Unpopular Opinions about Video Games

[BradeRunna]

And if you want that experience, you have to actually buy something better than a peasant box. According to Steam Charts, a huge number of PC gamers have something inferior to even the PS5 base model. So I will just repeat that a 6700 XT is 1/3 as powerful as a PS5 Pro's GPU. It's not really any different than someone in 2002 with an ATI Rage 128 Pro being pissed off that Xbox games looked better than what his machine can do.



In the good old days of hyper-optimization, if you had a 4-year-old GPU, you didn't suffer through medium settings in the latest, hottest to obtain a mere 60 fps. You often got zero fps because the game didn't run. If you were lucky, you could squeeze out 30 fps at absolute minimum settings and some shitty resolution like 800x600.

It's not just about the hardware and games looking better. PC gamers get mods free online multiplayer. A PC is capable of more than just playing games. Steam sales are also another perk of PC gaming. I can refund any game I buy on Steam. You can't do that with a console. I don't even think consoles allow refunds for digital games. If there is an old game I want to play I can most likely get it working even if it needs user created fixes to get up and running. This can't be done on a console. PC is the superior platform and it's not just about graphics and hardware.

Yes, back in the late 90's and early to mid 2000's games would look terrible on low and medium settings. You had to run games on at least high for them to look good. This changed over time though and by the early to mid 2010's games would look pretty good event at medium settings. It's still that way at least with some games. But that will probably change with things like UE5 seeing more use as an engine and Nvidia's ray tracing replacing baked lighting. Ray tracing is just more Nvidia bloatware like Physx was in the late 2000's and early 2010's. A lot of people just turned physx off in the settings. PC hardware just isn't capable of handling Ray tracing without help from DLSS and frame gen.

 

[Hentai-Semitism]

Ray tracing is just more Nvidia bloatware like Physx was in the late 2000's and early 2010's. A lot of people just turned physx off in the settings.

Yep. Same with those fancy hair physics you'd see in a few games like The Witcher 2 and one of the 57291 recent Tomb Raiders.

It really sucks that we've only had two companies making GPUs for decades, one of which is now number three on NASDAQ. I wonder how different the GPU market would be with one or two more serious competitors. By "market" I mean price-performance ratio for gaming cards.

 

[4chanJanitorDefenseForce]

Yep. Same with those fancy hair physics you'd see in a few games like The Witcher 2 and one of the 57291 recent Tomb Raiders.

It really sucks that we've only had two companies making GPUs for decades, one of which is now number three on NASDAQ. I wonder how different the GPU market would be with one or two more serious competitors. By "market" I mean price-performance ratio for gaming cards.

Nobody wants to put the work in, so we had companies like Matrox and Intel step in for a generation or two, then quit because it's too hard. Nvidia and ATi/AMD have been boots on the ground since the 90s and have committed to the business, excluding all other products at times (well, when ATi was separate from AMD).
Intel showed why it's harder to get in now with their complete lack of DX9 support. AMD and Nvidia have been tweaking and releasing drivers consistently for decades. Intel drifted out after the i740 and halfass came back for their iGPU solutions that were never taken as a serious product for gamers.
Even with AMD fumbling the ball and being unable to compete at the top end, the barrier to compete even with them is ridiculous for any company who's trying to enter the market. This is a market for veterans who put in the work. Upstarts have a significant uphill battle to reach parity even with AMD.

 

[Hentai-Semitism]

Intel showed why it's harder to get in now with their complete lack of DX9 support.

Does that mean you can't run DX9 games if you have one of those GPUs? Or is it possible but you have to use all kinds of workarounds? I don't know anything about Intel cards.

 

[Terrorist]

This isn’t an unpopular opinion so much as an unpopular fact, but Frogger: The Great Quest is objectively the greatest video game of all time. “Froggy free!”

 

[The Ugly One]

It's not just about the hardware and games looking better.

Except what launched this entire argument was a PC Master Racer with old, outdated hardware complaining that his old machine, which was only marginally better than a PS5 at the time and is now completely outclassed by a PS5 Pro, can't run the latest games at the highest settings.

I have seen these stages of grief play out over and over:

Denial: No, I paid $2000 for this PC back in 2019! I belong to the PC Master Race! It can't be possible that a $500 console now outclasses it! There's no way it can't run this game at 100 fps at ultra settings!

Anger: These new games are unoptimized slop! My PC would totally be able to max out this game if the devs just weren't so lazy! Fuck NVIDIA for using these stupid features to trick people! These new graphics technologies are a waste of developer time! In fact, developers are just lazy, leaning on new technology instead of artistry to make games!

Bargaining: Well, I never wanted to use those new features anyway. Only an idiot would enable them! And besides, I don't have to pay $6/month to play online and can buy hundreds of games I will never play during Steam sales!

Depression: Gaming is dead now. Developers are lazy and stupid. Unreal Engine 5 is killing gaming.

Acceptance: I need to buy a 5090 so that I can have a true PC Master Race machine. Wait until those console peasants see those screenshots I take with MSI Afterburner on proving I can run Space Marine 2 at 200 fps!

I can refund any game I buy on Steam. You can't do that with a console. I don't even think consoles allow refunds for digital games.

https://www.playstation.com/en-us/support/store/ps-store-refund-request/

Xbox Support

support.xbox.com

This changed over time though and by the early to mid 2010's games would look pretty good event at medium settings. It's still that way at least with some games.

PC Master Race: Games look just fine with the graphical fidelity typical of ten years ago .

Also PC Master Race: What? I can't run this brand-new game at 4K with all effects maxed out on my 4-year-old GPU and maintain 90 fps? I have to turn down the settings to something more typical of when I bought it? But the horrible graphics of medium settings are making me go blind!!!

Problem is, you can't have it both ways. Either medium settings cause you eye-stabbing pain, and it's a moral offense that a developer would even dare to release a game that your GPU can't max out, or they look completely fine, and people with newer, more powerful hardware are just fools wasting their money on silicon they don't need.

Ray tracing is just more Nvidia bloatware like Physx was in the late 2000's and early 2010's. A lot of people just turned physx off in the settings

I thought NVIDIA had betrayed all those millions of PC Gamers playing Mirror's Edge every day with PhysX enabled by dropping support for 32-bit drivers.

 

[4chanJanitorDefenseForce]

Does that mean you can't run DX9 games if you have one of those GPUs? Or is it possible but you have to use all kinds of workarounds? I don't know anything about Intel cards.

It uses a hacky compatibility layer that has to be tweaked every time people find a batch of games that don't work.

 

[Hentai-Semitism]

Except what launched this entire argument was a PC Master Racer with old, outdated hardware complaining

Are you talking about me? Dude, I don't care that much. All I'm saying is that two specific games are not running as well as I think they should. I'm not now playing The Last Of Us 2 on much higher settings than SM2 and AW2 and everything's fine. Same goes for Horizon Forbidden West.

You don't need to follow hardware news all the time to know that performance can vary wildly from game to game. I'm more concerned about ridiculous GPU prices.

 

[The Ugly One]

Are you talking about me? Dude, I don't care that much. All I'm saying is that two specific games are not running as well as I think they should.

And all I'm saying is that if you are expecting a PS5 game to run on your machine at Ultra settings, you should have a GPU that is at least as good as a PS5 Pro, which would mean a 7800 XTX. The lead console platform is generally at best the 1080p medium @ 60 fps target. Sometimes it's even a low, upscaled, and/or 30 fps target.

It uses a hacky compatibility layer that has to be tweaked every time people find a batch of games that don't work.

Seems like a bad move on their part. DX9 might be 20 years old, but a lot of PC gamers have some favorite ancient game they still play.

 

[4chanJanitorDefenseForce]

Seems like a bad move on their part. DX9 might be 20 years old, but a lot of PC gamers have some favorite ancient game they still play.

Nvidia and AMD did it the hard way, but they've been doing it for decades. Intel is a tourist in the GPU scene, and they don't have the desire to put in that much effort and money for old games.

 

[BradeRunna]

Yep. Same with those fancy hair physics you'd see in a few games like The Witcher 2 and one of the 57291 recent Tomb Raiders.

It really sucks that we've only had two companies making GPUs for decades, one of which is now number three on NASDAQ. I wonder how different the GPU market would be with one or two more serious competitors. By "market" I mean price-performance ratio for gaming cards.

Nvidia removed the ability of the newer 5000 series cards to even use PhysX so if you want to play a game that uses it, and you want to use PhysX you need to have a dedicated PhysX card in your PC. I have a 4070 Ti Super so it's not an issue for me. But I wish I had held onto that GTX 750 Ti SC I bought nearly a decade ago. It would have made a great PhysX card. If you try to use PhysX on the 5000 series, it still tanks performance. It was an incredibly stupid move by Nvidia to remove support for it. But they want people playing all the new shitty slop games with the woke DEI propaganda in them. Not old good games.

Except what launched this entire argument was a PC Master Racer with old, outdated hardware complaining that his old machine, which was only marginally better than a PS5 at the time and is now completely outclassed by a PS5 Pro, can't run the latest games at the highest settings.

I have seen these stages of grief play out over and over:

Denial: No, I paid $2000 for this PC back in 2019! I belong to the PC Master Race! It can't be possible that a $500 console now outclasses it! There's no way it can't run this game at 100 fps at ultra settings!

Anger: These new games are unoptimized slop! My PC would totally be able to max out this game if the devs just weren't so lazy! Fuck NVIDIA for using these stupid features to trick people! These new graphics technologies are a waste of developer time! In fact, developers are just lazy, leaning on new technology instead of artistry to make games!

Bargaining: Well, I never wanted to use those new features anyway. Only an idiot would enable them! And besides, I don't have to pay $6/month to play online and can buy hundreds of games I will never play during Steam sales!

Depression: Gaming is dead now. Developers are lazy and stupid. Unreal Engine 5 is killing gaming.

Acceptance: I need to buy a 5090 so that I can have a true PC Master Race machine. Wait until those console peasants see those screenshots I take with MSI Afterburner on proving I can run Space Marine 2 at 200 fps!

https://www.playstation.com/en-us/support/store/ps-store-refund-request/

Xbox Support

support.xbox.com

PC Master Race: Games look just fine with the graphical fidelity typical of ten years ago .

Also PC Master Race: What? I can't run this brand-new game at 4K with all effects maxed out on my 4-year-old GPU and maintain 90 fps? I have to turn down the settings to something more typical of when I bought it? But the horrible graphics of medium settings are making me go blind!!!

Problem is, you can't have it both ways. Either medium settings cause you eye-stabbing pain, and it's a moral offense that a developer would even dare to release a game that your GPU can't max out, or they look completely fine, and people with newer, more powerful hardware are just fools wasting their money on silicon they don't need.


I thought NVIDIA had betrayed all those millions of PC Gamers playing Mirror's Edge every day with PhysX enabled by dropping support for 32-bit drivers.

I highly doubt a 6700XT is outclassed by a PS5 pro. Anyone with a 6700XT should be able to play the latest games with at least high settings. Especially if 1080p is their native resolution. They could probably manage 1440p with high settings. Ultra with 1080p shouldn't be an issue either. Yes, if you can't manage to do 1080p with high settings with a 6700XT it means the game is poorly optimized slop. This has been proven time and time again by YouTubers.

But hey, lets take a look at the specs of a PS5 pro.




Looking at the specs of a PS5 Pro there isn't really anything that groundbreaking about it. It has the hardware configuration of any PC released in the last decade or so. It has 16GB of RAM that's has been the standard in gaming PC's since at least the mid to late 2010's when the PS4 was still around. It has an AMD Zen 2 CPU with 8 cores and 16 threads. There is nothing special about that. I have a 3700X with 8 cores and 16 threads. I am still using 16GB of RAM in my PC. Though a lot of the newer games on Steam (Doom: The Dark Ages) call for 32GB as the recommended amount of RAM. The GPU is also AMD based, and it says it uses an RDNA based graphics engine. The GPU isn't discrete it's most likely an APU which is like an SOC System on a Chip. It is capable of 16.7 TFLOPS.

Let's look at the specs for the 6700XT.



The 6700XT is far more powerful than the GPU in the PS5 Pro. It is capable of 26.43 TFLOPs. Way more than the PS5 Pro's GPU. It's nearly double what the PS5 Pro is capable of. Yes, it should be able to play modern games just fine. With settings higher than what would be used on a PS5 pro. The games are just poorly optimized trash and that is why it can't.

So, all I see is a butthurt Jelly console peasant that is way in over his head engaged in discussion far out of his league. Taking advantage of someone else's lack of knowledge to bully them and tell them their PC is shit and outdated when it actually isn't. Console peasants should never engage in discussions of hardware and what hardware is outdated and shit tier. Consoles are always a decade behind PC's in terms of hardware. They can't sell you the latest and greatest hardware for the price of a peasant box. It's just not possible. I paid $800 for my RTX 4070 Ti Super. That's just one piece of hardware that costs just as much if not more than a peasant box.

Stick to arguing with other console peasants about peasant boxes. You have no idea what you are talking about.

You can also go watch some of these video by Threat Interactive on YouTube and he will explain to you how the games are poorly optimized slop.

 

[4chanJanitorDefenseForce]

watch this eceleb to hear about goyslop and pajeets and shills and etc

Isn't it tiring being you?

 

[BradeRunna]

Isn't it tiring being you?

I guess you couldn't come up with anything intelligent to say.

 

[The Ugly One]

I highly doubt a 6700XT is outclassed by a PS5 pro.

Radeon 6700 XT / PS5 Pro GPU

	Radeon 6700 XT	PS5 Pro	Difference
Architecture	RDNA 2	Hybrid RDNA 2/RDNA3
TMUS	160	240
ROPS	64	64
Transistors	17.2m	21m
Pixels	165.2 GPixel/s	150.4 GPixel/s	-10%
Texels	413.0 GTexel/s	564.0 GTexel/s	+36%
Bandwidth	384 GB/s	576 GB/s	+17%
FP16	26.43 TFLOP/s	36.1 TFLOP/s	+36%
FP32	13.21 TFLOP/s	18.05 TFLOP/s	+36%
FP64	825.9 GFLOP/s	1128 GFLOP/s	+36%

Sources:

AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT Specs

AMD Navi 22, 2581 MHz, 2560 Cores, 160 TMUs, 64 ROPs, 12288 MB GDDR6, 2000 MHz, 192 bit

www.techpowerup.com

https://www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/playstation-5-gpu.c3480

The PS5 Pro is also a hybrid RDNA 2/RDNA 3 pipeline. The pixel shading hardware is RDNA2, while the raytracing cores and, quote from some article I found, "certain parts of the geometry pipeline," are upgraded to RDNA 3. The upgrade in the RT cores gives it far better in-game raytracing performance than the 6700 XT. No clue what it actually is, but the 6700 XT's RT cores are useless, and the PS5 Pro's aren't, typical of the 3x-ish jump we expect to see from RDNA 2 to RDNA 3.

So, to make a long story short, the 6700 XT is completely outclassed by the PS5 Pro, which is about 3x faster in raytraced games (30fps-60fps vs fucking unplayable). You can say I was being hyperbolic when I said the 6700 XT was 1/3 as fast, and you know what, sure, whatever. The PS5 Pro is still 36% faster by the most generous possible accounting.

The 6700XT is far more powerful than the GPU in the PS5 Pro. It is capable of 26.43 TFLOPs. Way more than the PS5 Pro's GPU. It's nearly double what the PS5 Pro is capable of.

You're comparing 16-bit FLOPs on one GPU and 32-bit FLOPs on the other. You wrote that entire, long-winded forum post based on you not realizing that one website listed 32-bit performance, while the other website listed 16-bit performance. Maybe check your sources before being a massively unhinged, sneering cunt.

So, all I see is a butthurt Jelly console peasant

I told you upthread that I have a PC with a 6700 XT.

EDIT: Massive edit for neatness

 

[BradeRunna]

The PS5 Pro is also a hybrid RDNA 2/RDNA 3 pipeline. The pixel shading hardware is RDNA2, while the raytracing cores and, quote from some article I found, "certain parts of the geometry pipeline," are upgraded to RDNA 3. The upgrade in the RT cores gives it far better in-game raytracing performance than the 6700 XT. No clue what it actually is, but the 6700 XT's RT cores are useless, and the PS5 Pro's aren't, typical of what we see from RDNA 2 to RDNA 3. Raw compute is 36% higher, texel fill is 36% higher, pixel fill is 10% lower, memory bandwidth (which I didn't list) is 17% higher, and while Sony never revealed how many RT cores are on the GPU, RDNA3 tends to get you a 2x-3x jump in performance for otherwise similar hardware.

You are clearly a butthurt console peasant. You are literally coping and seething. You clearly prefer peasant boxes. LOL

Anyway, what I said still stands. Consoles suck. PC is the superior platform, and modern games are garbage and poorly optimized slop. There is no way a peasant box can have hardware better than what a decent gaming PC has. Also the GPU inside the PS5 Pro is not a discrete GPU.

Now go be salty somewhere else console faggot. LOL

 

[The Ugly One]

Denial:

You are clearly a butthurt console peasant. You are literally coping and seething. You clearly prefer peasant boxes. LOL

Bargaining:

Anyway, what I said still stands. Consoles suck. PC is the superior platform, and modern games are garbage and poorly optimized slop. There is no way a peasant box can have hardware better than what a decent gaming PC has. Also the GPU inside the PS5 Pro is not a discrete GPU.

Anger:

Now go be salty somewhere else console faggot. LOL

I'll be here when you're ready to accept that you wasted a lot of time writing a long forum post that got everything wrong in every meaningful detail because you didn't realize you were looking at 16-bit FLOP/s on one website and 32-bit FLOP/s on the other.

P.S. You should learn what a mantissa is, this is a growth opportunity for you.

 

[Retarded Weeb]

@The Ugly One
Bruh, it's not like the PS5 Pro can play every game on the highest settings at consistent 60fps either. Some games can't even do consistent 60fps on performance mode. Not to mention all the various shit being used like dynamic resolution and AI upscaling so shit's never just as simple as just being at whatever resolution #fps. How powerful the PS5 Pro is compared to the average gaming PC doesn't argue against the original line of conversation that started this stupid argument which was complaining about modern games being unoptimized. That still applies to console ports too, you're in the same boat as the PCfags you hate so much.

 

[The Ugly One]

AI upscaling

The PS5 can't do AI upscaling.

modern games being unoptimized

What do you mean by "optimized," and when, in your estimation, were games optimized? For example, people are complaining about Alan Wake 2 being unoptimized. In what sense was Alan Wake 1 optimized?

 

[Retarded Weeb]

The PS5 can't do AI upscaling.

Pro has PSSR, which Sony at least claims is some AI-powered upscaling, but I don't know maybe that's just marketing bullshit. In any case, modern consoles are making heavy use of some type of upscaling to keep at resolutions above 1080p, sometimes to even to get above 720p.

What do you mean by "optimized," and when, in your estimation, were games optimized? For example, people are complaining about Alan Wake 2 being unoptimized. In what sense was Alan Wake 1 optimized?

You seem pretty emotionally invested in proving that there was never any point that games were more optimized in the past, and I don't feel like trying to argue with that because it's true that games as a whole weren't all more optimized before, but modern games tend to be unoptimized in similar ways that easy to point out, mainly having to do with their use of Unreal Engine. I can't really answer your question directly because "optimized" here basically means to be programmed efficiently enough that it hits a certain standard, and that standard changes based on time and platform, and we could just end up disagreeing on the standard. I also have no idea what Alan Wake is nor want to look it up.

All I'm going to say is my own standard, which is that if I can look at some older game and some newer game side by side and they both look basically the same graphical quality, but it takes more computing power to run the latter at the same native resolution and FPS as the former, then I would say the developers of the newer game are doing something wrong and they should stop that. I feel comfortable saying that even if I'm a retard who doesn't know how this coding shit works behind the scene because at the end of the day it's the developer's job to impress me so I give them money, and if the can't do that because they're putting out games that look the same or worse than before but saying I need a better computer to play them then I simply won't buy their games.

 

[Spud]

I like my RX580, it's a nice card.