Seems likely. It only stutters on Windows - run it through Proton on Linux, where it’s translating it all to Vulkan, and it’s silky smooth. Maybe off by a frame or two as well of course, but it’s pretty much locked to 60 fps in either case on my machine and can’t really check. DirectX seems quite bad for hitching when a new shader is loaded - they’d all be pre-compiled on a console since the devs know exactly what the target hardware is, so if you don’t rewrite your engine on Windows to accommodate it, then you’ll have problems.
Act 1 and at the first half of Act 2 ran pretty well for me, generally 80ish fps on max settings everywhere (6700xt @ 1440p). It’s after that when it started running like a three legged mare; frequent random slowdowns to about 15fps. I suspect that they got the game mostly finished and then started their optimization pass at the beginning, and just hadn’t got to the end of the game by the release date, which was moved forward last-minute to avoid Starfield.
The end of the game doesn’t look any more complicated than the beginning; suspect they just ran out of polishing time.
It would still be a fun little puzzler, but it’s very much a single-note satire, and a lot of it would come off as “lol random” rather than taking the piss out of The Witness. Which is also brilliant, love them both.
Annoying - the demo was really good, and ran great on Linux using Proton. Guess I’m going to be holding off on buying till it’s removed and on sale, then - there’s no point in buying a game early and it running like shit.
I was bewildered by this myself. The developers who were famous for their walking simulators but who fired all their staff a few years back (keeping the studio founders) have taken over a project where the original developers were dismissed amid some damaging-sounding rumours and budget overruns. Hardsuit Labs presumably had completed most of the initial writing work and concept art - their ‘tech demos’ looked pretty convincing, even though that kind of thing is very carefully managed - but must have still been a long way from anything that could be released. A mystery. See how it goes - still a year away, anyway.
Dark Souls 1 had the stupid 30 fps cap and rendered at 720p and then stretched it. But otherwise it was very stable and bug free, totally playable from beginning to end. Dark Souls 2, Scholar, 3, Sekiro, and Elden Ring were all fantastic ports, rock solid 60 fps, all the settings that you could ask for, and ran great. If I was picking on a Japanese dev that did shitty ports, wouldn’t really have picked From.
RockPaperShotgun did a performance analysis on this - long story short, a 30xx card will be good for about medium settings, a 40xx for high, and really a 4090 for ultra. According to the Steam hardware survey, that’s about one-in-five PC gamers that could start this up if they wanted to; a few percent can run it with all the flashy graphics. Combine the hardware exclusivity and the distinctly ‘meh’ reviews, get some seriously low player numbers.
Witcher 2, before they patched in the tutorial mission. (Which is still not very good as a tutorial.) Enjoy getting a shitkicking in the very first fight, since you’ve no idea of the controls.
Well, has the fully Youtube Poop-compliant animations, I suppose. The actual ‘game’ part of the games, if they weren’t so absurdly sluggish to respond to inputs and take such a very long time to load each new screen, would have been indistinguishable from any other completely uninspired, middle of the road platformer of the early 90s. From the gameplay segments of that video, that looks like all they’re aspiring to here, as well.