Even if you don’t have a Series S anyone in the near vicinity?Apparently it can drop to 50s on a RTX 4090 with DLSS.
Fuck.
Quick reminder that for much less Arkham knight (a way better looking game that still ran 1080p 30 console settings on a GTX 760) was removed from Steam for months.
The "lowest common denominator" are the millions of i3 6300 and GTX 770 equivalent gaming rigs out there. These games aren't console exclusive. And this game, specifically, is i5 9600k and a GTX 1660TI. This game was just poorly developed, and even more poorly optimized.Switch is getting down ports of some games when it's possible. While series s version has to be always made and it's the lowest common denominator. This console will hold entire 9 gen aside PS5 and pc exclusives, no matter what you think about it this is reality.
The "lowest common denominator" are the millions of i3 6300 and GTX 770 equivalent gaming rigs out there. These games aren't console exclusive. And this game, specifically, is i5 9600k and a GTX 1660TI. This game was just poorly developed, and even more poorly optimized.
No it is not......I have PC with 1660TI & AMD Ryzen 7 3700X, XSS is better on my monitor then PC on 1080P games.Developers don't give a fuck about low end PC gaming rigs. Required CPU and GPU are the one that have all the features of lowest performing console and 1660ti is stronger than series s.
Apparently it can drop to 50s on a RTX 4090 with DLSS.
Fuck.
Not even close, revisionist history, the game was a near unplayable stutterfest on pc with a massive amount of negative reviews; valve had to remove it because it was fundamentally broken.Quick reminder that for much less Arkham knight (a way better looking game that still ran 1080p 30 console settings on a GTX 760) was removed from Steam for months.
Yeah, some of these devs should be thanking MS for giving them an excuse at this point.XSS becoming the perfect crutch for lazy developers..
This in itself is revisionist revisionist history lol. I played Arkham Knight at launch on my laptop with a 970m and an SSD. The issues that plagued the PC version were mainly due to PC's using HDD's, which were still very common at the time (Now should it have run that badly on HDDs? Of course not).Not even close, revisionist history, the game was a near unplayable stutterfest on pc with a massive amount of negative reviews; valve had to remove it because it was fundamentally broken.
Even now it's not completely fixed, but hardware is so much more powerful, brute force handles the bad optimisation.
No it is not......I have PC with 1660TI & AMD Ryzen 7 3700X, XSS is better on my monitor then PC on 1080P games.
Nonsense, I was there at day 1 and the main issue with the game was that it just stuttered everywhere, even on high end hardware because, among things, it didn't handle texture generation properly; I personally was able to brute force it by going out and buying an extra 8gb ram, but even then it wasn't great.This in itself is revisionist revisionist history lol. I played Arkham Knight at launch on my laptop with a 970m and an SSD. The issues that plagued the PC version were mainly due to PC's using HDD's, which were still very common at the time (Now should it have run that badly on HDDs? Of course not).
Series S has a better CPU...and it's pretty much exactly the GPU power of a 1660TI with it being RDNA2...and this game is running @ 30-40% GPU utilization. So, yeah. Also, most games min specs are a 1070 or lower. The ONLY reason they recommend a 1660TI is because of how poorly optimized it is. It chugs on a 4090 ffs.Developers don't give a fuck about low end PC gaming rigs. Required CPU and GPU are the one that have all the features of lowest performing console and 1660ti is stronger than series s.