• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Opinion So, after all the hype, it turns out that it's the PC that had the real next-gen "secret sauce" all along?

ViolentP

Member
Jan 13, 2009
6,521
704
1,235
Star Citizen should only be looked at as a way to fleece old boomers out of their retirement money.

Consoles and PCs are structured so similarly these days that they both benefit from each others’ existence. It’s so easy to make a game multi platform these days it just makes no sense not to, and the gaming audience is so huge. While I do wish sometimes we could go back to the days when there was, say, Quake 2 and Unreal on PC just melting PCs, that’s not feasible anymore with how much games cost. Still, even within the confines of multi platform, PCs are still breaking new ground, as they did with VR and ray tracing last generation. I kind of shake my head whenever anyone is like “muh efficiency” because ultimately it doesn’t matter, yea Death Stranding or HZD look great on PS4 but it looks and runs wayyyy better on PC, as does every other game, and I think the mere existence of a top-end platform where these games can look and run at their best pushes the tech forward. The question isn’t “wow look at how great TLOU2 looks on a piece of shit PS4”, the question is how good CAN that game look, and right now we just don’t have that answer, and we are missing out because of that.
I don't disagree. But I believe the similarities between the different platforms are only demonstrated when starting from the weaker link. Build HZD and watch it perform better on PC. Build on PC and now you are faced with the problem of where to cut assets when porting to console. But speaking very surface level, if you told me that if I bought a console and its game, and plugged it into a PC, that I would get the console content on the PC power, I would. Added expense, yeah. But it would also be providing what each platform does best to provide the objectively superior experience.

Good shit costs money, you know? My PC was expensive because for me, performance is king. Also, Satisfactory is the best game this year.
 
Last edited:

RoadHazard

Member
Dec 9, 2008
18,642
851
1,095
Gothenburg, Sweden
5 + 5 = 2.5 +7.5 The bandwidth of the storage is inversely proportional to the amount of System Ram needed to accomplish the same task.

Does that give it an edge on xbox sure. The xbox would need a bigger pool of Ram to accomplish the same task. Thing is these games weren't using alot of Ram in the first place and any multiplatform game developer wouldn't design their game around using the faster storage and a smaller pool of Ram of the PS5. I understand clearly what's happening. Its you guys sensationalizing and all it comes down to is "oh well use more memory" as seen by the PC specs for The Medium which reccomend a system with 16gb or ram which still isnt alot while their last game recommended 8gb.
The Medium isn't made to depend on SSD transfer speeds, obviously. Practically no games we've seen yet are. Your misconception that you just need more memory to do the same things, which you keep repeating, again shows that you don't understand the potential.

Tell me, how would more RAM make the world hopping in the new R&C possible? Let's say we're loading from an HDD. And 1 minute load screens are not an acceptable answer. Are you gonna load the entire game into RAM? That's a lot of memory you're gonna need.
 
  • LOL
Reactions: DonJuanSchlong

RoadHazard

Member
Dec 9, 2008
18,642
851
1,095
Gothenburg, Sweden
What good is it to load the data but can't render it all at a good FPS and good quality? Your bottleneck is going to always be the GPU.
Currently the HDD is far more limiting than the GPU. That's why you can only move so fast through the world in Spider-Man for example. The HDD simply can't stream data any faster. It also limits the variety you can have in each block of the city, because it has to be able to load in X seconds (basically the time it takes to move from one block to the next). It's not the GPU that limits this, it could render more different objects and move you through the world much faster if the data was just there to do it. On PS5 it will be. Of course there's still not unlimited GPU power, but at least now the GPU can be given more to work with.

And it's not just about showing more at once either, but about showing different things much faster in rapid succession. Instead of a long hallway or elevator ride to mask loading, we'll just walk around the corner and the entire next area will be loaded in a second or two. Or you could be allowed to fly over the world in Horizon 2 and just land anywhere, and the SSD will load all the required data right away. With an HDD that just wouldn't be possible, which is the main reason there are no flying mounts in HZD. Of course the LOD when flying around will still be limited, because obviously you couldn't render everything you can see at full detail, but more detailed LODs could be loaded fast enough that it could be a very smooth experience.
 
Last edited:

Mister Wolf

Member
Sep 21, 2014
4,567
3,561
640
The Medium isn't made to depend on SSD transfer speeds, obviously. Practically no games we've seen yet are. Your misconception that you just need more memory to do the same things, which you keep repeating, again shows that you don't understand the potential.

Tell me, how would more RAM make the world hopping in the new R&C possible? Let's say we're loading from an HDD. And 1 minute load screens are not an acceptable answer. Are you gonna load the entire game into RAM? That's a lot of memory you're gonna need.
It would be made possible if the assets we already in the Ram in the first place hence having a larger pool with more of the games assets already available to the GPU. What part of that are you failing to comprehend? The Medium is requiring more Ram on the PC then what the Xbox Series has obviously its benefitting from the faster transfer rate of the Xbox's storage. See how you don't understand how this works.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: VFXVeteran

RoadHazard

Member
Dec 9, 2008
18,642
851
1,095
Gothenburg, Sweden
It would be made possible if the assets we already in the Ram in the first place hence having a larger pool with more of the games assets already available to the GPU. What part of that are you failing to comprehend? The Medium is requiring more Ram on the PC then what the Xbox Series has obviously its benefitting from the faster transfer rate of the Xbox's storage. See how you don't understand how this works.
Ok, so your answer is "load the entire game into RAM" then. That's what you're saying.

Lol.

The Medium isn't relevant to this discussion since, again, it's not a game designed around SSD speeds.
 
Last edited:

Mister Wolf

Member
Sep 21, 2014
4,567
3,561
640
Ok, so your answer is "load the entire game into RAM" then. That's what you're saying.

Lol.

The Medium isn't relevant to this discussion since, again, it's not a game designed around SSD speeds.
You don't know what you're talking about but enjoy your sensationalizing. Alot smarter people on here have already backed up what i'm saying including Sony supporters. And why would the entire game needed to be loaded? Do you truly think any games data demand to the GPU will be anywhere close to what DDR4 provides?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: VFXVeteran

RoadHazard

Member
Dec 9, 2008
18,642
851
1,095
Gothenburg, Sweden
You don't know what you're talking about but enjoy your sensationalizing. Alot smarter people on here have already backed up what i'm saying including Sony supporters.
You are simply wrong with "all it does is free up RAM". That's ONE of the benefits, but that itself doesn't change how you can design games. Watch Cerny's presentation, and maybe you will understand what I'm saying.

You still haven't answered how R&C would be possible on a machine with an HDD but more RAM. How do you do 4 rapid jumps between completely different environments? Load them all into RAM? Ok, how much RAM do you need then, and how long will the initial loading screen be? What if I want to jump between 10 different environments with just a second loading between each?

You can't just say "have all the assets already loaded", that's not a realistic answer.
 
Last edited:

Mister Wolf

Member
Sep 21, 2014
4,567
3,561
640
You are simply wrong with "all it does is free up RAM". That's ONE of the benefits, but that itself doesn't change how you can design games. Watch Cerny's presentation, and maybe you will understand what I'm saying.
Keep drinking the kool aid then. Everything I stated was a fact and you just listed the ONLY benefit.
 

jshackles

Gentlemen, we can rebuild it. We have the capability to make the world's first enhanced store. Steam will be that store. Better than it was before.
Jul 2, 2013
16,041
13,594
1,300
Oregon
The true "secret sauce" was the friends we made along the way
 
  • Love
Reactions: Bolivar687

RoadHazard

Member
Dec 9, 2008
18,642
851
1,095
Gothenburg, Sweden
You are simply wrong with "all it does is free up RAM". That's ONE of the benefits, but that itself doesn't change how you can design games. Watch Cerny's presentation, and maybe you will understand what I'm saying.
Keep drinking the kool aid then. Everything I stated was a fact and you just listed the ONLY benefit.
It confuses me how you really cannot understand this. But it is what it is.
 

RedVIper

Member
Jun 13, 2017
2,377
3,076
450
, or less sharpness with no errors under Checkerbording. The pixel density under 4K is so high that the CB vs DLSS sharpness difference is barely visible under gameplay without 400x still magnification, but not so the DLSS rendering issues.
Are you high?

I hate checkerboard rendering, it introduces one the only things that actually annoy me about graphics, shimmering, it's fucking awful. I'd rather have a clean lower resolution image than checkerboarded 4k where everything shimmers.
 
  • Thoughtful
Reactions: DonJuanSchlong

diffusionx

Member
Feb 25, 2006
11,748
7,232
1,610
You are simply wrong with "all it does is free up RAM". That's ONE of the benefits, but that itself doesn't change how you can design games. Watch Cerny's presentation, and maybe you will understand what I'm saying.

You still haven't answered how R&C would be possible on a machine with an HDD but more RAM. How do you do 4 rapid jumps between completely different environments? Load them all into RAM? Ok, how much RAM do you need then, and how long will the initial loading screen be? What if I want to jump between 10 different environments with just a second loading between each?

You can't just say "have all the assets already loaded", that's not a realistic answer.
We know nothing other than a few minutes of R&C, so let’s not go nuts. It didn’t look like anything that can’t be done on a PC. Like I said it seems the console fanboys worked themselves into a lather on the magic SSD because the rest of the system wasn’t anything special.
 

DonJuanSchlong

Spice Spice Baby
Jul 15, 2020
882
2,063
590
Are you high?

I hate checkerboard rendering, it introduces one the only things that actually annoy me about graphics, shimmering, it's fucking awful. I'd rather have a clean lower resolution image than checkerboarded 4k where everything shimmers.
Shimmering doesn't matter to those wearing rose tinted shades. They can vouch for their console ONLY, or dev of choice. CB rendering has nothing on DLSS 2.0. Not image quality, nor performance.
 

Yoboman

Member
Sep 17, 2005
17,631
4,675
1,805
Im just glad we are having the honest conversation that native resolution is overblown, and techniques whether CB or DLSS or something new is far preferable with the performance gains
 

DonJuanSchlong

Spice Spice Baby
Jul 15, 2020
882
2,063
590
Yes.

You don't actually need to load the entire game. Something like 32GB of ram should do the trick.
32gb of ram + dedicated vram, sounds so much better than 16gb shared between cpu and gpu, handling the OS, audio functions, etc, all while sharing a very limited amount of universal bandwidth.
 
  • Like
Reactions: VFXVeteran

theclaw135

Member
Oct 1, 2014
1,182
394
460
In a sense PC gaming is "held back" by how PCs can do everything. From the game designer's perspective, it's fantastic that consoles have limited multitasking. You can load as much of the game as possible into RAM without fretting over the possibility of another app wanting it.
 

Shmunter

Member
Aug 25, 2018
5,456
12,184
715
Are you high?

I hate checkerboard rendering, it introduces one the only things that actually annoy me about graphics, shimmering, it's fucking awful. I'd rather have a clean lower resolution image than checkerboarded 4k where everything shimmers.
Sometimes, but not now.

Not everything shimmers, the game you spend 99% of the game in the plains with no shimmer. I said on balance checkboarding is better in this game as it doesn’t have the rendering errors that effect the experience, not better in every regard. If the DLSS issues get fixed, it’s objectively better, till then it needs work.

Jesus wept get a hold of yourselves pc people, be objective, the inability to critique anything you like just exposes a narrow minded, fanboy or undeveloped mentality.
 
Last edited:

RedVIper

Member
Jun 13, 2017
2,377
3,076
450
Jesus wept get a hold of yourselves pc people, be objective, the inability to critique anything you like just exposes a narrow minded, fanboy or undeveloped mentality.
Lol, could say the same thing about you.

I'd rather have the artifacts introduced by DLSS than the ones introduced by checkerboarding. DLSS also produces a cleaner image overall.

"PC people", i have an ps4, I have a bloodborne avatar for fucks sake.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bonfires Down

Fbh

Member
Dec 6, 2013
13,919
8,117
960
But how easy is it to implement?
Is it fast and inexpensive? Because so far it's only in a very limited number of games.

If it takes off and stars being supported by most games it's definitely a big deal. It would really help lowering the price of getting into PC gaming which is one of the biggest barriers so far

Why do some PC gamers find it hard to understand that consoles are not PCs and are not competing with them? Consoles are for ppl that dont want a pc taking up room or that dont care for having the ultimate tech at a huge cost or tech that is outdated so often... consoles are easy to plug in and play and more accessible.
Because the whole PC elitsim thing has always been about people with $1500 builds trying to feel better about the money they spent on it by pointing out how much better they are compared to a $400 console.
 

Shmunter

Member
Aug 25, 2018
5,456
12,184
715
Lol, could say the same thing about you.

I'd rather have the artifacts introduced by DLSS than the ones introduced by checkerboarding. DLSS also produces a cleaner image overall.

"PC people", i have an ps4, I have a bloodborne avatar for fucks sake.
I’d rather, I’d rather, I’d rather, and anybody that disagrees with my ‘rather’ is wrong.

Good luck to you and your preferences, I’ve said it from the beginning. Thank you for your time, have a good time.
 
  • LOL
Reactions: DonJuanSchlong

diffusionx

Member
Feb 25, 2006
11,748
7,232
1,610
In a sense PC gaming is "held back" by how PCs can do everything. From the game designer's perspective, it's fantastic that consoles have limited multitasking. You can load as much of the game as possible into RAM without fretting over the possibility of another app wanting it.
It’s not 1996 anymore. Every operating system in use today is very adept at shuffling things in and out as needed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RedVIper

Thugnificient

Banned
May 29, 2020
830
2,686
380
Because the whole PC elitsim thing has always been about people with $1500 builds trying to feel better about the money they spent on it by pointing out how much better they are compared to a $400 console.
And it's not the other way around with console gamers claiming bullshit such as their $400 boxes matching a high-end rig?

Sorta explains why we had to debunk bullshit such as "eyes can't see above 30fps", "30fps is more cinematic", "can't spot the difference between 1080p and 4K below 50 inches" and all kinds of garbage that downplayed PC's obvious advantages. Then the resolution wars on consoles that made a big deal of 900p vs 1080p but somehow 1440p and 4K didn't make a difference lol.



Graphics, res and performance matter...until PC steps in then all that matters is price and AAA exclusives.
 
Last edited:

cyber69

Member
Sep 21, 2018
1,552
2,399
385
I’m as hyped as the next Nvidia fanboy is about DLSS. The results are fantastic. However, none of the games I play support it. This is the main problem here. Games need to be individually trained.
 

DonJuanSchlong

Spice Spice Baby
Jul 15, 2020
882
2,063
590
I’m as hyped as the next Nvidia fanboy is about DLSS. The results are fantastic. However, none of the games I play support it. This is the main problem here. Games need to be individually trained.
I'm pretty sure that has been debunked several times now. More so, the game engines need to support DLSS, and with more and more recent games coming out, the adaptation rate has been steadily growing. Many of the larger games in fact support DLSS. I wouldn't expect older games or games developed in mid cycle to support this feature.
 
Last edited:

RoadHazard

Member
Dec 9, 2008
18,642
851
1,095
Gothenburg, Sweden
Yes.

You don't actually need to load the entire game. Something like 32GB of ram should do the trick.
That's only twice what the PS5 has. So you could really only keep two different environments loaded at once, unless you think Insomniac are just leaving a ton of memory unused. Sure, if you do only one world jump and then keep the player in the second world for at least 1-2 minutes while world 3 loads, that could work. But as soon as you want to do a few quick jumps in succession it breaks again.

But really, that's only one example. There are many others one might imagine. It's about being able to replace everything in RAM in around 2 seconds. Having twice the RAM lets you get around ONE such data swap, but if you ever want to do more than one within a minute or two your larger memory just doesn't help. Cerny was talking about stuff like loading the world in around you as you're turning around in the game, so that all memory can always be used only for what you're actually looking at. Combine that with fast movement through the world, etc, and there's just no way you could do it with an HDD.
 
Last edited:

RedVIper

Member
Jun 13, 2017
2,377
3,076
450
That's only twice what the PS5 has. So you could really only keep two different environments loaded at once.
Your entire post is based on this.

What's your evidence that the entire PS5 can only load one environment at once into memory? (really I didn't watch the entire presentation so I might have missed it)

What's your evidence that environment 2 will take as much memory as environment 1? I'd figure it would reuse a lot of asssets so the footprint should be a lot smaller.

It's about being able to replace everything in RAM in around 2 seconds. Having twice the RAM lets you get around ONE such data swap, but if you ever want to do more than one within a minute or two your larger memory just doesn't help.
Not quite true. Having larger memory means you have to do less data swaps. Which means you also have to do it less.

Either way, it's not like SSDs haven't been standard for like a decade now.
 
Last edited:

JonnyMP3

Member
May 31, 2020
1,557
4,891
365
As I said before on a previous thread. 4 year old tech that runs on GCN cores vs 2 year old tech that runs on RTX cores... Where's the battle?
We using MSAA vs all other AA methods too now?
 

RoadHazard

Member
Dec 9, 2008
18,642
851
1,095
Gothenburg, Sweden
Your entire post is based on this.

What's your evidence that the entire PS5 can only load one environment at once into memory? (really I didn't watch the entire presentation so I might have missed it)

What's your evidence that environment 2 will take as much memory as environment 1? I'd figure it would reuse a lot of asssets so the footprint should be a lot smaller.



Not quite true. Having larger memory means you have to do less data swaps. Which means you also have to do it less.

Either way, it's not like SSDs haven't been standard for like a decade now.
HDDs have been the baseline up until now, and therefore all games have been designed to work with them, except like one PC game (Star Citizen). So no, SSDs haven't been the standard as far as games are concerned, no matter how common they may be in PCs. That's changing, which is great. And it's a much bigger deal than "it saves some memory", but I'm gonna give up trying to explain that to you guys.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Shmunter

diffusionx

Member
Feb 25, 2006
11,748
7,232
1,610
HDDs have been the baseline up until now, and therefore all games have been designed to work with them, except like one PC game (Star Citizen). So no, SSDs haven't been the standard as far as games are concerned, no matter how common they may be in PCs. That's changing, which is great. And it's a much bigger deal than "it saves some memory", but I'm gonna give up trying to explain that to you guys.
You should give up, because your explanations are dumb.

Everything the PS5 could do with its magic SSD, the PC will be able to do as well, and better. Consoles never have superior technology for a longer period of time than a year or two. The PS5 looks like a very nice machine, and the games showed so far look very good. I am planning to get one, if I can pull myself out of the financial hole I have found myself in. But I also know that it's not going to be a superior machine, just a solid all in one box with cool games.
 
Last edited:
  • Fire
Reactions: DonJuanSchlong
Aug 28, 2019
3,112
6,224
585
www.instagram.com
DLSS is just a software trained on real games.
It turns out Nvidia has access to real games data.
That's it. There is no technology involved: whoever has better dataset wins the DL game.
Well that says a lot to Nvidia's financial strength and focus on the area since they're still out ahead of everyone else. On a technical implementation level sure it may not be that difficult, but there's still easily a resource cost in the man-hours needed, the hardware needed to run and train the data, and the engineering capabilities to design solutions from the results of that data.
 

psorcerer

Member
May 1, 2012
2,118
3,161
930
Well that says a lot to Nvidia's financial strength and focus on the area since they're still out ahead of everyone else. On a technical implementation level sure it may not be that difficult, but there's still easily a resource cost in the man-hours needed, the hardware needed to run and train the data, and the engineering capabilities to design solutions from the results of that data.
I think NV is pretty genius in their marketing efforts. But technology...meh. Overall vendors are a bad example of tech leadership. They can't do much and all their solutions are too generic.
I think from the market education standpoint having DLSS is a good thing. Game developers will know it's good and can be leveraged. I hope that artistic friction isn't that prominent, so far it was used on pretty uninspiring games (before DS).
 

RoadHazard

Member
Dec 9, 2008
18,642
851
1,095
Gothenburg, Sweden
You should give up, because your explanations are dumb.

Everything the PS5 could do with its magic SSD, the PC will be able to do as well, and better. Consoles never have superior technology for a longer period of time than a year or two. The PS5 looks like a very nice machine, and the games showed so far look very good. I am planning to get one, if I can pull myself out of the financial hole I have found myself in. But I also know that it's not going to be a superior machine, just a solid all in one box with cool games.
Of course PC will be able to do the same things eventually. That's not what we were talking about at all. The claim I was refuting was the ONLY thing a fast SSD does is free up some RAM, and that by having more RAM you could do the exact same things with an HDD. That's just very unimaginative thinking, and absolutely false.
 
Aug 28, 2019
3,112
6,224
585
www.instagram.com
I think NV is pretty genius in their marketing efforts. But technology...meh. Overall vendors are a bad example of tech leadership. They can't do much and all their solutions are too generic.
I think from the market education standpoint having DLSS is a good thing. Game developers will know it's good and can be leveraged. I hope that artistic friction isn't that prominent, so far it was used on pretty uninspiring games (before DS).
Well like any other technology the uptake depends a lot on timing and if the company that utilizes it can leverage it in ways relatable to the audience. For games that of course mean a platform holder with their software, as at least one of the major vehicles that can drive adoption.

Issue there obviously is that Nvidia doesn't make games, they make gaming GPUs (among other things). By and large the platform holder will the one best suited to leveraging the hardware they create. That also helps with setting a tone for 3rd-parties to consider leveraging those technologies in their own software. So I'm not surprised that uptake of games leveraging DLSS has been a bit slow in the past since Nvidia can't leverage that type of benefit due to not having a game development studio of their own and that technology only being present in a selection of their GPU hardware which limits market saturation which limits incentives for devs to leverage the technology. Plus DLSS 1.0 not necessarily being the best implementation to begin with.

That can start changing soon though thanks to games like Control and Death Stranding, and maybe if games like Star Citizen are successful enough we can see more PC-orientated AAA games see the bigger incentive in taking advantage of the technology, too.
 
  • Praise the Sun
Reactions: DonJuanSchlong

VFXVeteran

Industry Professional (Vetted)
Nov 5, 2019
2,962
6,006
675
Currently the HDD is far more limiting than the GPU. That's why you can only move so fast through the world in Spider-Man for example. The HDD simply can't stream data any faster. It also limits the variety you can have in each block of the city, because it has to be able to load in X seconds (basically the time it takes to move from one block to the next).
That's Spiderman which was developed for a console. A PC version would just load the entire city into RAM and be done with it.

It's not the GPU that limits this, it could render more different objects and move you through the world much faster if the data was just there to do it. On PS5 it will be. Of course there's still not unlimited GPU power, but at least now the GPU can be given more to work with.
I never said otherwise, but you are stating a case for 1 game and applying it to every game. FS2020 will have way more detail and still have high speed flying and it will not require an SSD - just more RAM.

And it's not just about showing more at once either, but about showing different things much faster in rapid succession. Instead of a long hallway or elevator ride to mask loading, we'll just walk around the corner and the entire next area will be loaded in a second or two. Or you could be allowed to fly over the world in Horizon 2 and just land anywhere, and the SSD will load all the required data right away. With an HDD that just wouldn't be possible, which is the main reason there are no flying mounts in HZD. Of course the LOD when flying around will still be limited, because obviously you couldn't render everything you can see at full detail, but more detailed LODs could be loaded fast enough that it could be a very smooth experience.
Again, FS2020 is more detailed than any next-gen game so far and will have massive amounts of data being rendered per frame and will not require an SSD for the PC. RAM trumps all.
 

RoadHazard

Member
Dec 9, 2008
18,642
851
1,095
Gothenburg, Sweden
That's Spiderman which was developed for a console. A PC version would just load the entire city into RAM and be done with it.



I never said otherwise, but you are stating a case for 1 game and applying it to every game. FS2020 will have way more detail and still have high speed flying and it will not require an SSD - just more RAM.



Again, FS2020 is more detailed than any next-gen game so far and will have massive amounts of data being rendered per frame and will not require an SSD for the PC. RAM trumps all.
I don't know how much memory the entire city in Spider-Man would take up, but I'd bet it's more than most PCs have. What then?

I don't know exactly how FS2020 handles this, but I know it streams a lot of the data from the internet. You're not installing the entire Earth, I'm pretty sure. So what does it do if your connection is slow? Load lower quality assets I would assume? Does it load data for your chosen route on a loading screen? What if you deviate from that path? I guess there's also a free flight mode? The point is that all the RAM in the world doesn't help if you can't get the data there fast enough. That's why we have 1 minute load screens on current consoles.

Either way, as good as FS2020 looks, the cities are nowhere near as detailed as in a current gen open world game up close, so it's not really comparable. They do look very good though.
 
Last edited:

VFXVeteran

Industry Professional (Vetted)
Nov 5, 2019
2,962
6,006
675
I don't know how much memory the entire city in Spider-Man would take up, but I'd bet it's more than most PCs have. What then?
Dude, are you serious? Most of Spiderman's city is just instances of the same geometry. It's probably extremely light weight.

I don't know exactly how FS2020 handles this, but I know it streams a lot of the data from the internet. You're not installing the entire Earth, I'm pretty sure. So what does it do if your connection is slow? Load lower quality assets I would assume? Does it load data for your chosen route on a loading screen? What if you deviate from that path? I guess there's also a free flight mode? The point is that all the RAM in the world doesn't help if you can't get the data there fast enough. That's why we have 1 minute load screens on current consoles.
You don't understand rendering man. Look at the DF talk and observe the popin on the landscape. It's using higher detailed assets the closer you get to the terrain. I think they cull out the shadow casting far away but seems like AO is used throughout. The game runs well at 4k on a high-end GPU. No way it will run on Ultra at 4k on any of the next-gen consoles at reasonable framerates.

Either way, as good as FS2020 looks, the cities are nowhere near as detailed as in a current gen open world game up close, so it's not really comparable. They do look very good though.
It is comparable because there is SO much being rendered and with advanced rendering techniques (photogrammetry) that none of current-gen games have. Any city in FS2020 will dwarf Spiderman's city simply by the sheer amount of unique data. There is Terabytes of data on that earth model (for the entire world). Because the rendering is more advanced than anything current-gen has done, it's not even a fair comparison.
 
  • Fire
Reactions: DonJuanSchlong
Aug 28, 2019
3,112
6,224
585
www.instagram.com
I don't know how much memory the entire city in Spider-Man would take up, but I'd bet it's more than most PCs have. What then?

I don't know exactly how FS2020 handles this, but I know it streams a lot of the data from the internet. You're not installing the entire Earth, I'm pretty sure. So what does it do if your connection is slow? Load lower quality assets I would assume? Does it load data for your chosen route on a loading screen? What if you deviate from that path? I guess there's also a free flight mode? The point is that all the RAM in the world doesn't help if you can't get the data there fast enough. That's why we have 1 minute load screens on current consoles.

Either way, as good as FS2020 looks, the cities are nowhere near as detailed as in a current gen open world game up close, so it's not really comparable. They do look very good though.
You can argue that it streaming in data through the internet would indicate you don't quite need a super-fast SSD to do a similar type of data streaming if you happened to have 7 petabytes (lol) of data locally. Even the best ethernet out there, routinely you're getting way less than 1 GB/s bandwidth. In fact the fastest ethernet I can find, which is cable-based, is...250 MB/s.

So a game like FS2020 is streaming in satellite geography data at a rate up to 250 MB/s if you happen to have a connection that good, but most players will probably have internet half that speed at best, probably even lower. No it's not streaming all of the game graphics data at that rate obviously, but it does go to show that for the game's presumed highest quality assets that aren't coming from the discs or a local install, you only need a peak internet connection of 250 MB/s (most likely less) to do it.
 

Elog

Member
Aug 28, 2016
299
826
430
Prove it. Give me a game where that's not true that runs higher than 1080p.
Just check the DF video on Flight Simulator...at around 50 FPS at higher resolutions the game is CPU bound and not GPU bound with all graphical details on.

You live in the past where all games had to run on console (i.e. Jaguar). Once that boundary condition is taken out moving grass, clouds, water, NPCs etc will all eat CPU resources and be rate limiting as well.