing the Switch version?
This is a loading stutter.
Games were running DX11 few years back (At least UE4). Stuttering was less prevalent in DX11 I think. But then again, was the infamous Arkham Knight stutter a result of shader compilation problems?
5800x
Seems like every game suffers this nowadays. And having a complication at launch is imo not a good solution since I don’t want to wait to play. I don’t have to on console.
So for the record, I'm not a fan of Alex. His style just rubs me the wrong way, and some of his routines (Crysis? Still? Really?) are so worn out.
And the experience is better on PS5 than a 5800 x 4090?
In a beautiful state with a slight loading freeze when loading in new areas of the map?
Mate it stutters every few seconds, not sure what to tell you.And the experience is better on PS5 than a 5800 x 4090?
Aint this also you?:
In a beautiful state with a slight loading freeze when loading in new areas of the map?
Something that they could easily patch by reducing the resources used during the loading phase.
We clearly see that differences are at least not staggering like pc people would want you believe.
Not technically but through ease of use and overall experience yes.
Looks like I'm the only PC guy in the thread who believes stable performance is the most important thing. I know a lot of PC guys used to think the same thing until this PC Stutter Struggle started happening. Now the goalposts have shifted. I can't believe I'm reading that people would rather have more stuttering in their game if it means they get a higher framerate, resolution graphic settings.
Eh, thats subjective. Personally i hate playing on couchTV™ and controllers.
No goalposts have shifted. This kind of stutter was a thing for eons, on consoles too in fact, and no cared or noticed them until DF decided to start pointing them out.
"Medium settings" "Medium Station".. DF videos shows there's literally no discernible difference between Ultra and Medium, reason why Battaglia is making guesses.
Exactly. That’s the crux of these pc settings. They are redundant just because they feel the need for every option to have low medium high and ultra.
Game pre-compile shaders. Any semblance of stuttering is from loading new areas, and majority of players don't notice going by the user reviews on steam.
The console warrior defense force is increasing on GAF the more the disparity between pc and console increases too. 900p....
The stable input lag and frame rate performances are still far better of pc, despite your crusade vs some rare stuttering.
You are more of a pc warrior than any of people defending consoles here.
Difference is I deal with facts. Other people deal with special emotions with 900p, potato gunplay with dual sticks with aim assists and claw grip, higher lag, lower frame rate, lower aspect ratios and FoV, higher prices for the games, no mods, etc, etc...
Some facts, mostly preferences.
Is 900p only bad when a console does it or is also bad when sub 1080p is used for DLSS to get better performance and visuals out of a 2060 super?
People preferring the more retard, imprecise with lack of enough buttons controller doesn't make it less retard, imprecise and with more buttons.
900p tp 1440p with FSR on a 4k screen is worse everywhere.
The only retard here is you for telling people what they prefer.
