Do you actually notice a difference when using RT? It is so miniscule for the most part, and still costs you like 15% fps. It's really not worth it, imo.I'm bummed out that the game is getting a shit reception, but there were so many signs that the launch would be popcorn material.
I predicted this well before release. Incompetency has a stench to it.
-follows the marketing campaign-
-notices all the regular signs of decline-
I feel like this game is going to be a shitstorm when it releases.
I gave them the benefit of the doubt as most of their recent releases have been good performance wise. I think the biggest thing was the denuvo related bug in RE Village.
That said, there were very obvious signs pre-release that they were struggling to optimise the game. All the comments about the game not running above 30 FPS and the super high specs they were pushing to run at 60 fps on PC.
- I tweaked some settings and was able to improve this to 80-95 FPS, sometimes hitting highs of 100-ish, with very little loss of fidelity, but honestly this game isn't too impressive graphically
I would be interested to see your settings if you don't mind sharing them.
Main points:
- DLSS helps a lot, I went for Quality but I did see framerate improvements by going deeper in, I'm wary of going too far with it cos the game already looks a bit 'soft'
- Sharpness doesn't seem to be doing much
- Ray Tracing doesn't seem to cost very much and improves the graphics a decent amount, I don't usually go for it but it's not too expensive here
- Screen-Space Reflections produced some buggy graphical glitches so I turned it off, water looks a lot flatter without it but I can't say I really care
- Texture Quality seems fine at 2GB
- Trees/grass seem a lot nicer on high and it doesn't seem to cost much
- Shadow Quality MAX costs a LOT and High is fine, Medium was fucking awful
- Contact Shadows I'm a little undecided on but I might keep it off
- Motion Blur is for weirdos