UE5 slop in shambles
So fucking tired of these chatgpt emoji every fucking where.
Damn, that’s kinda a holy grail of game storefronts
Yeah, and it makes a ton of sense for Steam Deck/Machine/Frame
I remember seeing someone play a Steam Deck in an airport awhile ago and the 3D game had a HORRIBLE frame rate.
To the person playing to their credit they didn’t seem bothered but I couldn’t look away for a couple of seconds it was so shockingly bad. It made me think that a lot of people may have not really had the importance of framerate explained to them and what the relevant numbers are (film is 25, 30 is generally minimum for games and 60 is best).
Almost by definition we aren’t going to know those people but that is because if you are here you are probably a nerd, so this is good for all those blindspots. No one deserves a poor framerate if they don’t have to, unless you are Mitch McConnell.
I grew up playing RuneScape at 15 frames per second on the crappy school computers, so I’m used to it.
shit, was that me? that sounds like me. cyberpunk runs pretty bad on the deck, bg3 is pretty choppy… but older games like DS1 and DS2 seem to run pretty smooth for me, but I’ve always been bad at noticing quality.
A neat trick you can do with heavier games on … at least an OLED Deck (not sure if this is doable on the LCD version)…
You target 45 fps, min, lock the max frame rate at something like 45-50, then, use VRR set at a 1:2 ratio, so you get 45 fps at 90hz.
In many games, this generally, at least imo, ends you up with a smoother and potentially graphically higher quality than just targeting 60 fps / 60 hz.
You can also use Optiscaler / DeckyFrameGen to basically hack different/better ability to do upscaling and framegen into a fair number of games that otherwise don’t normally support it.
For instance, the OptiScaler people recently, successfully managed to get FSR 4 working on RX 6000 and 7000 cards, which also works on a Deck.
They essentially reverse engineered the previously leaked FSR4 driver to work on INT 8.
I didn’t think Deck supported VRR? If you have VRR you just cap your frame rate at 37 FPS or whatever and the screen syncs to that and refreshes at 37 Hz. What you’re describing sounds like old school vsync.
I don’t have a PC. My only way to play PC games is through a Deck. I’m at the point where I’m just happy to be able to play these games, period, let alone on the go.
Any game with motion needs 60fps at a bare minimum, with a consistent frametime. Although 90+ is preferable for an actual pleasant experience. 30fps is just abysmal for anything that isn’t FTL, Balatro or the like.
Idk man, I’ve enjoyed many a game at 30 fps. 60 is my general target but acting like it’s a minimum to have a fun time is ridiculous.
I fly helicopters and airplanes in battlefield type games on multiplayer servers on my steam deck framelocked at 40 fps and do fine, I play shooters all the time at that framerate. I think if you get used to a higher framerate your brain just must lose the capability to fill in the blanks or something, it really doesnt bother me too much.
My brain sees it like distortion in a quadcopter fpv goggle feed or something lol. The issue is really rapidly changing framerate, the acceleration and deceleration is disorienting.
I can’t play FTL at anything less than 240 fps. Those life bars depleting from oxygen deprivation need to be buttery smooth
I didn’t get a prompt on my PC for this, but on my Steam Deck it asked me if I was okay with them collecting anonymous framerate data.
But but but the 30% cut is too high it’s not justified and the epic game store takes only 12%!!!111
You can agree that this is great without being stupid. 12% would be great for developers. This is great for consumers. They’re different things. It’d be nice for Steam to take less of the developer’s money. I hope you can agree with that.
Ultimately the EGS has shown 12% is not profitable, a lower cut would be nice for smaller devs but I don’t see why Valve would when every other platform of Steam’s size also takes 30%.
I’ve had a long-winded discussion about that a few days ago. Yes, 12% would be great for devs, but guess what, 0% would be even better.
Steam takes care of the entire e-commerce and distribution side, which is very expensive. Just look up what publishers used to take back in the day for taking over game distribution, that was like 70%. Not exactly a time you want to go back to as indie dev.
If you think a 12% cut would be viable, idk. However, epic just recently laid off 1000 people so idk how financially successful that company currently is.
I’ve had a long-winded discussion about that a few days ago. Yes, 12% would be great for devs, but guess what, 0% would be even better.
Yes, 0% would be better. What’s your point? Valve is charging 30%. That’s worse than 12%, correct? It’s better. Why do people like you always have to defend what a company does all the time?
Steam takes care of the entire e-commerce and distribution side, which is very expensive. Just look up what publishers used to take back in the day for taking over game distribution, that was like 70%. Not exactly a time you want to go back to as indie dev.
No one is saying we want to go back to that. Them being better than that does not make them good. Hitler killed a smaller percentage of the population than Genghis Khan, but that doesn’t make Hitler not evil, right?
If you think a 12% cut would be viable, idk. However, epic just recently laid off 1000 people so idk how financially successful that company currently is.
They make an incredible amount of money. Their employees are extremely generously rewarded. This means the 30% is well over what is required. I can’t give a number of what they need, and neither can you. Notably, the Epic layoff was for Fortnite, because of a reduction in players, not the Epic store team. It has nothing to do with distribution or engine development. Even still, Fortnite was profitable. It was just less profitable.
Why do we have to defend every action Valve takes? Why can’t we criticize them? Why does anyone still have loyalty to any corporation in the modern day? That was a fairy tale that I thought people here were over.
I’m a Linux gamer. I appreciate what they’ve done. I’ve been on Steam for I don’t even know how long at this point. That sure as hell doesn’t mean I’m not going to point out what they do that’s wrong. If anything, it should be the opposite. I don’t want them to become bad, so I need to call out when they’re doing the wrong thing.
Laying off employees is not a sign of being unsuccessful. In fact, in many cases it’s the opposite. Also Epic as a storefront is horrific, and Tim is a cunt, so it shouldn’t be any surprise that very few people actually buy from them.
Steam is a multi-billion dollar company and Gabe owns like 4 yachts. They can easily afford to lower their commission.
I agree. We need more kids being exposed to gambling. Steam earning money from ruining children is very important for those neat features. :3 Steam FTW. Amirite g*mers? <333
For real though. This is just long term business strategy. They are not your friend. They can do things things that are good and things that are very bad. Stop defending big corporation that doesn’t know or care about your existence. I can’t even discribe how sad it is to be a person that needs to get defensive about a corporation because their service is alright for the most part.
We need more kids being exposed to gambling
I’m honestly tired of debating that point again and again. However, to summarize my stance on this: If parents are unable or unwilling to monitor what their child is playing or spending money on, that is not the problem of steam - or any platform for that matter. It’s also not EAs fault if a child is spending thousands of bucks in ultimate team. If my child stole my credit card and did that, I would refund the money immediately and get his account locked. It’s honestly tiring of hearing people demanding companies to “protect the children” when many parents do fuck all to protect or educate THEIR children.
I can’t even discribe how sad it is to be a person that needs to get defensive about a corporation because their service is alright for the most part.
Saying that a 30% cut is justified for everything steam offers isn’t “defending” steam, it’s just stating my opinion, but yeah whatever, you do you.
It’s honestly tiring of hearing people demanding companies to “protect the children” when many parents do fuck all to protect or educate THEIR children.
That’s exactly why they need to do more… Children shouldn’t suffer because corporations exploit them and their shitty parents.
Disagree. Not because I don’t want corporations to do something, but because the ways they’d need to implement are a net-negative overall.
There’s a huge discussion going on right now about age verification on OS level. That’s exactly the kind of shitty results we get when we have other entities being responsible for child safety than the parents. And that’s not a world I want to live in. I don’t want to have to upload my government ID to any service I want to use and live in a borderline surveillance state because parents aren’t able to pay attention to their children.
Ager verification is absolutely not a necessity to curtail gambling, obviously.
They were also the ones to bring out the 30% cut mocking the people talking about it in general and when I called them out they doubled down saying that sharing an opinion is not defending a corporation. Lmao
I see so many bad takes from them in this thread and it’s wild to see people upvote them. I thought the users here would know better about tech instead of getting parasocial with a corporation and thinking it can’t do bad…
It is. There is no other way to “protect the children” if you don’t want parents to do their job.
Yup. People forget that the internet is adult by default. A child cannot buy an internet connection.
The “protect the children” crowd, while they think they mean well, are fucking clowns. Let’s start with actually protecting them, you know what the biggest killer of children is? Cars. Let’s ban them first, shall we?
We should never have to show ID to use the internet, it’s crazy dystopian, giving governments and corporations more and more control of our lives.
And I was talking about literal casinos running on steam and not the exploitative games in there. There’s absolutely no reason for steam virtual market (don’t remember the name) to exist (besides it making valve money) and they could crack down on casinos easily but again, that makes them money. Also steam popularised lootboxes and they have this dumb case + key psychological trick in cs to drive more purchases. As for the 30% cut, the indie devs already have it rough. Developing a game takes a lot of effort and time. Taking 30% cut while publishers take another cut on top makes it hard for indies to sustain themselves and so they often close down. Not to mention the insanity of steam actually lowering the cut for really big studios (the more you earn the lower the cut) to keep them on the platform when corporations will do just fine and the indies need the money the most.
Steam just can’t stop winning. The competition is so far behind they never even appeared in the rear view mirror to begin with
What settings would they use for those FPS numbers? Most importantly, does it count Nvidia’s generated frames in that number?
Steam’s fps overlay can show base frames and generated frames separately, so I’m assuming they’ll be able to only show base frames.
I would still take with a big grain of salt tbh.
That’s a great idea. I wonder if it will make developers consider optimizing their games more.
I highly suspect it’ll lead to less than serious developers finding a way to trick this system.
Valve HATES this ONE TRICK to DOUBLE YOUR FPS INSTANTLY!
- Render scene to texture
- Copy texture to frame buffer, present it, wait for vblank (x2)
- Repeat from step 1.
does steam currently have a way to tell you if a game’s minimum system requirements (or recommended sys requirements) are too high for your pc? to me that would seem like a better way to handle this overall, tho this is really cool too
(side note, but why do so many games show the min specs as specific hardware instead of actual specs?? “minimum cpu: intel i5-3040whatever” thanks but if you have an amd processor this means nothing. at least if you have an intel cpu you can apply the old technique of Bigger Means Better (which is not always true but most of the time it is))
The way they’re doing it actually seems way better in my opinion.
Steam’s userbase is big enough, there’s likely always an exact system out there that’s shared fps for the game you want and with that info you can know (with some margin for error) how it’ll run for you.
Game minimum requirements aren’t always accurate in my experience and I’m guessing they list actual components rather than specs of said component because two chips with the same cores/ghz can perform quite differently nowadays, so they leave it to the consumer to validate (might not be easy or possible to calculate this type of thing programatically im not sure).
Neat. It’s going to be interesting how they will solve the issue of different quality settings - I don’t care about FPS at “ultra” settings, usually it’s more important how the FPS are at low settings before you have to take desperate measures like turning down the resolution, completely turning off antialiasing, using upscaling etc. that have an extremely negative effect on graphics fidelity.
Also, two games running at an average of 60FPS might give very different experiences depending on how consistent the FPS are.
Thinking about it, they’ll probably use a law of large numbers and average out similar specs.
It will probably reveal which crowd is bigger: the high frame rate crowd or the high quality crowd.
Accounting for patches will also be interesting, especially for newer games that are still working their way towards a decent state.
They may be able say something like “50% or users run the game at 30fps, 40% at 40fps” or something like that, where you can guess about different settings people are running at.
The biggest thing is just knowing whether it’s possible to run the game on your hardware at the minimum acceptable fps. If average fps for a steam deck game is 25, you know it doesn’t run well. If a significant number of deck users are able to average a higher fps than 30 (40-60), you know the deck can run it decently and you’ll have options besides running everything on the lowest setting.
They’re gonna have to take into account for programs like lsfg-vk, Decky-framegen and others that increase frame rates. Easy to do on the deck though just ignore reports from games that have the programs launch option. Cant do that with my laptop though as lsfg-vk just grabs the process by name.
I suspect that will shake out with enough data. And I bet they can cross-estimate based on performance of various hardware configs across games too.
If they end up having a message on some games that says “not enough data yet.” Or similar, you’ll know they need a good sized volume to extrapolate average performance.
I’m sure they have considered all of this and the estimates will be conservative and rages/performance windows, not “we estimate this title will run at 47.5 fps on your rig.”
Frame generation is surely on their mind too.
lmao very curious to see what steam thinks of my unnatural unholy abomination of a setup
This is something gamers wish to have since inception of PC Gaming. And it was always told this cannot be done. That’s why we rely on game specs and tests. I mean we still rely on, but a storefront putting estimated FPS is something they would fear to do. And here we have VALVE (once again) doing the impossible. Very curious to see how this will workout in reality.
It’s literally been a thing for decades. Not only have games themselves had automatic configuration based on the machine its installed to, sites like “Can You Run It” have been around for a very long time.
No, this has never done before. Games configuring itself is something completely different and irrelevant to our discussion topic. It has nothing to do with gathering information from players and trying to estimate a FPS before buying the game. “Can You Run It” also does not estimate a FPS for your hardware, based on opt-in information from analyzing the FPS you are playing the game. And especially making it an official thing for a store is also spicey, because usually those stores selling the games themselves could potentially be sued for false marketing if it does not work well enough.
Can’t wait for steam to be confused as fuck when it sees my hardware It is gonna use the bringus studio chinese pen statistics for my pc
This is gonna make so many users rage 🤣
"Now, DikHamz67, before you leave your fifth negative review for the month, I want you to look here and understand that no one else is experiencing these “sloppy optimisation” problems caused by “lazy devs”.
Your rig is shit.
Go look up some sprite titles."
Idk how accurate this will be. Fps isn’t stable in games.
It fluctuates pretty dramatically.
Especially with games where it runs fine in the starting area, but performance tanks once you enter The City.
I really hope they won’t completely fuck it up, though, it would be a really neat feature.
How will this be achieved? I’d be curious to see if a really rudimentary estimation is used based on GPU benchmarks internally (like an estimation kernel trained of Valve’s internal benchmarking of machines against the steam machine, for example.)
Steam recently started giving people the option to share fps/hardware details for games. So it should be real data from real users who have opted in.
