Optimization

[Paddi01]

What are the most well optimized PC games out there?

Just write down whatever comes to your mind.

I prefer Max Payne and Witcher series.

[Himommies]

MGSV

I can run it a mid settings 1080p on a APU and a 750

[Froody129]

Dishonored. The game looks beautiful since it’s more of a cartoony art style and the game itself is incredibly good. It’s also quite cheap since it’s a bit older.

 

Haven’t played the second one though 

[PorkishPig]

PUBG and Fallout 4.

I'd say Rocket League, Bioshock Infinite, Ori and the Blind Forest, and Bad Rats.

[kelvinhall05]

War Thunder. Looks fucking great, plays fucking great, and runs fucking great on shitty hardware. It's free to play, too, so that's good.

[Imbellis]

I'd have to go with nearly all classic games.

 

The limitations of hardware at the time forced developers to take shortcuts to reduce file size and the hardware needed.

Nowadays you'll see a "flash game" take up a gig or two when it should be able to be compressed down to a couple megs.

 

My personal example of this is "V",(Now Old TV) which is 350mbs.

[minibois]

Depends in what way.

Tomb Raider 2012 for example scales rather well in SLI mode, but not really in terms of CPU's (what I mean by that last point is that it doesn't make a huge difference in having a better CPU, which could also mean it's rather well CPU optimized).

[Vandorlot]

4 minutes ago, kelvinhall05 said:

War Thunder. Looks fucking great, plays fucking great, and runs fucking great on shitty hardware. It's free to play, too, so that's good.

Disagreed couldnt run it at min on old pc.

[Himommies]

6 minutes ago, Froody129 said:

Dishonored. The game looks beautiful since it’s more of a cartoony art style and the game itself is incredibly good. It’s also quite cheap since it’s a bit older.

 

Haven’t played the second one though 

That's not really a example of optimization IMO

It just uses a different art style which in turn makes the game easier to run.If Dishonored tried for photo realism I doubt it would be considered having good optimazation

 

[Paddi01]

Isn´t this depended on the game engine as well? I mean that for a specific genre you need the appropriate engine in order to make proper optimization (racing,shooter etc.).

Just a guess

[kelvinhall05]

1 hour ago, Vandorlot said:

Disagreed couldnt run it at min on old pc.

I was able to run it on lowest settings 1080P on a crappy i5 laptop.

[Paddi01]

5 minutes ago, kelvinhall05 said:

I was able to run it on lowest settings 1080P on a crappy i5 laptop.

same

[GitGud]

Need For Speed Hot Pursuit 2010

[GitGud]

15 hours ago, Himommies said:

That's not really a example of optimization IMO

It just uses a different art style which in turn makes the game easier to run.If Dishonored tried for photo realism I doubt it would be considered having good optimazation

 

Also it was UE3 game which were very easy to run mostly.

[Mira Yurizaki]

On 1/7/2018 at 12:40 PM, Homeless Pineapple said:

PUBG and Fallout 4.

I'd say Rocket League, Bioshock Infinite, Ori and the Blind Forest, and Bad Rats.

Funny you mention Rocket League. I was randomly browsing Notebookcheck for GPU performance comparisons and I noticed that the GTX 1050 Ti can run that game at 4K and achieve 60 FPS while using high or very high settings.

On 1/7/2018 at 12:41 PM, Imbellis said:

I'd have to go with nearly all classic games.

 

The limitations of hardware at the time forced developers to take shortcuts to reduce file size and the hardware needed.

Nowadays you'll see a "flash game" take up a gig or two when it should be able to be compressed down to a couple megs.

 

My personal example of this is "V",(Now Old TV) which is 350mbs.

You might want to backpedal on that. The accepted performance until 3D acceleration came along was around 15 FPS. Even Doom, everyone's favorite poster child of a PC game back then, had a cap of something like 35 FPS. So while they may have done some clever tricks back then, performance expectations were pretty low compared to today.

On 1/7/2018 at 1:05 PM, Paddi01 said:

Isn´t this depended on the game engine as well? I mean that for a specific genre you need the appropriate engine in order to make proper optimization (racing,shooter etc.).

Just a guess

The engine only handles some of the work. You can make it terrible with poor design, scripting, and middleware choices. For example, we have Unreal Tournament 3 which works pretty well on a lot of PCs, but then you have Batman: Arkham Knight, which ran like crap on PCs. Both used Unreal Engine 3

[Paddi01]

18 minutes ago, M.Yurizaki said:

Funny you mention Rocket League. I was randomly browsing Notebookcheck for GPU performance comparisons and I noticed that the GTX 1050 Ti can run that game at 4K and achieve 60 FPS while using high or very high settings.

You might want to backpedal on that. The accepted performance until 3D acceleration came along was around 15 FPS. Even Doom, everyone's favorite poster child of a PC game back then, had a cap of something like 35 FPS. So while they may have done some clever tricks back then, performance expectations were pretty low compared to today.

The engine only handles some of the work. You can make it terrible with poor design, scripting, and middleware choices. For example, we have Unreal Tournament 3 which works pretty well on a lot of PCs, but then you have Batman: Arkham Knight, which ran like crap on PCs. Both used Unreal Engine 3

yes i understand your point. In other words, it all depends on what you make out of the engine in the end. So it has to be chosen well and though-out which is being used before developing a game.

[Imbellis]

37 minutes ago, M.Yurizaki said:

You might want to backpedal on that. The accepted performance until 3D acceleration came along was around 15 FPS. Even Doom, everyone's favorite poster child of a PC game back then, had a cap of something like 35 FPS. So while they may have done some clever tricks back then, performance expectations were pretty low compared to today.

 

Sorry I was unclear. I meant to say that the games ran well for what they had - not that they run "well" today (compared to other games).

 

They may not hit 100 fps, but if you were to take a game of similar fidelity and complexity back a decade, the classic would dominate in terms of optimization - both if fps and file size.

[Mira Yurizaki]

1 hour ago, Imbellis said:

Sorry I was unclear. I meant to say that the games ran well for what they had - not that they run "well" today (compared to other games).

 

They may not hit 100 fps, but if you were to take a game of similar fidelity and complexity back a decade, the classic would dominate in terms of optimization - both if fps and file size.

Well funny you say these things anyway because this is why I still believe consoles have pushed a lot of the modern technical aspects of 3D gaming because they were limiting and didn't have Moore's Law to rely on.

[Zodiark1593]

1 hour ago, M.Yurizaki said:

Well funny you say these things anyway because this is why I still believe consoles have pushed a lot of the modern technical aspects of 3D gaming because they were limiting and didn't have Moore's Law to rely on.

Having consoles be of a similar, contemporary architecture helps a lot with porting games around as well. Makes me wish the PS3 axed the Cell and wait a tiny bit longer for a G80 chip from Nvidia. 

[Mira Yurizaki]

14 hours ago, Zodiark1593 said:

Having consoles be of a similar, contemporary architecture helps a lot with porting games around as well. Makes me wish the PS3 axed the Cell and wait a tiny bit longer for a G80 chip from Nvidia. 

Then the Xbox 360 wouldn't have existed D:

 

Anyway, on a side note, one of my favorite consoles from a technical point of view is now the N64. The graphical effects its GPU could achieve at the time makes a GeForce 3 look outdated. Granted of course, it wouldn't be pushing the same pixels or performance, but having a fully programmable GPU before DirectX was even a household name? Doooood

[TheSilverNiko]

Rocket league runs pretty well on a lot of hardware.