- Jan 4, 2018
- 105
- 376
It's only three weeks old, and just a Developer Preview. But don't worry. There will be plenty. I know that feeling of grinding five months for a nip slip. And I hate it.There is something missing in this game.
It's only three weeks old, and just a Developer Preview. But don't worry. There will be plenty. I know that feeling of grinding five months for a nip slip. And I hate it.There is something missing in this game.
Actually, more like 3070 for 45 average fps. That's what I'm building it on, so...It, looks like... Mom tnx for 4090, I take cool terrain template, and some assets. Quixel models without Nanite give 8 FPS for me. Any way good luck
You have to remember the Switch has a power draw on 15w. The fact that the GPU in the Switch can handle an Unreal Engine game at 20/30fps is actually impressive ;-) It's not perfect - sure. But it should be a good comparison when considering some cards on PC won't get by unless you've got at least a 600w PSU.Arguable.
I consider the fact Splatoon and BOTW run at sub 30 on the switch reason enough to question your point, kek.
Jokes aside, you gotta admit Daz models and Store bought assets are enough of a shitshow alone.
But the engine by default being a fiddly mess with 600 layers of makeup on doesn't help.
You missed the point, bad performance is bad performance and pointing to the switch as an example of what the engine can run well on is a lie. Nothing runs well on the switch, its a out of date system with out of date Nvidia gpu in it from the start.The fact that the GPU in the Switch can handle an Unreal Engine game at 20/30fps is actually impressive ;-) It's not perfect - sure. But it should be a good comparison when considering some cards on PC won't get by unless you've got at least a 600w PSU.
Paragon was the most beautiful thing I have ever seen back then (UE4), and made by Epic.Is this yet another unreal engine "experiment" with
Daz models - ?
Store assets - ?
Sandbox - Check
Performance issues - Check
Gotta realize maybe the issue is the engine?
Maybe there's a reason the engines dev made Fortnite and not something graphically intense...
Oh it was a looker, fun too.Paragon was the most beautiful thing I have ever seen back then (UE4), and made by Epic.
No no I got your point. But I never said it ran "well" on any platform. Let alone the Switch. I actually said -You missed the point, bad performance is bad performance and pointing to the switch as an example of what the engine can run well on is a lie. Nothing runs well on the switch, its a out of date system with out of date Nvidia gpu in it from the start.
Unreals just not gonna do well by itself.
2 main issues with unreal is LOD and culling. Unreal is not good for open world by default, as much as it advertises it.
Gotta chip off the 600 layers of makup to make it usable, than tweak it to your use case.
In terms of performance - define "well" - because, I think a lot of people (as it has been shown) do not intrinsically care, or know about better performance options. Many people who play the Switch somehow tend to ignore the glaring performance problems it has and somehow shill the hell out of Nintendo for it. And then, there are some - who don't. Like me. I have one and I feel it's a poor console, worthy of only being used to play the sport games when family come around and we've all had a couple beers.SireneDead said:The fact that the GPU in the Switch can handle an Unreal Engine game at 20/30fps is actually impressive ;-) It's not perfect
That's key tho isn't it? Anything handled properly can be used well.but if handled properly
Yep. Pretty much nailed it right there, I mean - I like some of the Nintendo games - and, while I play a lot of FPS typically, I've attempted DOOM Eternal on there and while it's graphically, a good port - it's stability is just not worth the hassle. Not to mention the horrendous often overlooked input delay, despite the Joycons being attached to the console directly.The switches "strengths" are the facts its Nintendo and has good games. The technical and performance issues are something I'm unable to put up with at length. But i can see why some do when there's no competition to speak of.
And yes, Virt-A-Mate is a great example. And it's something I've not seen done before or since in terms what can be done. Of course, as you stated already - and thus, I'm only reaffirming your stance - it does have flaws. But none so glaring that I couldn't play it with a good stable experience.That's key tho isn't it? Anything handled properly can be used well.
Take Virt-A-Mate for example, technical masterpiece. Made in Unity, far out steps anything made in Unreal by a landslide.
But even that has flaws.
Thinking about it, I think the majority of UE games I've seen have either been FPS, VR or "linear open world" games, nothing else. Don't think I've played a UE game that is, say, racing or sport based.Unreal sells itself as some mystical can-do-anything tool, but when you take it off that pedestal you should be able to see that for every "feature" is a outweighing flaw.
Can't disagree with you here. And, to be fair -I relate its focus on graphical fidelity to "600 layers of makeup" for a reason, its superficial and not feasible.
Unreal is potentially part of the blame for modern gaming's graphical obsession. Easy to point a finger when its the biggest player in the field, saying the exact slogans thats one of the biggest issues today.
Meanwhile rarely, if ever, actually using such features themselves....
Solid points.I relate its focus on graphical fidelity to "600 layers of makeup" for a reason, its superficial and not feasible.
Unreal is potentially part of the blame for modern gaming's graphical obsession.
Nobody is arguing. We're discussing.Ok! Guys, let's not argue on platforms and how good or bad is one despite the other.
Why use it then? I mean - it's a known thing, even on the UE5 forums there are people complaining about huge FPS drops and issues with their games. Even on 4090's.Groom in Unreal Engine 5, a feature that chews fps even if you are half a mile away from the asset.
It's not just about graphical obsession, it's about ease of use. I've waited almost two years for the engine to reach this point, a landmark that can give me, a small Developer, the opportunity to recreate a playable Mars outpost or a 2 square km jungle in a matter of days. Not to mention the thousands upon thousands of tutorials which can help you code the game. Yes, it has its flaws, every engine does. But, as if now, it's the only software that can provide the necessary tools to deliver, as a single developed, especially if you want an open world, with interaction, cinematics, dialogue, voice acting integration, powerful animation tools and, most of all, world building capabilities. Yes, I agree, for small scale, every other engine is good enough. But for large scale, trust me, as blamed as it is, Unreal remains the top pick. And for one good reason: it can help you deliver fast, which, in crowdfunding sector, is a must. I avoided publishing for the past two years for a reason. You always got stuck at some point in the development process, because the engine is it's lack of compatibility with other software, like blender or daz.The switches "strengths" are the facts its Nintendo and has good games. The technical and performance issues are something I'm unable to put up with at length. But i can see why some do when there's no competition to speak of.
That's key tho isn't it? Anything handled properly can be used well.
Take Virt-A-Mate for example, technical masterpiece. Made in Unity, far out steps anything made in Unreal by a landslide.
But even that has flaws.
Unreal sells itself as some mystical can-do-anything tool, but when you take it off that pedestal you should be able to see that for every "feature" is a outweighing flaw.
I relate its focus on graphical fidelity to "600 layers of makeup" for a reason, its superficial and not feasible.
Unreal is potentially part of the blame for modern gaming's graphical obsession. Easy to point a finger when its the biggest player in the field, saying the exact slogans thats one of the biggest issues today.
Meanwhile rarely, if ever, actually using such features themselves....
Yes, I do have a reason for using Unreal. It's explained in one of the comments above.Nobody is arguing. We're discussing.
Why use it then? I mean - it's a known thing, even on the UE5 forums there are people complaining about huge FPS drops and issues with their games. Even on 4090's.
If I can ask an honest question - if UE5 is so demanding, that you have to put in all this extra work - why did you not just use UE4? Or Unity instead? There are plenty of other engines which could deliver what you're trying to do here.
Is there a specific reason you chose this engine?
Basically, an options menu . I know it's necessary and I tried to avoid implementing it until I find a better, yet more complicated solution for optimizing the game. Thanks for the info in the foliage and Ray Tracing (this last one really slipped my mind). Will look into both. And, as for the hair, well, most likely I'll have to sacrifice it at some point to make it playable on lower end systems. In the end, most of the players will feel like in the "Can it run Crysis?" era but... nonetheless, I would love to make Project Bounded so good that will want to buy a new rig, just to play it the way it's meant to be played.Some recommendations -
1. Add a toggle for ray tracing. "ON" as default is a poor choice, especially for those on lower end systems.
2. Perhaps a D3D11 option, too for better performance. Again on lower spec systems.
3. Resolution scaler would be nice. For the above mentioned.
4. Way too much of the map is rendered, despite not being accessible/visible for 90% of the time. Consider culling some.
5. Spread those trees a little more thinly, when you go higher up, you see that they're duplicated throughout the environment
6. Add a toggle for dynamic hair, or prefab static mesh.
I mean, those are a few things I feel would definitely make this game more playable at a higher FPS for those on lower end systems.
On this rig, my specs are - Intel i9 13900k clocked at 4.4Ghz, Nvidia 4090 Ventus 24gb, 64gb of DDR4 Ram - and despite those overkill specs, this game runs poorly and has over the top FPS fluctuations on my rig. I can test on my lower spec system later today and see how it handles.