I mean, isn’t vanilla New Vegas pretty famously unoptimized? I think its performance has less to do with your hardware and more to do with the engine (hence this mod).
It absolutely does, though. Vanilla crashes all the time and has several game-breaking bugs. I don’t recommend that anyone plays New Vegas unmodded – especially on a newer machine that’ll be less compatible (like my 7700X + 4090 rig running Windows 11) – unless you just hate yourself. You need community patches to get it in a playable state.
Same goes for Fallout 3. It’s not nearly as buggy as NV, of course, but try running it Vanilla on a modern Windows 11 machine and let me know how well that goes for you lol. You get massive framerate dips and it literally crashes every 5 minutes on a brand new PC if you don’t install any mods to make it compatible.
I mean I still play it on a modern system mostly unmodded (I do minor QOL mods like adding/moving fast travel points to limit loading screens but nothing super fancy or specifically for performance). Still on windows 10, though. I get no performance issues, though crashing is still a worry. It’s not like every 30 minutes tho, like when it was new 🤣
Windows 11 is essentially a skin and experience pack for win 10, in fact it was.originally going to be the nezt update to 10. very little has changed that will affect how games run.
My toaster of a desktop can easily run the game at pretty good framerates yet the game just sometimes decided to just crash like it’s nobody’s business.
Hell, it ran it just fine before getting an upgrade from 4gb to something like 16gb of ram, but the problem wasn’t performance issues. Instead it was random crashing. Mods completely fixed that issue.
New Vegas is a pretty good game, but I wouldn’t wanna play it unmodded because I don’t wanna deal with random crashes.
I said this on Masto, but this tells me nothing as written. You can get the first game to run like that, too.
The thing is, if it runs that way on an empty map and degrades the same way the first one did, I can't see it not crashing on a full endgame map. So... how does it run on endgame? Or is this endgame and it runs fine at first? Guessing no, since the devs themselves said this was a problem. And, well, I've seen footage from streamers and it certainly chugs on small maps, too.
To answer your main Q from this, apparently the biggest performance dropoff is going from no pop to 10k, scaling up to 100k isn’t nearly the same dropoff.
Even with a beefy setup on high settings, CPP suggests turning off many of the post-processing effects and definitely disable VSync. Lastly 4K is out of the question for most cards, barely playable for top end enthusiast cards, Most will be limited to 1080p for a usable experience.
The good news from this video is that for anything above a 970 it is possible to get to late game, as long as you stick to 1080p low-med settings on any card with less than 8GB VRAM.
Hm. So it scales with VRAM and GPU, not CPU? Interesting.
That's less concerning than people had made it out to be, at least for a game of this genre. It still doesn't sound particularly pleasant to play, but hey, less of a dealbreaker.
Precisely. Not to sound too much like a shill because full disclosure I bought and I’m very excited for C:S2, but I find some of the concern is overblown. Yes the performance is a MAJOR problem, but the game is feature complete and optimization is ongoing, with significant improvements to arrive by console release.
Yeah, it seems weird because you'd think all the simulation load would be in the background and they could scale the visuals. Since it seems like there's a high base cost for them I assume it's possible to make that run at least a bit better at some point.
The console release target is a bit of a question mark, though. You'd think they have just weaker GPUs and they'll need to optimize to fit, but they can also target lower resolutions and do other stuff there. Plus if there's an I/O issue in there, there's a reliable spec for SSDs on those, so who knows.
Alright, so I got the game and it a) actually has a fantastic options menu with a ton of granularity, and b) it has some really dumb, wasteful settings flagged as "high" with no "ultra" preset.
I went from launching into a default in the 30s for the default map to toning down their nuts global illumination, volumetric clouds and transparent reflections for a neat 100+ fps. And then I cranked it back up a bit to be hovering around 90. I'm sure I'll have to tweak more when I get deeper into the game, but yeah, no, this is gonna be playable.
For the record, I think setting up decent defaults and settings should be a thing in PC games. Tuning the game shouldn't be the first thing you have to do. But whether it's thanks to last minute patches or people overreacting to the announcements I think this was a bit overblown. I'll report back if that proves not to be the case as I get deeper in.
Hah. It did lose some fps as the city grew. By the time I expanded to a bunch of tiles I was hovering at 50-60 instead of 70-90, but I'm on a VRR display, so I never felt the need to crank it down further. It may get there eventually, but I'm done for the day
The defaults for high are absolutely messed up, and it's entirely possible that some of the settings are straight up bugged. The game doesn't look that much better than CS1 on reasonable settings... but it also doesn't run that much worse, either.
Honestly, I have bigger gripes with some of the interface and with how much micromanagement there is in here. I think the tech issues are both overblown and could have been mitigated with better defaults.
EDIT: In case someone has use for it, what I did was mostly turn off volumetric clouds, turn off Vsync, turn off transparent reflections and drop the settings for Global Illumination and other screen-space effects to not be full res.
Oh, and also, they seem to think SMAA looks better than TAA here. It doesn't. You definitely want to manually change that to TAA and disable DRS, which defaults to extremely gross FSR 1.0. The way this is technically put together by default is super weird.
Yeah, I saw that they acknowledged the broken settings and provided a slightly confusing explanation about the technical reasons for it.
I genuinely think they should have locked those settings to a lower default until they can patch them. I get what they're trying to do by being transparent, but... yeah, I don't think it worked out for them or the people interested in the game.
I've been playing a bunch, I now have a large city going on and it's still very playable, at the cost of worse lighting and slow-loading textures in close-ups. Honestly, at this point I'm more annoyed by some UI and sim quirks than the performance, but here's hoping they keep improving all of the above.
Also, compared to any other city builder, there really is no competition. Even if the launch was truly botched, the game was unplayable, nobody got about 12 fps, there’s not another full feature city builder. Not since SimCity blew it’s brains out.
People just think that all new games should be able to run at 60fps on ultra settings on 4 year old hardware or it isn’t “optimized”. If it runs fine, I’m happy ,even if it needs to be on “high” settings until hardware catches up a bit.
Yeah. In fairness, it IS disappointing to have to target 1080p or 1440p at 30 fps these days on PC... but it's definitely not a dealbreaker for a sim game like this. Seeing early benchmarks and performance I'd say it went from wait and see to "temper expectations and be ready to target 30".
Yeah, that makes sense. They probably can’t properly support a video card they couldn’t get their hands on due to Intel not shipping it until late last year. They also aren’t that powerful of cards. Lastly the Intel drivers are brand new. Most engines are not treated against them, as such there are a lot of corruption bugs. Which makes sense because they weren’t able to get the cards early enough to support them. Since Intel has now discontinued their flagship arc card not even a year after release it’s unlikely any games will really support Intel gpus in the future.
For anyone still following this thread in confusion, the Limited Edition (LE) card is Intel’s equivalent of a Founder’s Edition card. Intel stopped producing LE cards, but their AIB partners are still producing their own SKUs.
That’s a bit disingenuous. It’s Intels own Limited Edition A770 SKU that is discontinued not the A770 as a model. They still ship the chip to AIB makers like ASRock etc. Their second generation, BattleMage, is still on track as well so on the contrary I believe we’ll see much better support for Intel GPUs in the coming years since more game developers will have had adequate time with the hardware. Intels cards are also priced competitively if we’re looking at the entry level cards which is bound to make them end up in many cheaper pre-builts that parents buy for their younger kids. So I expect to be quite commonly used for certain games in the coming years.
The limited edition wasn’t limited in the sense they planned to stop making them. It’s their flagship. This is what I got off of a few articles. If they are still shipping chips to people, it wasn’t clear from a few places I read this from. Additionally battlemage information seems to be all from leaks.
Either way with how shotty the drivers have been went how little hardware has been available to place blame at video game developers for not supporting their cards is silly.
I’m placing 0 blame on developers here but it’s just a fact that Intel can’t reasonably optimize the drivers for all games past and present in such a short time. And developers haven’t had access to the card for even remotely long enough for it to be part of the testing for any game (outside small titles maybe but they generally don’t need special treatment driver wise) releasing this year or next. AMD and Nvidia have literal decades of head start. So while I would’ve wanted Intel to do a better job I’m not trivializing the monstrous task either, and all things considered they’ve done OK. Not great, not horrible.
If it wasn’t clear in the articles you read then those places wanted the clicks and engagement that comes from vaguely implying that Intel is killing their GPU division.
Falsehood flies, and the Truth comes limping after it - Jonathan Swift
Its not like intel never had gpu drivers (they have had igpus for ever), they just never had to constantly need to update them for the gaming audience.
Lets not pretend features like intels quicksync that came out on sandy bridge igpus to do video encoding didnt reshape how companies did encoding for viewing(which would lead to NVenc or AMD VCE) or scrubbing in the case of professional use.
The gpu driver team had existed for awhile now, its just they never was seveeely pressured to update it specifically for gaming as theybreally didnt have anything remotely game ready till arguably tigerlake’s igpu.
There are 2 versions of XeSS: one which runs on most later Nvidia and AMD GPUs and gives roughly equivalent results to FSR1, and another which only runs on Intel GPUs because it uses their equivalent of tensor cores (thus more like DLSS). I don’t ever see a scenario where anyone is going to support the second one unless Intel starts sponsoring games. And for the first, what’s the advantage over FSR1?
My dream is a fallout game set in New Orleans, but made by Obsidian.
Give them permission to have greenery in the game as you run around a massively overgrown swamp (there's some lore from unpublished games about an over-abundance of GECK testing in the area,)
Helping people actually build new shit from the abundant trees. The people would be that fun mix Creole and Americana.
We could have new enemies, like snakes and gators and shit. Maybe assassin vines and man eating trees.
My dream enemy would be a splinter group of Caesar's legion and remnants of the Enclave.
As for music, dig deep into New Orleans history. There's more than enough to put together a kick-ass soundtrack.
Microsoft has bought up both Obsidian and Bethesda so it is technically possible for them to make another Fallout game. But at the same time they already announced Outer Worlds 2, and I’m not even sure the key people are necessarily still around.
Before that’s a cause for alarm, however, many of these remaining 20 were key people in New Vegas’ development, and Obsidian also has Leonard Boyarsky and Tim Cain on board, even though both are on Outer Worlds (2), and Leonard and Tim are the original creators of Fallout.
Josh Sawyer, the director of New Vegas, is still there as well and has said he is open to working on Fallout again.
Lots of samesy stuff. Travel to a side quest, same looking area, same enemies, same thing.
I feel like they spent most of the resources trying to rebuild a working functional engine for themselves, rather than do what they do best, which is create stories. Because there was some serious amazing sparks of creativity like being able to skip a whole story chapter with a single dialog option.
Like Mass Effect 1 - very flawed but lots of potential. But then Mass Effect 2 became a masterpiece.
So I have high hopes for Outer Worlds 2 being incredible.
While I would kill for an actual remake, there is a fan-made remake in the F4 engine that has been many years in the works. The devs are pretty active on Discord and still plugging away at it. Who knows if it ever actually gets finished, but I think at this point this is the best hope for a somewhat-modernized New Vegas.
This is actually one of those things that bothers me the most. So many projects that are at risk of getting taken down are announced way before they are ready, whether it be on purpose for them to knowingly get taken down before anything ever becomes playable and gets released because they never had any intention of actually releasing it they just wanted the fame for it with no intentions of delivering on it, or because they didn’t think they would get taken down and get completely surprised by it like it’s never happened before. If you are going to make something awesome, wait until you release it to announce it.
I wonder what would happen if Bethesda gave a few of the best modders full access to the game's code and to the latest version of the engine. I bet they could come up with a current gen remake in under a year without the involvement of a single Bethesda dev.
I think you’re severely underestimating how much time, effort, and resources game development takes. Especially when the devs aren’t doing it full-time.
Are we talking about a whole engine re-write or just bringing the game into modern times graphically? Because you could do the latter much easier and with less time (still time consuming yes, but not as much) with just basic modding and not even need the source code.
Well, in such a scenario I'm also making two assumptions:
That the modders are indeed being paid by Bethesda to work full-time on it since it's meant to be sold when finished (not unlike Skyrim Special Edition, only made by modders)
There's a way to add code and assets from existing mods to their remake. If they have to make it all from scratch then yeah, a year is not enough.
Okay, maybe I will be buying the game afterall. As long as “No Denuvo” doesn’t mean “no denuvo, but we added a different DRM instead.” Except Steam’s built in DRM, I guess. It doesn’t seem to negatively effect the performance in my Steam games.
Not that I don’t believe them, but it’s odd that none of the videos from YouTubers with early access have shown that kind of performance. It makes me wonder if they are trying to set lower expectations for some reason.
This article is talking about it like this is a new thing. It has been part of the core set of QoL mods for new installs for years now. Looks like they got a recent update though which is exciting
Edit: Didn’t look at the link just knew by name, looks like they released a new mod to compliment the one I’m talking about? This person is a fucking godsend
They did indeed release a new engine optimization mod, separate to the standard mandatory-install Stewies Tweaks. The past year has been crazy for NV mods.
Perfect Dark with dual analog controls is something I’ve wanted to exist and now it does! No Mac support though, gonna have to maybe take another look at clearing things out to make room for boot camp.
Both perfect dark and goldeneye had dual analog support on the N64, though only in single player. Was my first experience with dual analog and all my friends thought I was nuts holding two controllers. Then the Ps2 came out w dual stick and we never looked back.
Not sure about Perfect Dark (never played it), but Goldeneye had the control mode where you hold the left and center grips which was quite similar to dual analog. Of course, that was moving with the d-pad instead of moving with an analog stick, so not quite as smooth on the movement front, but it was definitely a step up from the default control scheme while not being quite as unwieldy as using two separate controllers.
Holy freakin moley I never knew this, that means I might be able to give it a shot on my mac sometime even without this new port. For anyone else as unfortunate as me that’s gaming on an old mac, I found the tutorial for how to set this up by Eggyhead.
There was actually an Xbox 360 port. It’s very hard to find as it was only on Live Arcade and it’s since been delisted (afaik), but it had updated graphics and native dual analog support. I managed to find a ROM and run it on an X360 emulator a year or so back but have no idea where my files ended up.
No worries, I have a couple drives I use for archiving stuff like that in case it gets pulled down, so it should be on one of those I’m just too lazy to look😅plus, with this port I’ll likely not go back to the emulated version
Really sad. GTA Online in principle sounds so cool, but it's such a shitty execution. I'm sure if modded servers were encouraged I'd find something to my liking but the way this rotten piece of shit company treats modders is just despicable, and always has been.
A lot of stuff is Iike that. Ultimate Team in Madden or FIFA, without the monetization, could potentially be one hell of a game mode (though also maybe hard to balance). The idea of being able to build out a team to your personal preferences and play style and match up against others head to head is awesome.
But "fuck you, we want users dropping $10k on their team", so we can't have nice things.
I believe my last time playing FIFA was on the PSX. I vaguely heard something about loot box style booster packs to get players I think? Imagine Nintendo would do that with Pokemon, and all the good & rare ones would be super rare, but you could of course buy packs for real money. 🎰
That's basically what ultimate team is in practice.
If it had no cash involved and was either tuned to a level where a normal person could build a team that was competitive at the high end in a month or so (since it is, ultimately, an annual game) or you just had a budget and could sign who you wanted (based on "market value" that was set based on overall rating and position or that fluctuated with how many people had a guy on their roster), it could be awesome.
But yeah, it's basically a card game (that I think also has cards expire, though I don't play it at all) that's designed to milk whales for cash. And they replaced a lot of the normal Madden tournaments you could win money playing to use this nonsense mode instead.
The only semi-saving grace is that it's mostly self contained. There are obnoxious ads for it, and other game modes haven't seen the development work they should because they spend most of the non-engine work on that nonsense, but you can still just play online head to head of a great football sim if you tune out the nonsense.
It's super scummy and I would love to see legal involvement shut it all down. Lootboxes are unregulated gambling and in sports games specifically they're very obviously targeting kids.
Yeah. I already don't do trading card games because of this. Having an expiration date on the cards sounds even dumber. Kinda sad how everything nowadays has to get milked into oblivion. Really kills the fun of many games, but unfortunately people still buy into it. Reminds me also how "micro" transactions ended up ruining the mmorpg genre. Everything is just so over-commercialized nowadays (same for the internet).
So I think it was "games played" "contracts" and there were ways to earn extensions through normal play when I briefly played the single player part a while back. I recognized the giant trap for what it was and bailed and am not sure the current state, but if it did exist and is scummy and makes them more money, I'd be surprised if they walked it back.
I was incredibly excited for this game because I thought it’d be an actual city simulator this time, but it’s just another American-road-based traffic simulator.
Switch’s operating system is based on the OS from 3DS. The ARM architecture was already well documented and emulated. Tegra has documentation from NVidia.
With all that, making a Switch emulator was relatively “easy”. They took Citra, the 3DS emulator, and worked from there.
Xbox 360 is a different beast. Even its OS was only kinda Windows, so they couldn’t just take Wine and a PowerPC emulator and call it a day. Taking long is IMO not much of a surprise because of that.
IIRC the original Xbox has even worse emulation, to this day, despite being infamously close to a stock PC.
What makes RDR’s emulation struggles noteworthy is that it’s a highly desirable game that still took ages to unfuck. Most nightmare cases for emulators seem to be random D-list titles. Pinball Fantasies on Game Boy had incomprehensible crashes, early and reliably, for no discernible reason. True Crime New York on Gamecube was a white whale for Dolphin despite being absolute garbage.
RDR was a huge deal for its own sake - and it ran bad, looked worse, and stayed that way for a while. Back in the day it was common for emulators to only work properly for big-name games. NESticle and SNES9X absolutely cheated to run major titles. Early N64 development was nothing but. So having this killer app refuse to work, year after year, was a lingering presence in people’s minds.
Finally getting it working, only to have a nearly painless alternative drop, is pretty goddang funny.
Aside from poorly documented hardware, one reason why Xbox emulation is in such an early state was simply lack of interest. The Xbox had a meager first-party library and what exclusives there were, were already available to play on every Xbox released ever since via back compat.
I think a more tragic case would be if MGS4 was ever re-released as part of the Master Collection ports. That game was designed from the ground up for PS3, and runs terrible even on the custom RPCS3 builds designed specifically for it.
I mean even then, its odd but I don't see a problem if modders aren't selling the mod as a "expansion" to users. Ai voices are iffy but they can bring so much cool things to the modding scene. The biggest problem is when large corporations like Rockstar/Take two/etc start using them to replace actual voice actors. A modder isn't going to have the money to pay an A list voice actor to voice act in their mod
Edit: I do think it does cross a bit of a line if said mod is a sex mod but realistically that isn't a logical difference between that and a normal mod but it does feel like its crossing a line.
I'm in other topics arguing that training on copyrighted content is not infringement in any way, but I think using someone's likeness is different and probably not legal, because there are separate laws there.
You can usually get away with it if you have deniability, but I don't think straight up adding lines to characters gives you any way to argue that.
Its iffy isn't it? Like we have to remember video game mods are a whole can of worms and they are plainly in a gray area for many regions. Say for instance you have a mod where you have a party member who was modded in who was something like John Wick, Indiana Jones, Princess Leia, Luke Skywalker, Macho man Randy Savage, etc. Some of these mods would likely rip audio from other source material or they can be impersonation but you are taking someone's "likeness" in a similar fashion. Is it just a step too far because we are copying a voice? I'm 100% for modding but we have to be aware it is on pretty shakey ground. Its also hard since some voice actors do have a ton of range and would it really count as "stealing" someone's likeness if you are copying a voice of a character they have played but you aren't copying their regular speaking voice
I understand why people fear AI but I just think when its being used by hobbyists its a bit different compared to a company doing it especially when the hobbyist isn't doing it for commercial gain. Like the recent outrage about a fan animation of scooby doo using AI voices where an actual voice actor sent a hate mob and trying to blacklist the person for daring to have a shoestring budget and make a silly non serious fan episode of scooby doo.
Edit: It seems crazy to see someone dismiss a person's hard work just because 1 element isn't up to snuff. I don't agree with people hating the concept of "AI art" but this person did a full 10 minute 3d rendered retro style felt/puppet animation but the voice acting is the massive hang up and seeing their work dismisses because of it is infuriating.
If they are not making money on the mod, it’s possible you might be able to get away under a fair use argument, especially if the character skills were some sort of parody.
Although that’s definitely not a legal battle I would want against Disney’s lawyers.
That is quite the fucking interesting take. I guess props for being consistent but those style of mods are typically seen as one of the best type of mods. Massive overhauls that bring one game into another universe take a ton of work and have worked as a basis to work from. Hell Total Warhammer may not have existed without the Call of Warhammer from Medieval 2. I just fundamentally think the world is a far better place when fans who aren't making money can work on projects that would never get the go ahead to continue in a commercial setting.
dsogaming.com
Ważne