Support NeoGAF

[DenchDeckard]

It’s going to be interesting when DF and others test the pc version vs the ps5 for load times. I wonder how close it will be.

 

[Snake29]

It’s going to be interesting when DF and others test the pc version vs the ps5 for load times. I wonder how close it will be.

uhm....load times are already close with multiple games right now between the next-gen consoles and PC. It will be used for more then load times what we've already seen on the PS5, and we're just scratching the surface.

SSD or dedicated I/O stack is more then load times only.

 

[DenchDeckard]

uhm....load times are already close with multiple games right now between the next-gen consoles and PC. It will be used for more then load times what we've already seen on the PS5, and we're just scratching the surface.

SSD or dedicated I/O stack is more then load times only.

well yeah, but we are hardly going to see anything this generation that really utilises game development of the IO that the current consoles and now direct storage bring.

the only real example we’ve had is ratchets portals and those ran within a 10 percent window on a 3000mbs speed drive. With how long games are taking to develop and The fact that entire teams are going to have to rethink their entire process of developing games ( 20 years of experience) we are talking years upon years before we see a drastic shift in anything outside of loading times.

still it will be great if pc can be on par with ps5 for loading times.

 

[Panajev2001a]

well yeah, but we are hardly going to see anything this generation that really utilises game development of the IO that the current consoles and now direct storage bring.

the only real example we’ve had is ratchets portals and those ran within a 10 percent window on a 3000mbs speed drive. With how long games are taking to develop and The fact that entire teams are going to have to rethink their entire process of developing games ( 20 years of experience) we are talking years upon years before we see a drastic shift in anything outside of loading times.

still it will be great if pc can be on par with ps5 for loading times.

We will see as the generation progresses, Ratchet essentially moved the bottleneck somewhere else in the engine and until they sort that out pushing the SSD harder brings little benefits.

Aside from big show offs like that you may see more dynamic elements here and there and generally higher detail and hopefully lack of popping as the other benefit of the SSD and custom stacks is to allow many small requests to be served at once with low latency.

 

[DenchDeckard]

We will see as the generation progresses, Ratchet essentially moved the bottleneck somewhere else in the engine and until they sort that out pushing the SSD harder brings little benefits.

Aside from big show offs like that you may see more dynamic elements here and there and generally higher detail and hopefully lack of popping as the other benefit of the SSD and custom stacks is to allow many small requests to be served at once with low latency.

i agree, I hope we do see it but I’m sceptical in that I think both the big players of Sony and MS are so dedicated to the pc platform now that every game will be developed with at best a standard sata SSD in mind. I don’t think we will see a true shift in game design and development around this kind of IO for years. Entire engines will need to be re written and then you need the right minds to even think up how it will work.

 

[Panajev2001a]

i agree, I hope we do see it but I’m sceptical in that I think both the big players of Sony and MS are so dedicated to the pc platform now that every game will be developed with at best a standard sata SSD in mind. I don’t think we will see a true shift in game design and development around this kind of IO for years. Entire engines will need to be re written and then you need the right minds to even think up how it will work.

I think for both you have either specialists that can help, see Nixxes, titles that may be platform exclusive (completely or for a few years at least, gives you a lot of time to tweak things for the PC side afterwards), and on PC you have a LOT more main RAM + VRAM + GPU compute as well as big improvements in the base I/O stack.
The extra RAM alone does wonders as you can preload more stuff continuously and SSD’s are getting faster.

Adapting to tech like DirectStorage on PC will also help in the engine refactors these studios are already doing (some of it could be to keep their engine gurus happy too).

 

[YOU PC BRO?!]

Damn, imagine how fast the Direct Storage implementation would be if SFS (sampler feedback streaming) was also being utilised? That's how Microsoft designed Series console velocity architecture to work end to end. As far as we know there hasn't been game that implements this feature. It's strange as SFS is a part of DirectX 12 Ultimate and is available on PC. In fact Intel has talked about support with their new Xe GPU architecture.

 

[ChiefDada]

Why would they waste their time testing drives that aren't supported by the system? They tested one of the slowest supported drives available. I guess they could try a hdd too, but what's the point.

I'd already call the drive 2GBs slower than the recommendation gimped.

I'm just saying that DF specifically mentioned gimping the 3.5gb/s by taping portion of SSD to reduce throughput to <2gb and this has not happened yet.

They tested a 1.7 GB/s on the Matrix demo which worked flawlessly.
Second, its funny how you credit PS5's I/O while a limited SSD is being used.
Yet Direct Storage on XS is outperforming the PS5 with literally half the SSD speed.
If PS5's IO is god-tier, then DS must be a god killer.

Why do people keep bringing up the matrix demo as proof that super fast i/o performance isn't necessary for the new gen? In 2 years time, the Matrix demo will be considered a joke in comparison to actual PS5 first party titles.

Also, DirectStorage is just an API, whereas the PS5 i/o advancements are centered around the custom fixed function hardware in addition to Sony's proprietary storage API.

I can't believe we're still debating this.

 

[thicc_girls_are_teh_best]

Well I don't think much companies have the muscle to do it, Nvidia can definitely, however I don't think there is a need for that. Also on PC there is obvious push to have the solution working with different data sets, since there it's an open platform, so I believe that this is the best solution. It's super quick and you can use unused HW (units) in your PC. So what's not to love.

I agree, but I also think having more options for the end-user is never a bad thing . A decompression block could be a nice fallback in case the user's system doesn't have the spare hardware resources on CPU and/or GPU side to do the decompressing of data.

And as far as implementation, a decompression block would be pretty cost-effective to add, so not adding too much expense on the chip costs.

The 2020 demo has already been proven to run on PC without direct-storage or mesh shaders or fancy SSD.
You continue to spread misinformation. The creators of UE5, the creator of Lumen and Nanite literally both told you that. MULTIPLE TIMES. But somehow you consider them as idiots that don't know what they are talking about.

The 2020 demo was not ran on a PC; that was a video of the demo running on a laptop. If you have direct quotes from Epic Games people saying the specific 2020 UE5 demo was running in realtime on a PC, then please provide them.

Also even if it was, doesn't mean too much without knowing the hardware specifications of the PC in question.

The creator of Nanite and multiple other Unreal engines engineers have also told you that the 2021 Valley of the Ancient demo that was released on PC and ran on both consoles were MORE heavy and taxing than the 2020 demo. But again you consider them as idiots.

1: I've never said anything about the creator of Nanite or Unreal engineers. You're shoving words down my throat.

2: The demo can be more taxing, but by a different metric. They specifically said the resolution was higher, and texture sizes were larger. That's what I recall off the top of my head. The 2021 demo showcased (or, better to say, emphasized) different aspects of UE5 compared to the 2020 demo.

Literally you consider the creator of nanite as an idiot. cause clearly he doesn't know what he is talking about.

No I don't, but I'm beginning to think you do, considering how often you want to bring him up when no one else is doing that

Not only that we have specs from the Matrix demo and can compare them with the Valley of the ancient demo, which creator of nanite already said was more taxing than the 2020 demo.

Again, different demoes emphasizing different aspects of UE5, so they aren't directly comparable.

Not only that the matrix demo will be released on PC in literally 3 WEEKS. And guess what? PC will run it at native 4k without even direct storage. But that wont stop you from continuing to push your misinformation.

1: You're only considering what I'm saying misinformation because it isn't affirming every little thing you want to believe and think everyone else should believe without question.

2: Any PC version of that demo running at native 4K will probably be using beefier CPU/GPU than what the console have, and more RAM (combined system & VRAM) than the consoles, too. So it won't matter if it isn't using DirectStorage; you can simply have more system RAM installed to work as a cache for SSD data to pipe to the GPU's VRAM.

And system RAM is always going to be faster than a SSD, so by that point it becomes moot.

- 2020 demo had only 6.14 GB of nanite data
- Valley 2021 demo had slightly less nanite data but way more texture data that the 2020 demo.
- Valley 2021 demo was way more taxing than the 2020 demo (2x+)
- Valley 2021 demo needs only 3 GB Ram and 7 GB VRAM (I/O)

The conclusion is basic logic.

The conclusion is that you shouldn't try drawing conclusions from dissimilar data sets :/

Here is the 2020 demo running on PC. Clearly these engineers are lying.

1: That's running in the UE5 Editor

2: It could LITERALLY be running on any PC configuration. Do you HONESTLY think the PC they're using is rocking a 5700 XT, 4 GB/s SSD, mobile-esque Zen 2 processor and 16 GB combined RAM?

Because that's what it would need to be somewhat within the (raw) specifications of something like a PS5 or Series X (but specifically using PS5 in this example since you seem to have a hate-boner against it). If you genuinely believe they are running that demo on PC with the build I just listed, you're delusional.

This is pure nonsense, Direct Storage on console has performed on par and even outperformed the PS5 in every way on almost all games. If there were a difference. We would see it by now. This is the same narrative we heard before launch. That "other platforms will need elevators", "this won't run on other platforms", or "only the flying section will work on PS5".

We're still in the crossgen period, and besides I never said Xbox's data I/O system would not be performative. Literally said that it would. However, the same way some people want to look at certain paper specs regarding the GPUs between the systems to claim one is objectively more capable than the other (even if a lot of multiplat results so far haven't displayed it), anyone looking at the SSD I/O specs of both systems on paper can see one has a consistently higher throughput.

Which, granted, as you've said might not be visible in most titles so far, and even if or when it does, won't mean the Series systems are somehow "left in the dust" like some people might want to think they'll be. However, if some sorts of people are willing to accept the idea that the reason we haven't seen a measurable advantage for Series X over PS5 in terms of graphics throughput is because we're still in a crossgen phase and perhaps certain tools aren't quite ready yet, they should also be willing to support the notion that we haven't seen a lot of consistent demonstrations of PS5's I/O in multiplatform releases for exactly similar reasons!

Even with the people who go into a more conspiratorial direction, and say stuff like "Series X performance is being held back due to parity clauses!"...why can't other people claim the same in terms of PS5's I/O performance being held back for similar reasons? I'm not saying I agree with any of these takes, but I do believe in fair rationalization, especially when it can be applied equally to different scenarios.

What I will say IS my own opinion on this, though, is that yes, I do eventually expect there to be some PS5 games within the next year or two that clearly display its I/O advantages, which it does have, because even if the system never hits the theoretical peaks, it simply has so much more headroom WRT I/O performance over the Series systems that even poor yields (we're talking 50% - 60% of theoretical performance metrics given, here) stull put it ahead of the Series platforms. In reality though, there's no reason to even entertain performance yields being that poor in practice; I don't think a company would spend so much time talking about their I/O architecture if they weren't confident the peaks could be reached .

Meanwhile, I never said Microsoft's solution would fall behind greatly, or imply they'd need "elevators" or games wouldn't run on their systems. Again, you're just shoving words down my throat at this point. I fully expect their I/O to remain performant throughout the generation, because they and Sony have taken somewhat different approaches to resolving many of the same issues when it comes to file I/O. And ultimately, MS's advantage with their solution over Sony is its scalability and flexibility for deployment in different system configurations; considering their main aim this generation is the "play anywhere" initiative, it's not a leap to conclude that they are probably okay with sacrificing a performance advantage versus Sony on the file I/O space (which even that being the case, their solution with the Series systems will still be very competitive) if it means having an advantage over Sony in file I/O scalability & deployment, due to a more software-driven solution.

Your inability to think about this from anything other than plastic box warring is embarrassing.

It isn't every single game so far has proved that.

See above for why this take is silly.

All of it has been wrong. UE5 creators have told you several times that you are wrong.
But you regard them as idiots.
You don't care about the truth.

I care about not being gaslit multiple times saying I'm dogging on developers whom I've never even named. That would be nice if you could, 'ya know, stop doing that?

Matrix demo will drop in 3 weeks on PC and PC will run it flawly in higher resolution, fps and without even using direct storage and you won't bat an eye and continue spreading your misinformation.

Claiming the creators of UE5 doesn't know what they are talking about.

I didn't know being this salty could lead to so much gaslighting and missing of the obvious all at the same time

i agree, I hope we do see it but I’m sceptical in that I think both the big players of Sony and MS are so dedicated to the pc platform now that every game will be developed with at best a standard sata SSD in mind. I don’t think we will see a true shift in game design and development around this kind of IO for years. Entire engines will need to be re written and then you need the right minds to even think up how it will work.

Their PC strategies aren't exactly 1:1 the same. Microsoft's is focused on simultaneous console & PC development and Day 1 releases across both platforms, for all 1P games content. Sony's is focused more on prioritizing console development (a PC version could be in earlier development stages) and staggering releases between console & PC by varying amounts of time, for what specific games they choose are suitable for PC releases.

WRT engines, well we know UE5 has already been written with these new file I/O advances at its core. We can speculate certain 1P engines like Decima (Sony) and iD Engine (Microsoft) have been rewritten with this new file I/O at their hearts. And there are at least some developers already deep in planning for games to leverage the file I/O technologies.

I don't think we'll be waiting too much longer to start seeing at least a couple of titles truly flexing the SSD I/O capabilities of current-gen.

 

[Chris_Rivera]

uhm....load times are already close with multiple games right now between the next-gen consoles and PC. It will be used for more then load times what we've already seen on the PS5, and we're just scratching the surface.

SSD or dedicated I/O stack is more then load times only.

What games are you referring to?

 

[staticshock]

The 2020 demo was not ran on a PC; that was a video of the demo running on a laptop. If you have direct quotes from Epic Games people saying the specific 2020 UE5 demo was running in realtime on a PC, then please provide them.

I literally just gave you two engineers running it on their PC live and you rejected it. You are absolutely ridiculous!

2: The demo can be more taxing, but by a different metric.

They literally told you by what metric it was more taxing. Its on video.
They said nanite was 2x more performance heavier than the PS5 2020 lumen demo.
That Nanite on Valley of the ancient was literally the worse case scenario.
This is why Valley of the ancient ran 1080p 30fps on PS5 and XSX. Yet the matrix demo with a full blown living breathing open world ran at a higher resolution and fps on PS5 and XSX.

They literally tell you on video. Timestamp 42:00

"Thats called overdraw and when that happens alot it can be VERY EXPENSIVE.
Its rare in most use cases but in the Valley of the ancient, the one case that can cause that to happen is actually quite prevalent throughout the map...If you have that happen just once, it will be more expensive but it won't be that bad. But if you have lot of that happening like in this demo. The overdraw can get quite a bit more EXPENSIVE. IN this demo, what we see versus other content we have tested in the past. Nanite is 2x more expensive. This demo in general ends up being about TWICE AS EXPENSIVE than what we have seen in other previous content example. "

They specifically said the resolution was higher, and texture sizes were larger. That's what I recall off the top of my head.

No they said the resolution was 1080p at 30fps on xbox and ps5.
Is anything you saying even remotely close to the truth?
Also yes the texture data was larger in Valley of the ancient versus the ps5 2020 demo.
And nanite was 2x more expensive in the Valley of the ancient demo versus the ps5 2020 demo.
According to Brian Karis, the creator of nanite. Valley of the ancient "pushed nanite to its limits" not the ps5 2020 demo

With all that said PC still runs it flawlessly at native 4k, with no directstorage, with sata ssd using only ~10 GB RAM total.

The 2021 demo showcased (or, better to say, emphasized) different aspects of UE5 compared to the 2020 demo.

No it didn't. There are no different aspects of UE5. Its Lumen, Nanite and Temporal Super Resolution.
You sound absolutely clueless. Do you even know what nanite is?

No I don't, but I'm beginning to think you do, considering how often you want to bring him up when no one else is doing that

Because him the creator of Nanite and UE5 literally called out fanboys like you for spreading misinformation!

"There has been some confusion in the community that this doesn't work anymore. or requires specifically...or it only runs on the PS5. There has been a bunch of misconceptions. Its NOT TRUE! This is running on my PC. Works perfectly Fine. It runs great!"

1: You're only considering what I'm saying misinformation because it isn't affirming every little thing you want to believe and think everyone else should believe without question.

Literally all I have done is quote what creators of UE5 have said who were calling out people like you multiple times.

2: Any PC version of that demo running at native 4K will probably be using beefier CPU/GPU than what the console have, and more RAM (combined system & VRAM) than the consoles, too. So it won't matter if it isn't using DirectStorage; you can simply have more system RAM installed to work as a cache for SSD data to pipe to the GPU's VRAM.

And system RAM is always going to be faster than a SSD, so by that point it becomes moot.
The conclusion is that you shouldn't try drawing conclusions from dissimilar data sets :/

Which is why there are benchmarks of the valley of the ancient which is 2x more nanite expensive than the 2020 ps5 demo and yet only uses 3 GB RAM and 7 VRAM and benchmark show it running at 4k flawlessly while it only runs at 1080p 30fps?

You fanboys are amazing with your deny of blatant facts

It could LITERALLY be running on any PC configuration. Do you HONESTLY think the PC they're using is rocking a 5700 XT, 4 GB/s SSD, mobile-esque Zen 2 processor and 16 GB combined RAM?

Because that's what it would need to be somewhat within the (raw) specifications of something like a PS5 or Series X (but specifically using PS5 in this example since you seem to have a hate-boner against it). If you genuinely believe they are running that demo on PC with the build I just listed, you're delusional.

Creator of UE5 Brian Karis literally calls you delusional by saying:
"There has been some confusion in the community that this doesn't work anymore. or requires specifically...or it only runs on the PS5. There has been a bunch of misconceptions. Its NOT TRUE! This is running on my PC. Works perfectly Fine. It runs great!"

and in the same stream saying the valley of the ancient is 2x more expensive than the PS5 2020 demo.

1: That's running in the UE5 Editor

Daniel Wright the creator of Lumen and UE5 already knew misinformed people like you would say none-sense like this so he said saying "Performance is lower in editor that it would be in game".

What you just said is equivalent to someone saying my dvd player that is playing this video is better and more powerful and doing more work than the rendering farm that they used to create this movie. Use your brain, its not yet illegal to think!

I didn't know being this salty could lead to so much gaslighting and missing of the obvious all at the same time

Ofcourse when Matrix demo drops and PC runs it at native 4k flawlessly using even less than 11 Ram total that it did on Valley of the ancient.
You would still be spreading misinformation. As you just confirmed.
To the point that Brian Karis and Daniel Wright, both Engineering Fellow - Graphics at Epic Games who created nanite and lumen had to call you out because you were spreading bs!

 

[SportsFan581]

The 2020 demo was not ran on a PC; that was a video of the demo running on a laptop. If you have direct quotes from Epic Games people saying the specific 2020 UE5 demo was running in realtime on a PC, then please provide them.

Also even if it was, doesn't mean too much without knowing the hardware specifications of the PC in question.

I think there are several videos out there where people from epic run parts of that demo from within UE5 on PC. Some time after that demo dropped different employees were demoing features on different channels, but maybe I misunderstood what they were doing.

 

[alabtrosMyster]

Well we already have a good amount of linear games and open world as a concept simply makes more sense.

Think about, its not like you leave your house and a fucking series of cut scenes start playing before you get to work. So you'll see more open world concepts as they naturally allow for lot of gameplay elements to occur, ironically even linear ones.

As in a character in a FF title can walk into cave and the rocks fall behind them annnnnnnd dungeon.

Even titles like Resident Evil can be done with a open world format, ie Leon goes to this part of town, gate gets overrun by zombies, you need a key to get into the next place etc.

So because of this, it means naturally you clearly already exist in a "open" world by default, within that game can have segments that can use the concept of linear without THE WHOLE GAME being that, which means you'll likely keep seeing em. It doesn't help that Elder Ring is moving all those units btw.

I don't see how making a game "open worldish" makes it somehow better, or possibly more fun.

Seriously, "forced" walking or slower portions of games are often pretty short when you go on a replay, you just run through the parts you don't care for anymore... Also, not all games have to have them, I can see how it gets fixed and gamers can focus on playing... The problems with openworld exist because this is part of the game, I see no point in walking/teleporting to adventure x, y and z with pretty much only filler content in between. I had the hand holding they have to revert to because they feel a need to make a big and complex world. None of these "advantages" make a game better, or even good.

 

[ChiefDada]

I literally just gave you two engineers running it on their PC live and you rejected it. You are absolutely ridiculous!


They literally told you by what metric it was more taxing. Its on video.
They said nanite was 2x more performance heavier than the PS5 2020 lumen demo.
That Nanite on Valley of the ancient was literally the worse case scenario.
This is why Valley of the ancient ran 1080p 30fps on PS5 and XSX. Yet the matrix demo with a full blown living breathing open world ran at a higher resolution and fps on PS5 and XSX.

They literally tell you on video. Timestamp 42:00

"Thats called overdraw and when that happens alot it can be VERY EXPENSIVE.
Its rare in most use cases but in the Valley of the ancient, the one case that can cause that to happen is actually quite prevalent throughout the map...If you have that happen just once, it will be more expensive but it won't be that bad. But if you have lot of that happening like in this demo. The overdraw can get quite a bit more EXPENSIVE. IN this demo, what we see versus other content we have tested in the past. Nanite is 2x more expensive. This demo in general ends up being about TWICE AS EXPENSIVE than what we have seen in other previous content example. "



No they said the resolution was 1080p at 30fps on xbox and ps5.
Is anything you saying even remotely close to the truth?
Also yes the texture data was larger in Valley of the ancient versus the ps5 2020 demo.
And nanite was 2x more expensive in the Valley of the ancient demo versus the ps5 2020 demo.
According to Brian Karis, the creator of nanite. Valley of the ancient "pushed nanite to its limits" not the ps5 2020 demo

With all that said PC still runs it flawlessly at native 4k, with no directstorage, with sata ssd using only ~10 GB RAM total.

No it didn't. There are no different aspects of UE5. Its Lumen, Nanite and Temporal Super Resolution.
You sound absolutely clueless. Do you even know what nanite is?

Because him the creator of Nanite and UE5 literally called out fanboys like you for spreading misinformation!

"There has been some confusion in the community that this doesn't work anymore. or requires specifically...or it only runs on the PS5. There has been a bunch of misconceptions. Its NOT TRUE! This is running on my PC. Works perfectly Fine. It runs great!"



Literally all I have done is quote what creators of UE5 have said who were calling out people like you multiple times.

Which is why there are benchmarks of the valley of the ancient which is 2x more nanite expensive than the 2020 ps5 demo and yet only uses 3 GB RAM and 7 VRAM and benchmark show it running at 4k flawlessly while it only runs at 1080p 30fps?

You fanboys are amazing with your deny of blatant facts

Creator of UE5 Brian Karis literally calls you delusional by saying:
"There has been some confusion in the community that this doesn't work anymore. or requires specifically...or it only runs on the PS5. There has been a bunch of misconceptions. Its NOT TRUE! This is running on my PC. Works perfectly Fine. It runs great!"

and in the same stream saying the valley of the ancient is 2x more expensive than the PS5 2020 demo.


Daniel Wright the creator of Lumen and UE5 already knew misinformed people like you would say none-sense like this so he said saying "Performance is lower in editor that it would be in game".

What you just said is equivalent to someone saying my dvd player that is playing this video is better and more powerful and doing more work than the rendering farm that they used to create this movie. Use your brain, its not yet illegal to think!




Ofcourse when Matrix demo drops and PC runs it at native 4k flawlessly using even less than 11 Ram total that it did on Valley of the ancient.
You would still be spreading misinformation. As you just confirmed.
To the point that Brian Karis and Daniel Wright, both Engineering Fellow - Graphics at Epic Games who created nanite and lumen had to call you out because you were spreading bs!

I think there are several videos out there where people from epic run parts of that demo from within UE5 on PC.

You are correct. Brian Karis from Epic ran the PS5 demo on his PC, but it's important to know that the entire demo was resident in RAM; PS5 on the other hand is streaming data in and out on the fly. That's what made the PS5 demo special.

 

[staticshock]

You are correct. Brian Karis from Epic ran the PS5 demo on his PC, but it's important to know that the entire demo was resident in RAM; PS5 on the other hand is streaming data in and out on the fly. That's what made the PS5 demo special.

This is simply false. Literally Brian debunked all of this. Nanite doesn't "stream data in and out on the fly".Watch the videos and STOP spreading misinformation. The demo was already in RAM because he played through it while they were waiting. He literally said that.
Brian also literally said, nanite cost 2x in valley of the ancient than in the PS5 demo. That Valley of the ancient NOT the ps5 demo pushed nanite to its limits.

Also running the demo in engine is WAYYYY MORE expensive than running the compile game version without the engine running. running it in engine is like running two games at the same time.

How many freaking times does UE engineers have to say that the PS5 demo is the WEAKEST demo out of the three nanite wise before you people accept it?

"In this demo, what we see versus other content we have tested in the past. Nanite is 2x more expensive. This demo in general ends up being about TWICE AS EXPENSIVE than what we have seen in other previous content example. " Brian Karis Creator of Nanite/UE5

Once you go through an area, it goes into memory. So if you play through the demo once, it keeps everything as it goes.
Whether you are on PC, Xbox or PS5. Thats how nanite works. Did you even bother to read or watch the Nanite white paper? What wrong with you people and spreading misinformation?


DF showcases how when you go into a area, its saved in memory.
Starts at 4:40

 

[EDMIX]

I don't see how making a game "open worldish" makes it somehow better, or possibly more fun.

People want exploration and the feeling of freedom, as to why simply making a Souls game open world went from 4 to 5 million sales, to something wild like 12 million in a few weeks.

The open, exploration goes a long way. Even if you fucking argue that you could do those things in past Souls games, the reaction to Elden Ring in terms of sales shows clearly gamers see that differently. So clearly there is something to that open format.

Also, not all games have to have them

lol yes, sooooo you needed to have that applied to shit you liked to realize that huh? =)

None of these "advantages" make a game better, or even good

ok, but sir also, not all games have to have them so....

 

[cartman414]

That is not accurate too.
If you look at NVMe specs it works in all type of form factor:

“It is the industry standard for solid state drives (SSDs) in all form factors (U.2, M.2, AIC, EDSFF)”

So no… not all NVMe SSD are M.2.

Touché.

But they're never SATA.

 

[Snake29]

And…..it turned into a UE5 thread again since that staticshock person is here.