Red Dead Redemption 2, native 4K or resolution scaling?

Commented on 2019-11-08 21:13:24

My 4k stable 60fps preset (i7 6700k 2080ti 16GB RAM):
AA: TXAA High
Volumetrics on medium
Water physics slider on medium
Everything else on high

I probably can bump some of those options to ultra but I am lazy to test it. The most taxing options are those two, volumetric effects and water physics (which causes fps drop if you're anywhere near body of water).

In reply to

Eyesoftheraven

Commented on 2019-11-09 02:22:11

I've just been going back and forth between living with the 30 - 45fps Ultra 4k experience and 1080p in 120Hz display mode @ rendering rates of 60 - 80fps Ultra. Other than the laggy animations the camera movement feels quite responsive even at native 4k. with an LG c9 65". But Death Stranding on PS4 wipes the floor with it's visuals compared to pretty much anything I've seen yet except some of the HQ Cyberpunk 2077 footage.

i9-9900x, 2080TI, 64GB 2133MHz, 970 NVMe Pro (It's mainly a video editing rig).

In reply to

agni_rzm

Commented on 2019-11-09 09:29:36

Insert Lucky_Luke_Western_Fever_sceenshot.jpg

In reply to

nzweers

Commented on 2019-11-11 11:25:55

Depends on your monitor. If you're behind a small 4k screen on the couch looking at a 4k tv, then you probably don't see the difference. I am behind a 40" 4k monitor and native looks much better. Non-native is a blurry mess, even at 90%.

This native 4k stream looks blurry too by the way. Not sure if its the encoding or the AA used. Something is wrong.
x (x)

#ir-ext-ui { position: fixed; padding: 1px; z-index: 9999; display: none; font-family: Consolas, "Lucida Console", "Courier New", Courier, monospace; text-align: right; }
x (x)

#ir-ext-ui { position: fixed; padding: 1px; z-index: 9999; display: none; font-family: Consolas, "Lucida Console", "Courier New", Courier, monospace; text-align: right; }

In reply to

Rooster

Commented on 2019-11-11 12:31:55

You know, I could buy into this argument that the game will 'grow' into future, more powerful GPU's, if the games 'Ultra kill your framerate' settings looked substantially better than the regular set of high/ultra settings

...but it doesn't. So all I see is a game that needs more powerful GPU's for very little gain.

In reply to

Sdarts

Commented on 2019-11-11 15:34:36 In reply to Rooster

Posted by Rooster

You know, I could buy into this argument that the game will 'grow' into future, more powerful GPU's, if the games 'Ultra kill your framerate' settings looked substantially better than the regular set of high/ultra settings

...but it doesn't. So all I see is a game that needs more powerful GPU's for very little gain.

That's the very definition of "diminishing returns":

"(the law of) diminishing returns - phrase of diminish

used to refer to a point at which the level of profits or benefits gained is less than the amount of money or energy invested."

Though this is true for almost all PC games, games in general, and countless other examples in real life. Blaming Rockstar or Red Dead Redemption 2 of this is unwise, since it's just a part of life. Gears 5 and Kingdom Come: Deliverance have settings that are insanely taxing on current hardware.

Also, Xbox One X's version at native 4K has a mixture of High - only 2 settings, Medium, Low and even some settings being "Lower than PC's Low". With a lot of other graphical features in the PC version not even present in the XB1X version.

The most powerful console with fixed hardwre and low level API is only capable of that, so this game and engine pushing PCs' hardware beyond today's limit isn't wrong. It gives you over 50 settings to mess around. As long as people stop with the "everything must be played on 4K@60-200fps with Ultra settings because I have X hardware" mentality, they will be fine.

Arguably, Rockstar's error was in not giving more classes of options and labelling them differently. In RDR2, High is actually Ultra in most other games, Ultra should have been titled Epic/Extreme/Ultimate/Uber/Ultra High, etc.

Still, as long as people are realistic and sensible with settings, the game scales very well among thousands of different configurations. If Rockstar had limited/restriced the higher-end extreme options, it wouldn't have made current hardware play the game better or look better, it would just have limited people in the future for playing this game better and looking better.

At the end of the day, isn't that exactly what a "PC version" should do? The answer is yes, and most games do it. Limiting the options based on current hardware would only have pleased some people's fragile egos. People who look at gorgeous game, but keep instead of appreaciating it, focus on the fact that they are using High, Medium and/or Low settings.

All this debate is really stupid, RDR2 is one of the best games of all time and people are debating over splitting hairs instead of just enjoying the game. Reminds me of a recent article on EuroGamer, where people were cheating on FIFA and conspiring against other players just to keep ahead with no benefit to them.

EutoGamer - Inside FIFA's "dodging Discord" scandal:
https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2019-11-07-insi...

So many stories like these in the past few years. So much drama about nothing. Two users on that article said it best:

SBandy: "When did playing videogames become such a drama?"

Tosdevino: "Blimey, there I was thinking games were supposed to be fun."

Fuck modern gaming!!!

In reply to

[quote=Rooster]You know, I could buy into this argument that the game will 'grow' into future, more powerful GPU's, if the games 'Ultra kill your framerate' settings looked substantially better than the regular set of high/ultra settings

...but it doesn't. So all I see is a game that needs more powerful GPU's for very little gain.[/quote]
That's the very definition of "diminishing returns":

"(the law of) diminishing returns - phrase of diminish

used to refer to a point at which the level of profits or benefits gained is less than the amount of money or energy invested."

Though this is true for almost all PC games, games in general, and countless other examples in real life. Blaming Rockstar or Red Dead Redemption 2 of this is unwise, since it's just a part of life. Gears 5 and Kingdom Come: Deliverance have settings that are insanely taxing on current hardware.

Also, Xbox One X's version at native 4K has a mixture of High - only 2 settings, Medium, Low and even some settings being "Lower than PC's Low". With a lot of other graphical features in the PC version not even present in the XB1X version.

The most powerful console with fixed hardwre and low level API is only capable of that, so this game and engine pushing PCs' hardware beyond today's limit isn't wrong. It gives you over 50 settings to mess around. As long as people stop with the "everything must be played on 4K@60-200fps with Ultra settings because I have X hardware" mentality, they will be fine.

Arguably, Rockstar's error was in not giving more classes of options and labelling them differently. In RDR2, High is actually Ultra in most other games, Ultra should have been titled Epic/Extreme/Ultimate/Uber/Ultra High, etc.

Still, as long as people are realistic and sensible with settings, the game scales very well among thousands of different configurations. If Rockstar had limited/restriced the higher-end extreme options, it wouldn't have made current hardware play the game better or look better, it would just have limited people in the future for playing this game better and looking better.

At the end of the day, isn't that exactly what a "PC version" should do? The answer is yes, and most games do it. Limiting the options based on current hardware would only have pleased some people's fragile egos. People who look at gorgeous game, but keep instead of appreaciating it, focus on the fact that they are using High, Medium and/or Low settings.

All this debate is really stupid, RDR2 is one of the best games of all time and people are debating over splitting hairs instead of just enjoying the game. Reminds me of a recent article on EuroGamer, where people were cheating on FIFA and conspiring against other players just to keep ahead with no benefit to them.

EutoGamer - Inside FIFA's "dodging Discord" scandal:
https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2019-11-07-inside-fifas-dodging-discord-scandal

So many stories like these in the past few years. So much drama about nothing. Two users on that article said it best:

SBandy: "When did playing videogames become such a drama?"

Tosdevino: "Blimey, there I was thinking games were supposed to be fun."

Fuck modern gaming!!!

GunsnSwords

Commented on 2019-11-12 02:50:50

Gamersyde - playing Red Dead Redemption 2 in native 4K on PC is not a piece of cake, even if you own the best graphics card and best CPU of the market.

my only issue with the PC version. that it's so far beyond console grade in hardware resources, that even most gaming PCs can't even run it either. don't know what to make of it. eventually new hardware will smash this game to bits like the rest of PC games. but that will still take some time.

it being said, i still can't help to appreciate all what UE4 has brought to PC gaming. at the cost of much better performance gains. like this recent demo that was running on a GTX970 at 1080p, near 60fps.
https://youtu.be/ecerIIClbMA

game developers will have to start optimizing their game engines for performance. if the next consoles are to game at native 4k.

In reply to

nostradamus

Commented on 2019-11-16 17:07:29 In reply to GunsnSwords

Posted by GunsnSwords

Gamersyde - playing Red Dead Redemption 2 in native 4K on PC is not a piece of cake, even if you own the best graphics card and best CPU of the market.

my only issue with the PC version. that it's so far beyond console grade in hardware resources, that even most gaming PCs can't even run it either. don't know what to make of it. eventually new hardware will smash this game to bits like the rest of PC games. but that will still take some time.

it being said, i still can't help to appreciate all what UE4 has brought to PC gaming. at the cost of much better performance gains. like this recent demo that was running on a GTX970 at 1080p, near 60fps.
https://youtu.be/ecerIIClbMA

game developers will have to start optimizing their game engines for performance. if the next consoles are to game at native 4k.

i mean the game could even never be released on PC, and people would only experience this Ultra settings UHD, in the next-gen consoles backwards compatibility. I can understand people not wanting to buy the game right now, but the option is out there so early, let some official/unofficial work be done to the game, and even some time to upgrade your machines, you'll get what you want instead of wishfull hoping for a release that never comes.

In reply to

[quote=GunsnSwords][quote][b]Gamersyde[/b] - playing Red Dead Redemption 2 in native 4K on PC is not a piece of cake, even if you own the best graphics card and best CPU of the market. [/quote]

my only issue with the PC version. that it's so far beyond console grade in hardware resources, that even most gaming PCs can't even run it either. don't know what to make of it. eventually new hardware will smash this game to bits like the rest of PC games. but that will still take some time.

it being said, i still can't help to appreciate all what UE4 has brought to PC gaming. at the cost of much better performance gains. like this recent demo that was running on a GTX970 at 1080p, near 60fps. 
https://youtu.be/ecerIIClbMA

game developers will have to start optimizing their game engines for performance. if the next consoles are to game at native 4k.[/quote]
i mean the game could even never be released on PC, and people would only experience this Ultra settings UHD, in the next-gen consoles backwards compatibility. I can understand people not wanting to buy the game right now, but the option is out there so early, let some official/unofficial work be done to the game, and even some time to upgrade your machines, you'll get what you want instead of wishfull hoping for a release that never comes.