As much as i agree, Stalker 2 has had a very rough development (bankruptcy, development hell and a literal war) so problems are to be expected and in this case the devs atleast have an excuse for bad peformance, as the game being released at all is a miracle.
@@primuspilusfellatus6501 It's just the war. Original Stalker 2 project was completely scrapped at roughly 60% complete, and was made in CryEngine. This new Stalker 2 is not really connected to it. New devs, new assets, new engine
STALKER? Performance issues? Noooo never! If you cant enjoy a stalker game without bugs and performance issues, can you really call yourself a stalker fan? (Edit: This is a joke. I cant believe I had to say this)
The game got delayed so many times why should we accept this? There shouldn’t be any excuse for it, the first few games came out a decade ago and this is a new modern title, if it can’t run on anything after the years of work they put into it then who’s going to really enjoy it? Aren’t we supposed to progress not revert?
@@Prizzim Seeing how the joke might have gone over your head, I'll just say Im looking forward to my Game Engine based anomaly's. (All jokes aside, its a none AAA company, where their home country is at war, and even before that we werent sure if the game would even be made. GSC has always been a... iffy company riddled with drama. Expectations should be minimal in the first place.)
STALKER just wouldn’t be STALKER without it’s bugs lol Plus I only plan to play on Medium anyways, which I’m sure my PC can take, even with just an RTX 2060 and 32gb of RAM (:
LevelCap can you make a story on how Gaijin has started to ban players for friendly fire and unavoidable teamkilling rather than removing the friendlyfire gamemechanic from the game?
The DLSS craze was always going to end up like this. Devs will make their games with DLSS in mind, with better graphics and lazier optimization. "It runs at 60 fps at 1080p high on a 4070 with DLSS quality? Send it."
Stalker 1 was CPU bound on release even with the reduced simulation systems (read, almost completely removed sim systems) and only became GPU limited after some patches and it's standalone updates where Nvidia stepped in to chuck in a bunch of their bloat at the game
- Average gamer - looks at game benchmarks - sees low numbers on mid end cards - completely ignores the part that says "max settings" - Calls the game unoptimized bloated garbage Are ya'll actually regarded? Or just malding that game developers add features that only top end systems can enable? Do you expect all games to look like Fallout 3 and run at 240 FPS on your Walmart brand toaster PC? God forbid you turn off a few unnecessary graphical features rather than whine because your Bangladesh dumpster special you pass off as a "gaming pc" can't get 120fps on your 60hz Onn monitor.
Lol have you seen recent releases? Turning down settings often does nothing! Going from Ultra to medium sometimes give you only 5-10 % better performance in newer games. Usaully in Very demanding games scalability sucks to.
It blows my mind how insanely anti consumer some consumers have gotten. You can see a brand new game come out, made by 5 people, developed over 3-6 years, looks like it's on Unreal 5 and has basic raytracing, AAA visual and gameplay quality, turns out it's on some old unheard of engine, runs insanely well, the devs record all of their videos on an old 1070 i5 8gb ram system at 100+ fps max settings, but hey, buying a 3k PC is now a totally reasonable requirement to "play" the newest games made by 100s of people with tons of funding and direct communication with industry leads in tech and software. Or you know, just enjoy the worse visual quality than 2005, worse performance than 2010, input lag worse than the apollo missions, likely screen tearing and/or baked in motion blur, and a major reduction in fun all because you don't want to give more money to several companies that are intentionally ripping us off because they have no competition. It's laughable how much you want to spend money, how you defend corporate greed instead of the hobby we should all want to share with as many people as possible, how you insult people who are likely in the same position you once were. Or maybe you really are that far gone.
I really hope Stalker 2 is not a cyberpunk situation... really want the best for this game. Thanks for showing me Rogue Point, seems right up my alley!
I doubt it. Not a single one of the people, from whom I've seen videos so far, who had the chance to play the 3hour demo, talked about performance issues
@@IIXxSLAYERxXII and? It's normal since decades, that new games can't be played at the highest settings, even if you have a "NASA PC". Remember Crysis, or far cry, or doom3 or even doom1, or Shadow of Chernobyl, or,or,or? People should be happy that we now have those little helpers in the gpu driver's, to still be able to play it with a good framerate and not cry about it and/or accusing it of bad programming, even though it hasn't even been published yet
@@Turbo1602ti We never seen good previews with bad end products … oh wait I would say there is a big chance people who tried the game are more forgiving to this team because of circumstances I personally would be surprised if this game turns out to be great
All things considered since STALKER 2 is a UE5 title, this would mean that on ultra preset, Lumen Ray Traced Lighting is cranked up the highest which I doubt most will enable Lumen anyways.
Stalker games being buggy and unoptimized checks out. I've been noticing that CPU bottlenecks are becoming more and more prevalent. I used to only notice them in games like Battlefield, but increasingly I'm seeing it more drastically across single player titles. I'll play at 1440p so it's no big deal, but 1080p seems like it will be a mess if you have an asymmetrical CPU/GPU pairing. Seems like 4k locked 60 might be the way to go for those who have the option.
@rivasvisual8403 most games with that hefty of a file size do that because they failed to compress their files, there are most likely technical issues, i hate having to delete half of my games for 1 game, and personally hardly any games I've played at that file size I enjoy. Off the top of my head... I love GoW Ragnarok.
@@5hane9ro It's not even close to be a red flag for compression. Anomaly + GAMMA are already half the size, that's just a modset to make the game more modern and overhauled. Shadow of Chernobyl was in general "massive" in file size for its time as well (10gb?! are you insane??). Or take Hitman 3 (or World of Assassination how it's called now) is 75gb in size with all content, it's smaller than the previous games thanks to the devs working extremely over the top for compression and developing extra methods. That's 75gb for less than the content you'll expect here after working a ton more than you're realistically expecting from any normal sort of compression. There's only so much you can do, especially when packing a ton of high quality assets for a rather big map filled with more detail than just the same building in different variations with entirely empty interriors *cough* Arma *cough*.
@@5hane9ro Stalker 2 is on par with other large games. Cyberpunk is 100+GB, Horizon: Forbidden West is around 130GB. Microsoft Flight Simulator hangs around 120+GB, Starfield takes 127GB. These games, at least after some performance patches, run decently. A large file size doesn't mean poor performance. There is 1,000 other reasons why game sizes are getting bigger and I doubt poor performance is the cause of large file sizes. High def audio, larger worlds, and 4k textures lead to this bloat. It's just the nature of modern games. They're only going to get bigger from here.
it's Unreal 5 slop, who's surprised it wouldn't run well on any PC ? all Unreal 5 games do this, devs use it because it makes their work easy but the downside is that PC's can't handle the poor optimisation, hence why devs rely on DLSS so much which degrades the image quality. Unreal 5 was a mistake, it made them complacent.
I’m sick of seeing how poorly optimized newer games are. We have hardware that is 1000x more powerful than what we had even 20 years ago and a ton of games can’t even run at 60fps on a $4000 PC on ultra settings. And then showcasing benchmarks with DLSS is such a lame excuse for “better performance “. No one would have to use DLSS if the game just ran well to begin with
@@Shaggii_I completely disagree, man. All of these newer games releasing broken has been great. Have you not seen the memes that have come out of these releases? It's all pure gold
Did everyone just collectively miss the part that said "MAX SETTINGS"??? The minimum requirements are a 7 year old i7 and a 6GB 1060... Or are you looking for all games to be hyper optimized roblox graphics because you're too poor to afford to upgrade from your Xbox 360? Maybe stop peasant maxing and let people who can afford decent gaming computer have nice things. You ARE allowed to turn down your graphics settings, despite apparent popular opinion
S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 2 doesn't have a performance issue; UE5 does. UE5 has poor multi-threading, prone to traversal stutters and has has generally poor performance scaling. Consoles are supposed to be the baseline yet almost every UE5 game scales poorly on said consoles. Even when these console versions stick to their framerate and resolution targets, chances are we're at a smeary upscaled mess thanks to FSR 2. If you as a developer want to create a game that actually feels good to play, don't use UE5. The marketing buzz is not worth it.
Anomaly custom has serious performance issues and looks ALMOST as good as stalker 2…..so I can imagine what stalker 2 is going to be like…..I usually run everything in 4K but I’m not too confident about this being as it is open world with no level connections…..I think they should have kept level connection and loading to cut down on resources….. they could have even used a modernized X-ray engine instead of the UE5….. but I’m sure with time there will be a-life optimizations…..I’m not too fond of having to use DLSS but atleast we get stalker 2 before GTA6 🤷🏾♂️
Because it's a disappointment incoming. Comparisons will be inevitably drawn and it wont live up to gamma at all. I've postulated in the past it will feel more on rails then GSC claims. More akin to Metro.
@@TheXboxSuxWell, you only say that because GAMMA’s free and community-made. If GAMMA costed $70 and was made by a more corporate dev team, you’d be more critical, naturally. No shade on the GAMMA team or the ANOMALY team, both have done God’s work, but the fact that ANOMALY is essentially a free version of all 3 STALKER titles bound up into one, with GAMMA being a free overhaul, that obviously gets a lot of positive attention no matter how broke you are.
@@oddforoddssake3751 That precisely. It's also what I called out a while ago. Loads of people WILL compare it to the entire overhaul Anomaly already had been (being entirely free on top and the only way for actual x64 usage) and most likely bring in GAMMA on top - a modset composing of a ton of different mods made & expanded/optimized by different people through the years on top of a mod that already overhauled the game in its entirety. Can't wait for the people that only played Anomaly to complain that money is too easy to make as well, as I highly doubt they'll go for the limited economy that Anomaly was built upon.
@@TheXboxSuxgamma runs like shit and is literally just a lazy compilation of mods from years and years of stalker modding. Only people who haven't played actual stalker will try to compare stalker 2 to gamma
What are you talking about? I turn everything to the max. I will literally upgrade my PC the moment I cannot play something at max settings 4K above 60 FPS. That can at times include a small amount of DLSS and frame gen but only if absolutely necessary. I'm probably in the minority though but I don't think that many people are in the minority of wanting maxed out settings.
Just turn off Volumetric clouds, Chomatic Abberation, bring the shadow detail to low , water to medium and use FSR or DLSS. I played Stalker for 12 years with stutters and freezes, it's not authentic if everything runs buttery smooth.
using frame generation in cpu bound scenarios doesn't help one bit because your cpu is still causing major stutters it doesn't matter how high your fake fps is showing
I can't understand the cryouts about dlss and fsr. Those crybabies are probably to young to know, that it's not a new thing, that a game is to hungry for current hardware. They should be happy that we nowadays have dlss and fsr to still be able to play it with good graphics and frame rate...
Guess so. I wish there was at least a market for cheap, lower-performance GPU without having to kneel to the whims of scalpers and other equally-shady characters.
Dont lnow what ppl expected, those devs never made a well optimized or bug free game in their life... Stalker only became somewhat polished due to years of modding.
Not sure why, but your videos stopped popping up in my sub feed for a few months. I scrubbed through a weeks worth of sub videos and noticed none of yours were in there. When I checked your page, I saw you uploaded several videos that week.
7:27 PlayStation is already doing this, all of their games this generation get ported to PC at some point. Which for some reason some people just hate and clown in PlayStation for having no games
I expect that when everyone in the gaming industry was transitioning into unreal engine Home grown engine, With just enough capability as the game needs will be a much more optimized Than engine that's build for everything As the saying goes Unreal engine Is Jack of all trades Master of none
dude there is a youtube ad LITERALLY EVERY MINUTE of your videos. is this something youtube does or is this a monetization option on your end? if it is something you can control i just wanted to let you know its ruining your videos. I've noticed it more with your channel than almost any other channel i watch though other channels do have this happen as well i just don't watch their content as much as yours. Anyhow not an attack on you to be clear I'm just letting you know that youtube ads are ruining your videos.
A CPU bound game still needs graphics... you know... to see. Better GPUs providing higher FPS. However, with a CPU bound game, the game is much more likely to become bottlenecked by your CPU. So frame gen can help if your GPU is underpowered to run newer gen graphics. However, if your CPU can't handle the game anyway, then yes, frame gen won't matter.
@@BigFry9591 The GPU cannot affect the FPS if it rendering faster than a CPU. This is because of Amdahl's law. If your GPU is faster than the CPU (being CPU bound) the way the frames are generated will have no difference as the GPU will wait for the CPU on every frame. So if the CPU instructions at 4fps are: 1- Render 2- Render 3- Render 4-- Render it will take the same time at 4FPS as generating every second frame: 1- Render 2- Generate -3 Render 4- Generate Generating extra frames only works if you are GPU bound as it cuts down the time the GPU is rendering.
I'm not even excited about hardware anymore, games release to garbage frame rates on anything outside of 720 that is upscaled to 1080 dynamic resolution scaling and frame generation are required and just look awful, downloads have gotten so large even with gigabit throughput you're waiting 30 minutes to download 300GB of uncompressed audio files for no reason. Video games are just not as fun as they used to be man.
Not sure, but some devs of Stalker 2 (In Ukraine) had to leave the country, injured from the war or join the Armed Forces of Ukraine so that could've hindered the optimization a bit
@@SirCamWA Hahah the irony is at 1080 p with Upsacling and frame gen enabled you cant enjoy "high end" visuals. Whats the point of graphical fidelity when you have to sacrifice resolution and input fluidity
UE5 is forcing people to buy high end hardware just to play games at 60 fps. What a joke. Might aswell just buy a Ps5pro and save a couple grand foe a decent oled VRR TV
I'm mostly playing old games now, everything else runs like shit and i have a good pc, my time is not respected neither my wallet, so these new titles will receive neither from me.
It is a CPU bottleneck, anyone with any common sense would be able to tell that i.e. why on earth would a 4090 perform practically the exact same as the 4080 there? Also why did the 4080 then perform practically the same as the 4070 ti super? Both the 4090 and 4080 are CPU bottlenecked at 1080p.
@@boomdaddymaxwell especially with the value offered. GTX 1070 was 80% of top GPU at the time (1080), and did cost 380$ MSRP. Now RTX 4080 is a analogue of it and has MSRP of 1200$. Also it's not a great price/performance value against 4090. Even taking inflation into account, Nvidia GPUs look at least twice overpriced now. And everything below xx90 model is deliberately cut in VRAM and memory bus. It's not "killing it", there's just no competition, it's a monopoly. GPU market was never as bad as it is now.
@@stanislavkimov2779fully agreed, Nvidia has no real competition so they are setting the bar with ridiculous pricing. I’m not buying another gpu for hopefully the next 8-10 years
@@boomdaddymaxwell I think the main reason they are doing well is because of that isn’t because of their consumer market share, but more the military industry they are heavily involved with. As well as AI processing. They are absolutely fucking the consumers over because they have no real competition and they saw they could sell gpu’s for what people were paying for them scalped.
Nah, it's a game pushing graphics forward and not setting sub par hardware hold it back. Typically games need to tailor to the lowest common denominator. Ie the budget gpu and consoles. Back when Crysis, the og graphics pushing tech, no one claimed it was unoptimized. Graphics has changed pure hardware has slowed in its grows Gen over Gen. Like it or not, AI is what's next. And we're in AI infancy. Also with these setting their on ultra, which means Ray tracing. I'm sure everyone will be fine just running the graphics to their hardware.
But you can turn down Crysis so it looks (at the time) 6-10 years older and it looks like the original Far Cry So the solution is to have ability to drop the quality really hard and noticeable Kinda like dropping from 1080p down to 480p... major difference But instead of resolution it's the graphics and stuff Edit: Basically make it so that lower settings make it look like original Stalker games Lmao
@@BastianRosenmüller "WE have 2024 not 2006 anymore" And what makes a high-end game from 2006 any different from a high-end game in 2024?... Also, gotta love it if people complain about "only" having ~60-100fps on high settings, people back then would've absolutely loved having those numbers (and especially those graphics and resolutions). So overall we can say: Indeed, it's not 2006 anymore, we now can play higher end games with 60fps+ on an actual high-end PC (and by that I mean actual high end: Desktop 4080 + matching CPU) at high resolutions instead of playing with less than 30 fps on average. People complaining about Games actually pushing the hardware in an effort to achieve more nowadays is absolute insanity, the most important part is that it doesn't only run on actual high-end machines, and given that it supposedly runs on a 1060 it's absolutely fine - that's an 8 year old GPU.
@@Unknown_Genius Pushing graphics means nothing if nobody can run it. even if you have a good graphics card of the 4000s series you still have to rely on heavy Upscaling and frame gen , which completely destroys image quality. What is the purpose of high end visuals if you have to use upscaling with render resolutions lower then 1080p. You cant even enjoy those visuals when everything is a smeary low pixel mess. Furthermore, advances in graphics is nice and all but that sacrifizes a lot of other stuff. We havent seen any big leap in gameplay, storytelling, mechanics and world building the past 20 years.
Watching your channel is like being immersed in a world of creativity and inspiration. Please continue to entertain us with your talent and enthusiasm!🧇🤹😸
There are no bugs in stalker only anomalies
They can keep their 5090 at that price point!
lmao i think its too cheap. they should make it a flat 3k
@@caesurabreak3528 5k would be more appropriate !
I don't understand why people literally only focus on the highest end hardware and complain that it's too expensive. What is the point in doing that?
@@TheRealEclipse1Nonce
@@TheRealEclipse1 Because of things like the 4060 being outperformed by a 3070.
I wonder when will people who get early game copies for reviews realize that they're just last stage beta testers
the first retail purchasers are the first beta testers. wym
As much as i agree, Stalker 2 has had a very rough development (bankruptcy, development hell and a literal war) so problems are to be expected and in this case the devs atleast have an excuse for bad peformance, as the game being released at all is a miracle.
@@primuspilusfellatus6501 It's just the war. Original Stalker 2 project was completely scrapped at roughly 60% complete, and was made in CryEngine.
This new Stalker 2 is not really connected to it. New devs, new assets, new engine
@@Crusader143d mostly kinda right nowadays. But not the first, the last.
STALKER? Performance issues? Noooo never! If you cant enjoy a stalker game without bugs and performance issues, can you really call yourself a stalker fan?
(Edit: This is a joke. I cant believe I had to say this)
The game got delayed so many times why should we accept this? There shouldn’t be any excuse for it, the first few games came out a decade ago and this is a new modern title, if it can’t run on anything after the years of work they put into it then who’s going to really enjoy it? Aren’t we supposed to progress not revert?
@@Prizzim Seeing how the joke might have gone over your head, I'll just say Im looking forward to my Game Engine based anomaly's. (All jokes aside, its a none AAA company, where their home country is at war, and even before that we werent sure if the game would even be made. GSC has always been a... iffy company riddled with drama. Expectations should be minimal in the first place.)
As long as the frame time is good, and has good variety in settings that actually make a difference, I dont care if max settings is that demanding
STALKER just wouldn’t be STALKER without it’s bugs lol
Plus I only plan to play on Medium anyways, which I’m sure my PC can take, even with just an RTX 2060 and 32gb of RAM (:
yes
That background piano music at atound 1 minute really got me thinking what alarm i've forgotten to turn off lol
Thanks for bringing back the news! I look forward to these every week ( and the dev blogs! )
HOLD THE PHONE, did i just see a This Week In Gaming notification pop!??! HOW IVE MISSED YOU
LevelCap can you make a story on how Gaijin has started to ban players for friendly fire and unavoidable teamkilling rather than removing the friendlyfire gamemechanic from the game?
He doesn't care about warthunder
The DLSS craze was always going to end up like this. Devs will make their games with DLSS in mind, with better graphics and lazier optimization. "It runs at 60 fps at 1080p high on a 4070 with DLSS quality? Send it."
Stalker 1 was CPU bound on release even with the reduced simulation systems (read, almost completely removed sim systems) and only became GPU limited after some patches and it's standalone updates where Nvidia stepped in to chuck in a bunch of their bloat at the game
Unreal engine 5 should of already told you everything you need to know about a games performance
- Average gamer
- looks at game benchmarks
- sees low numbers on mid end cards
- completely ignores the part that says "max settings"
- Calls the game unoptimized bloated garbage
Are ya'll actually regarded? Or just malding that game developers add features that only top end systems can enable?
Do you expect all games to look like Fallout 3 and run at 240 FPS on your Walmart brand toaster PC? God forbid you turn off a few unnecessary graphical features rather than whine because your Bangladesh dumpster special you pass off as a "gaming pc" can't get 120fps on your 60hz Onn monitor.
Lol have you seen recent releases? Turning down settings often does nothing! Going from Ultra to medium sometimes give you only 5-10 % better performance in newer games. Usaully in Very demanding games scalability sucks to.
It blows my mind how insanely anti consumer some consumers have gotten. You can see a brand new game come out, made by 5 people, developed over 3-6 years, looks like it's on Unreal 5 and has basic raytracing, AAA visual and gameplay quality, turns out it's on some old unheard of engine, runs insanely well, the devs record all of their videos on an old 1070 i5 8gb ram system at 100+ fps max settings, but hey, buying a 3k PC is now a totally reasonable requirement to "play" the newest games made by 100s of people with tons of funding and direct communication with industry leads in tech and software. Or you know, just enjoy the worse visual quality than 2005, worse performance than 2010, input lag worse than the apollo missions, likely screen tearing and/or baked in motion blur, and a major reduction in fun all because you don't want to give more money to several companies that are intentionally ripping us off because they have no competition.
It's laughable how much you want to spend money, how you defend corporate greed instead of the hobby we should all want to share with as many people as possible, how you insult people who are likely in the same position you once were. Or maybe you really are that far gone.
Leave bangladesh out of this
@@mykeh3155Those are a lot of words to just basically say "im broke"
@@primuspilusfellatus6501 Thank you for proving my point not so kind stranger.
I really hope Stalker 2 is not a cyberpunk situation... really want the best for this game. Thanks for showing me Rogue Point, seems right up my alley!
I doubt it. Not a single one of the people, from whom I've seen videos so far, who had the chance to play the 3hour demo, talked about performance issues
@@Turbo1602ti maybe because they have "maxed out PCs". Think about most PC users and console users...
@@IIXxSLAYERxXII and? It's normal since decades, that new games can't be played at the highest settings, even if you have a "NASA PC". Remember Crysis, or far cry, or doom3 or even doom1, or Shadow of Chernobyl, or,or,or?
People should be happy that we now have those little helpers in the gpu driver's, to still be able to play it with a good framerate and not cry about it and/or accusing it of bad programming, even though it hasn't even been published yet
@@Turbo1602ti We never seen good previews with bad end products … oh wait
I would say there is a big chance people who tried the game are more forgiving to this team because of circumstances
I personally would be surprised if this game turns out to be great
@@Turbo1602tiNo. Developers just need to optimize their shit games bro
All things considered since STALKER 2 is a UE5 title, this would mean that on ultra preset, Lumen Ray Traced Lighting is cranked up the highest which I doubt most will enable Lumen anyways.
Digital foundry we making it out that it looks close to 4k and running 60 with a few dips on series x which is hard to believe now.
Welcome back 'This Week in Gaming.'
Man why are you getting low views. Your videos are always high quality and awesome! Keep up the good work
Hopefully performance will improve alot in stalker just by turning off ray tracing if that option will be available
Stalker games being buggy and unoptimized checks out. I've been noticing that CPU bottlenecks are becoming more and more prevalent. I used to only notice them in games like Battlefield, but increasingly I'm seeing it more drastically across single player titles. I'll play at 1440p so it's no big deal, but 1080p seems like it will be a mess if you have an asymmetrical CPU/GPU pairing. Seems like 4k locked 60 might be the way to go for those who have the option.
Max settings is something I don’t use much for the last 4 years with. 2070 super
Im still hype for stalker 2, but major red flags came to me when i saw the download size. Also Rogue point hype, that game 100% looks like my vibe!
How is the download size a red flag? Games like RDR2 were similar in size and was a great game
@rivasvisual8403 most games with that hefty of a file size do that because they failed to compress their files, there are most likely technical issues, i hate having to delete half of my games for 1 game, and personally hardly any games I've played at that file size I enjoy. Off the top of my head... I love GoW Ragnarok.
@@5hane9ro It's not even close to be a red flag for compression.
Anomaly + GAMMA are already half the size, that's just a modset to make the game more modern and overhauled.
Shadow of Chernobyl was in general "massive" in file size for its time as well (10gb?! are you insane??).
Or take Hitman 3 (or World of Assassination how it's called now) is 75gb in size with all content, it's smaller than the previous games thanks to the devs working extremely over the top for compression and developing extra methods.
That's 75gb for less than the content you'll expect here after working a ton more than you're realistically expecting from any normal sort of compression.
There's only so much you can do, especially when packing a ton of high quality assets for a rather big map filled with more detail than just the same building in different variations with entirely empty interriors *cough* Arma *cough*.
@@5hane9ro
Stalker 2 is on par with other large games. Cyberpunk is 100+GB, Horizon: Forbidden West is around 130GB.
Microsoft Flight Simulator hangs around 120+GB, Starfield takes 127GB.
These games, at least after some performance patches, run decently. A large file size doesn't mean poor performance.
There is 1,000 other reasons why game sizes are getting bigger and I doubt poor performance is the cause of large file sizes. High def audio, larger worlds, and 4k textures lead to this bloat.
It's just the nature of modern games. They're only going to get bigger from here.
it's Unreal 5 slop, who's surprised it wouldn't run well on any PC ?
all Unreal 5 games do this, devs use it because it makes their work easy but the downside is that PC's can't handle the poor optimisation, hence why devs rely on DLSS so much which degrades the image quality.
Unreal 5 was a mistake, it made them complacent.
I’m sick of seeing how poorly optimized newer games are. We have hardware that is 1000x more powerful than what we had even 20 years ago and a ton of games can’t even run at 60fps on a $4000 PC on ultra settings. And then showcasing benchmarks with DLSS is such a lame excuse for “better performance “. No one would have to use DLSS if the game just ran well to begin with
@@Shaggii_I completely disagree, man. All of these newer games releasing broken has been great.
Have you not seen the memes that have come out of these releases? It's all pure gold
@@Shaggii_ props to Dragon Age Veilguard for being super polished and optimized on PC. Environments look great.
Did everyone just collectively miss the part that said "MAX SETTINGS"??? The minimum requirements are a 7 year old i7 and a 6GB 1060...
Or are you looking for all games to be hyper optimized roblox graphics because you're too poor to afford to upgrade from your Xbox 360? Maybe stop peasant maxing and let people who can afford decent gaming computer have nice things. You ARE allowed to turn down your graphics settings, despite apparent popular opinion
@@JordanVegBike yep but thats the only possitve aspect of the game so far :D
5:53, you mean like Rogue Spear? Haha
S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 2 doesn't have a performance issue; UE5 does.
UE5 has poor multi-threading, prone to traversal stutters and has has generally poor performance scaling. Consoles are supposed to be the baseline yet almost every UE5 game scales poorly on said consoles. Even when these console versions stick to their framerate and resolution targets, chances are we're at a smeary upscaled mess thanks to FSR 2.
If you as a developer want to create a game that actually feels good to play, don't use UE5. The marketing buzz is not worth it.
Anomaly custom has serious performance issues and looks ALMOST as good as stalker 2…..so I can imagine what stalker 2 is going to be like…..I usually run everything in 4K but I’m not too confident about this being as it is open world with no level connections…..I think they should have kept level connection and loading to cut down on resources….. they could have even used a modernized X-ray engine instead of the UE5….. but I’m sure with time there will be a-life optimizations…..I’m not too fond of having to use DLSS but atleast we get stalker 2 before GTA6 🤷🏾♂️
Top issues with S2? PC specs are based on AI upscaling, no embargo info, no A-Life2 info, no new gameplay
Because it's a disappointment incoming. Comparisons will be inevitably drawn and it wont live up to gamma at all. I've postulated in the past it will feel more on rails then GSC claims. More akin to Metro.
@@TheXboxSuxWell, you only say that because GAMMA’s free and community-made. If GAMMA costed $70 and was made by a more corporate dev team, you’d be more critical, naturally.
No shade on the GAMMA team or the ANOMALY team, both have done God’s work, but the fact that ANOMALY is essentially a free version of all 3 STALKER titles bound up into one, with GAMMA being a free overhaul, that obviously gets a lot of positive attention no matter how broke you are.
😊
@@oddforoddssake3751 That precisely.
It's also what I called out a while ago. Loads of people WILL compare it to the entire overhaul Anomaly already had been (being entirely free on top and the only way for actual x64 usage) and most likely bring in GAMMA on top - a modset composing of a ton of different mods made & expanded/optimized by different people through the years on top of a mod that already overhauled the game in its entirety.
Can't wait for the people that only played Anomaly to complain that money is too easy to make as well, as I highly doubt they'll go for the limited economy that Anomaly was built upon.
@@TheXboxSuxgamma runs like shit and is literally just a lazy compilation of mods from years and years of stalker modding. Only people who haven't played actual stalker will try to compare stalker 2 to gamma
Call of duty banning VPNs I wonder how many titles I’ve heard that through
What are you talking about? I turn everything to the max. I will literally upgrade my PC the moment I cannot play something at max settings 4K above 60 FPS. That can at times include a small amount of DLSS and frame gen but only if absolutely necessary.
I'm probably in the minority though but I don't think that many people are in the minority of wanting maxed out settings.
I also want max settings in every game on PC.
When I last played Call of Pripyat, I was getting 20 fps. As long as i get atleast 30fps on low im happy.
Just turn off Volumetric clouds, Chomatic Abberation, bring the shadow detail to low , water to medium and use FSR or DLSS.
I played Stalker for 12 years with stutters and freezes, it's not authentic if everything runs buttery smooth.
Sorry but games should be optimised enough even for medium settings to not require fsr or dlss to achieve even 60fps
using frame generation in cpu bound scenarios doesn't help one bit because your cpu is still causing major stutters it doesn't matter how high your fake fps is showing
Of course, there will be a performance issue when the game is running on Unreal Engine 5.
That 5090 price is a Titan price.
I can't understand the cryouts about dlss and fsr. Those crybabies are probably to young to know, that it's not a new thing, that a game is to hungry for current hardware. They should be happy that we nowadays have dlss and fsr to still be able to play it with good graphics and frame rate...
eh, still buying a 5090. I work remote, net over 250k/yr, and can write it off as a work expense. I guess I'm their only target market now.
Same
Guess so.
I wish there was at least a market for cheap, lower-performance GPU without having to kneel to the whims of scalpers and other equally-shady characters.
Whats a decent price for a high-end PC? Pre built obviously because i wouldn't know where to start lol.
High end pc? I’d say minimum you’d spend like 1700 before all services and other extensive charges
@AidennW honestly not that bad.
Dont lnow what ppl expected, those devs never made a well optimized or bug free game in their life... Stalker only became somewhat polished due to years of modding.
Not sure why, but your videos stopped popping up in my sub feed for a few months. I scrubbed through a weeks worth of sub videos and noticed none of yours were in there. When I checked your page, I saw you uploaded several videos that week.
good thing i only have it on gamepass as a cheap demo
Can't wait to try it out honestly. Regardless of performance. It is bound to be fixed.
Surely...
Banning VPNs in games is a great way to get people to not play them. I'm not going to raw dog the internet to play Call of Duty like some teenager.
It's not like like X-ray was runing well, god forbid stable, in past stalker games. Nothing new.
I expecting Stalker to be a mess. They are not in a great situation (duh) so the previewers gave them more slack for sure
7:27 PlayStation is already doing this, all of their games this generation get ported to PC at some point. Which for some reason some people just hate and clown in PlayStation for having no games
I expect that when everyone in the gaming industry was transitioning into unreal engine
Home grown engine, With just enough capability as the game needs will be a much more optimized
Than engine that's build for everything
As the saying goes
Unreal engine
Is Jack of all trades Master of none
i already planned on playing stalker at medium everything since i have a 3070
4070Ti super, 4080 and 4090 are barely faster than each other unless you use DLSS3 that to me looks like the limiting factor is the i9 14900k
I’m so sick of all this ai dlss crap I just want a crisp native image I don’t want an Ai’s interpretation
dude there is a youtube ad LITERALLY EVERY MINUTE of your videos. is this something youtube does or is this a monetization option on your end? if it is something you can control i just wanted to let you know its ruining your videos. I've noticed it more with your channel than almost any other channel i watch though other channels do have this happen as well i just don't watch their content as much as yours. Anyhow not an attack on you to be clear I'm just letting you know that youtube ads are ruining your videos.
0:59 Frame gen will do nothing for a CPU bound game. This just means that they do not know what CPU bound means.
A CPU bound game still needs graphics... you know... to see. Better GPUs providing higher FPS. However, with a CPU bound game, the game is much more likely to become bottlenecked by your CPU.
So frame gen can help if your GPU is underpowered to run newer gen graphics. However, if your CPU can't handle the game anyway, then yes, frame gen won't matter.
@@BigFry9591 The GPU cannot affect the FPS if it rendering faster than a CPU. This is because of Amdahl's law.
If your GPU is faster than the CPU (being CPU bound) the way the frames are generated will have no difference as the GPU will wait for the CPU on every frame.
So if the CPU instructions at 4fps are:
1- Render 2- Render 3- Render 4-- Render
it will take the same time at 4FPS as generating every second frame:
1- Render 2- Generate -3 Render 4- Generate
Generating extra frames only works if you are GPU bound as it cuts down the time the GPU is rendering.
STALKER 2 looks only "fine". The requirements don't represent that.
I want stalker to be good so badly
All games at the moment seem to be extremely poorly optimised. Lazy devs.
You need a rtx 6090 TI PROx2 to run this
I love this show! Weekly please!
Why doesn’t COD just get rid of SBMM? Everyone hates it.
games being push out before optimisation seems to be a common trend these days. its really hurts people like me with lower end/ older gen systems.
I'm not even excited about hardware anymore, games release to garbage frame rates on anything outside of 720 that is upscaled to 1080
dynamic resolution scaling and frame generation are required and just look awful, downloads have gotten so large even with gigabit throughput you're waiting 30 minutes to download 300GB of uncompressed audio files for no reason.
Video games are just not as fun as they used to be man.
You got nearly 2 million subscribers.
I fear stalker 2 is the new crysis......CAN IT RUN STALKER?....not if your poor
When is any game optimised now days
Not sure, but some devs of Stalker 2 (In Ukraine) had to leave the country, injured from the war or join the Armed Forces of Ukraine so that could've hindered the optimization a bit
completely fine with 60fps for STALKER - its a single player. Crank it up and enjoy the visuals
That's 1080p with DLSS upscaling turned on, btw.
@@SirCamWA Hahah the irony is at 1080 p with Upsacling and frame gen enabled you cant enjoy "high end" visuals. Whats the point of graphical fidelity when you have to sacrifice resolution and input fluidity
An amazing-looking Unreal Engine 5 game being hard to run? No that would never happen nooo never.
No raw gameplay footage = 🚩🚩
No pre order.
R u slow?
Stalker 2 being in UE5, it WILL be a stutter fest unfortunately...
But it’s max settings. Can you play cyberpunk on max settings without dlss using 3070 or 4070 😂
Half the devs are in the ground what do you expect
Gameplay > graphics...
UE5 is forcing people to buy high end hardware just to play games at 60 fps. What a joke. Might aswell just buy a Ps5pro and save a couple grand foe a decent oled VRR TV
UE = curse of gaming
Another GOG W
I'm mostly playing old games now, everything else runs like shit and i have a good pc, my time is not respected neither my wallet, so these new titles will receive neither from me.
I have a 4070 super I should be fine
f nvdia, make optimisation great again
your adds are pointless, my add block is working flawlessly
40 fps on stalker? thats fine for me
at 1920x1080
no
How is that fine in any way in this day and age?
Especially considering the looks its clearly due to poor optimization.
not for me
I was happy getting 30fps on the original Stalker! Most of that game for me was a slideshow
Thumbnail graphics were pre downgrade
Thank the zone for gamepass...try and not buy if its a mess..
A game getting 85 fps raw, **AT 1080p** on an RTX 4090 is not acceptable. Good to know I'll be skipping this trash
Where you get those numbers? If it gets over 60fps at 4K that just shows it's a CPU bottleneck and not the card.
It is a CPU bottleneck, anyone with any common sense would be able to tell that i.e. why on earth would a 4090 perform practically the exact same as the 4080 there? Also why did the 4080 then perform practically the same as the 4070 ti super?
Both the 4090 and 4080 are CPU bottlenecked at 1080p.
i have 4080 super 7800x3d 32gb memory if the game is not well optimized i will not play i don,t care
lul I'm not gonna get another GPU for the next 10 years
NVIDIA tanking again
The Unreal Stutter Engine strikes again?
Nvidia sucks.
@@boomdaddymaxwell especially with the value offered. GTX 1070 was 80% of top GPU at the time (1080), and did cost 380$ MSRP. Now RTX 4080 is a analogue of it and has MSRP of 1200$. Also it's not a great price/performance value against 4090.
Even taking inflation into account, Nvidia GPUs look at least twice overpriced now. And everything below xx90 model is deliberately cut in VRAM and memory bus.
It's not "killing it", there's just no competition, it's a monopoly.
GPU market was never as bad as it is now.
@@stanislavkimov2779fully agreed, Nvidia has no real competition so they are setting the bar with ridiculous pricing. I’m not buying another gpu for hopefully the next 8-10 years
@@boomdaddymaxwell I think the main reason they are doing well is because of that isn’t because of their consumer market share, but more the military industry they are heavily involved with. As well as AI processing. They are absolutely fucking the consumers over because they have no real competition and they saw they could sell gpu’s for what people were paying for them scalped.
@@boomdaddymaxwell Killing our wallets and their reputation.
Say what you want, but they are the only ones releasing GPUs that give good perfs. The prices though...
Anyone remember Skyrims release date?
11/11/11
I have a feeling STALKER 2 is gonna be another launch disaster.
❤GoG❤
Yeap!
Nooooooo
Xbox 🤷♂️
I just got the 4090😭😭😭😭😭
Nah, it's a game pushing graphics forward and not setting sub par hardware hold it back.
Typically games need to tailor to the lowest common denominator. Ie the budget gpu and consoles.
Back when Crysis, the og graphics pushing tech, no one claimed it was unoptimized.
Graphics has changed pure hardware has slowed in its grows Gen over Gen. Like it or not, AI is what's next. And we're in AI infancy.
Also with these setting their on ultra, which means Ray tracing.
I'm sure everyone will be fine just running the graphics to their hardware.
But you can turn down Crysis so it looks (at the time) 6-10 years older and it looks like the original Far Cry
So the solution is to have ability to drop the quality really hard and noticeable
Kinda like dropping from 1080p down to 480p... major difference
But instead of resolution it's the graphics and stuff
Edit: Basically make it so that lower settings make it look like original Stalker games Lmao
that AI @1:03 is brain dead....top game folks!
Do you know how they make these trailers and have you ever touched a stalker game?
First
Your channel is an oasis for those who appreciate creativity and intellectual entertainment. Continue to delight us with your clever videos!🏄🌛🌼
Stalker never ran well, why expect it to now that it actually packs visual fidelity?
I am sick of those excuses , always games come out which run shit on higjh end hardware. WE have 2024 not 2006 anymore
@@BastianRosenmüller "WE have 2024 not 2006 anymore"
And what makes a high-end game from 2006 any different from a high-end game in 2024?...
Also, gotta love it if people complain about "only" having ~60-100fps on high settings, people back then would've absolutely loved having those numbers (and especially those graphics and resolutions). So overall we can say: Indeed, it's not 2006 anymore, we now can play higher end games with 60fps+ on an actual high-end PC (and by that I mean actual high end: Desktop 4080 + matching CPU) at high resolutions instead of playing with less than 30 fps on average.
People complaining about Games actually pushing the hardware in an effort to achieve more nowadays is absolute insanity, the most important part is that it doesn't only run on actual high-end machines, and given that it supposedly runs on a 1060 it's absolutely fine - that's an 8 year old GPU.
@@Unknown_Genius agreed
@@Unknown_Genius Pushing graphics means nothing if nobody can run it. even if you have a good graphics card of the 4000s series you still have to rely on heavy Upscaling and frame gen , which completely destroys image quality. What is the purpose of high end visuals if you have to use upscaling with render resolutions lower then 1080p. You cant even enjoy those visuals when everything is a smeary low pixel mess.
Furthermore, advances in graphics is nice and all but that sacrifizes a lot of other stuff. We havent seen any big leap in gameplay, storytelling, mechanics and world building the past 20 years.
Watching your channel is like being immersed in a world of creativity and inspiration. Please continue to entertain us with your talent and enthusiasm!🧇🤹😸