@@tappy8741 Yes. I've called it out in a number of ways. There is the "this video is sponsored" notification RUclips applies automatically when I clicked the button when uploading. I also wrote it in the video description. I also had it in the chapter timestamps, but your comment helped me notice that the timestamps were not working properly, which I have now fixed.
@@tappy8741 Also at 4:58 I specifically state "and a huge thank you to Jawa for sponsoring today's video". So it is also clearly stated in the video itself.
@@danielowentech Ok fair. I missed the notification popup, did skim the video description but missed the sponsor acknowledgement because the sentence didn't start with "Sponsored by", and there's no chance I would've seen the disclosure at 4:58 because I had already clicked off at 3:40 when the sponsor was slapping me in the face. The content of the video at that point seemed liked it led to the sponsor and by missing the disclosures I felt that the entire video was going to be a stealth advert. You've done absolutely fine and can ignore my comment. edit: One improvement you can take on board or ignore, literally say sponsored by when you do the sponsor spot so my finger can subconsciously skip it before my brain starts throwing up at an advert. Every other youtuber I watch does this and it works great.
You know you don't HAVE TO use the path tracing? 4080 also does 4k60 at ultra, the path tracing inclusion is just a great forward looking feature for future hardware, makes them game worth replaying in 5+ years.
Yes, this is why nobody should have bought a Nvidia 4000 series card primarily based off of ray tracing. Waiting on Next generation GPUS made more sense.
@@0M0rty yh 4k ultra settings look better to me than 800p upscaled to 1440p path tracing. But some like to flex that they are playing with path tracing than actually enjoying the game.
Are y'all retarded or something? Were you straight up not listening or are you just dumb? Those are the PATH TRACING requirements, path tracing has ALWAYS been really hard to run. The normal specs are actually really good considering it's a AAA game with ray tracing always on. No way in hell were people expecting an Arc A580 to play at low settings, ray tracing, 1080p native 60fps on a AAA game.
That's only with full RT though right? I'm seeing 4k native 60 FPS with a 4080 at Ultra Settings in the video (9:56) and the chart, can someone correct me if I'm wrong? I'd like to pick this up if it comes to Game Pass but if I'm wrong I might just play something else
@@andersjjensen im pretty sure prices have been leaked (based off of a yt comment), 5090 is like 2.1k i think, i might be wrong. EDIT nevermind i just looked it up this leak was probably fake
@@jakdadkaj4546 The prices can be adjusted right up until the moment where the leather jacket walks onto the stage and start flapping his lips. It's the single factor we can never predict because it is fundamentally arbitrary.
@@daniil3815 I would say they rather seem to scale well. 1080p 60fps without upscaling with an extremely low end 6600 (non XT) seems very well optimized. Path tracing on the other hand not so well, basically requiring a 4090. But that's probably not bad optimization and rather the fact that we aren't advanced enough for real time path tracing yet.
@@DesoloVir The reason PhysX failed was because almost no one cares about physics in games, and it's not visible in promotional screenshots. RT lighting not only looks great, but also speeds up development time. So no RT will stay with us and the end goal is to replace raster completly with RT.
just disable FULL RT and enjoy the game, you don't have to play with FULL RT and you don't have to use DLSS (play native or use FSR), most games look stunning even without RT. AMD gpus can run raytracing starting from rx 6000 series (almost 5 years old) so if you can't run this game is mostly due to your pc being old. Realistically even if you had a 5700 xt (the best gpu before the 6000 series) it would still struggle to run modern games WITHOUT RT and it's totally fine because it was comparable to a 2070 super or to a rtx 3060. Xbox Series S can run this game, if your PC can't either it's old or you made bad choices when purchasing it
@@DesoloVir Yeah keep dreaming. That ship sailed when the first console shipped with RT support. RT is the future of real time rendering and is here to stay.
@@Extreme96PL You literally can't tell the difference between RT on and Off without the smoothness drop of the lost FPS in like 99% of scenes and games. On occasioan you can, but saying it looks good is massively subjective. It looks different. Often just brighter or more blownout. And in some games it misses the intended mood since it wasn't made scene by scene like Re village. The only true positive is it saves corporations money.
And the game is not even looking that good. All the trailers, b-roll footage is from PC version running 4090. The same goes to footage from preview event.
In 2024/5, I suspect this requirement will push more than a few folks away. Does my rig support it? Yep. Do I always opt for frame rate over ray tracing? Also, yep.
I’m only ok with this if the game is very well optimised, considering it’s not UE it might be, moving to RT is easier for devs and I can’t fault them for taking that route.
@@fletcherchambers7175 yeah the low FPS on the specs is more of a concern to me that the GPU requirements. RT GPUs are old enough it’s not odd to require it, but if you are gonna I’d want it to still hit high FPS
@@George-um2vc honestly I get you, UE is impressive but it’s gotten to the point I see it and it’s a negative. Most devs don’t seem to be the best at optimizing it and it stutters to shit. I know it can run well, look at Fortnite, but most devs don’t literally make the engine lol
I think it's a case of Pathtracing on a 4090 will do like 50-55fps at those settings without FG, but they can't say 60fps,... so they say use FG to breach to 60FPS (and it'll be higher than that ofc), while everyone seems to think this means the game will run at 30fps without FG, we will see very soon I tend to think it'll be sub60 for sure without FG but nowhere near 30fps baseline.
so a game ive looked forward to over years i just dont buy and play it because the devs decide to put ray tracing required ? i dont think thats the answer
@@mikeramos91 It’s partially true if you still got a PC with 8GB RAM. Then you should go for 32GB and skip 16GB. But if you have 16GB RAM right now then you still can wait until games really require 32GB and then upgrade to either 32GB or 64GB.
This will be the norm now, Ray tracing was never for us. it was for the game devs. It makes making game easier by far, no need to bake all lighting. More and more games will just ignore the old way to save money and time.
@@tomwatts9822 I dont recall people wanting 200 flops a year, having to pay thousands on a pc to barely reach 60fps and having all of that combined just to play a game that looks like it needs glasses but ok
Awesome, if it was "never for us", then they just made it easier for the customers to not buy their product. "You wanna play this tech-demo? Pay $70-$80 for it, please..." Hahaha! what a joke bro 😂
@@tomwatts9822 did you mean lazier? Look at Silent Hill 2 remake or Alan Wake. Most of its "mods" were performance optimizations. Any game made with UE5 uses the same tech of letting lumen, nanite, and raytracing do all the heavy work of lighting with games becoming bloated multi-million dollar messes
The gaming industry is in shambles oh my. From GPUs to the pc requirements adding frame gen just to hit 60fps to the closure of dozens of studios each year. 😂😂😂😂 also frame gen adds so much pc latency what’s the point of hitting 60fps with FG if the latency is astronomical?!
And that’s with dlss on performance. That means extra unsharp image (although in 4K dlss perf ain’t that bad) and then you get to 35ish frames and then FG, it’ll be terrible
difference is Crysis was actually a groundbreaking game in graphics. This is just cartoon looking standard fair game. Crysis to this day at max settings still looks as good as this game.
@@Toutvids You are never going to get leaps in visual fidelity like that again. There was always going to be a point of diminishing returns as we approach photo realism and all improvements here on are going to seem minor to those who don't know where to look.
No way to turn rays off, I wonder how that will affect reviews when you have no a/b comparison. Do you just look at it and pronounce it "good"? Oh look at the nice shiny pretty rays everywhere. So nice... Hmmm. Thanks for the heads up.
Exactly what i was thinking. It is insane . all those games wich are graphical so demanding turn out to be terrible games. Nice visuals but boring af gameplay.
@@griswo3272 You can kinda tell just from the short videos on the Steam page. Seems very much like Ryse son of Rome to me. It was visually impressive for the time but it was QTE, the game. This game seems to be mostly exploration and puzzle solving with some very basic combat here and there. Or like that Matrix game that never came out idk but yeah seems like a tech demo to me.
How is it that developers think frame-gen to 60 is ok? I imagine theses are all highly knowledgeable people with great technical understanding far beyond my spectrum who put these charts together. But why do we keep seeing this?
FG is useless to me, yeah it almost double the framerate but the input lag stay the same so if you get 30fps without FG, with FG you'll almost hit 60fps with 30fps input lag.
it is NOT, these games are made by the most incompetent woke trash that couldn't care less about optimising their game, i mean asscreed shadows apparently half of the developers are all interns, just rubbish.
@@metalface_villain yea it‘s probably marketing but you‘d guess there‘s some sort of discussion between the two and a sign-off? Maybe the 60fps number was just more important if the game really is that heavy.
@@YannBOYERDev You don’t like the best possible lighting available? You don’t like that games can now look photorealistic? You don’t like that devs can now spend their time on optimizing a game instead of wasting it on tedious chores like lighting?
@@thetranya3589if it's not affordable l fucking don't. This is like saying the future of gaming is VR... Ok then look at the specs you need to run such thing
most graphically demanding games has always been like that, most people have new hardware and can only play older games. games are pushing way to hard all kinds of graphics features and we still have LOD pop in, horribly short view distance of objects and foliage. but sure, give us detailed uncanny valley characters with cringe animations and voice lines.
idSoftware historically never cared for reaching the most fps's ever, but to keep a consistent framerate target, that is why their games and engines are very stable and feel fast. In the olden days they used to hard lock their engines at 60fps (because that was what most PC monitors displayed anyway...) but that ended with RAGE, they don't do that anymore. But they still target their games to 60fps, is a target minimum not a maximum now, so yes the game will run above 60fps, if you have the hardware for it. Also sadly, some people forgot and others don't know, that before Epic became a famous third party engine developer, it was idSoftware engines that powered most famous games around, HL1 and even HL2 Source Engine, were based on idTech, call of Duty, Medal of Honor just to mention a few, but there's plenty more. IMO If there's one thing idSoftware is good at, is making FPS's and custom game engines for their games. Btw the main guy that created Cryengine 2 (Crysis 1 engine) Tiago Sousa, is on the idSoftware engine team, so is not like they don't have known talent onboard.
Doom eternal ran on a damn toaster and doesn't have crazy requirements. It still looked great too! These other lazy devs just need to be shut down already.
8:22 No Daniel, that checks out. The more you crank up RT the more BVH structures need to be calculated, and that operation is not hardware accelerated. AMD actually published an interesting whitepaper on how UE5's Nanite (a technology that dynamically lowers polygon count with distance from the camera) is fundamentally incompatible with pre-baked BVHs and, sadly, the development of GPU hardware BHV calculation. Almost all modern game engines have something like Nanite, so it wasn't a stab at Epic in particular. But the crux of the matter is that this situation really complicates a gradual transition from raster lighting to RT lighting because polygon reduction with distance frees up a lot of shader power. That said: The CPU requirements made zero sense. There is not a single instance that I'm aware, of outside turn based strategy games, where an AMD 12 core CPU out performes the equivalent 8 core model.
@@samgragas8467 If you only turn on RT for contact shadows then you only need BHVs for moving objects. If you turn on global illumination then you need to BVHs for everything. So if the engine doesn't scale that, and simply calculates all BHVs as soon as one RT feature is turned on then someone made the dumbest fckng blunder imaginable. But obviously: Once you go to global illumination, and only increase ray count and render resolution of reflections as the settings levels go up, then the CPU utilization is the same.
What is even the logic between making a game that alienates so much of your potential buyer base? I mean I assume even consoles will struggle to run this game at a stable 30 fps. Pure insanity.
You do know games on console can still run RT at 60fps right? Spider-Man 2 literally doesn't have a non-RT mode because their RT is so performant. Indiana Jones is running on the Doom Engine which set a precedent for optimized RT as well. Consoles are meant to be the performance floor of the generation, if someone can't match their performance and capabilities 4 years by getting a mid range 6 year old card for a modern release then that is on them. Basically any entry level gaming PC built within the past 6 years could run this game at 60fps 1080p native which I think is plenty reasonable.
it’s a good thing that they force people to buy new hardware imagine if they still had to make games for the xbox 360 because they didn’t force people to switch you should be thanking them tbh
@@11cat123gotta love how whiney gamers are. They complain that devs are still making games for PS4 and they are holding back new releases, then 5 minutess later complain that a new game won't work on hardware from the last gaming generation.
I think people are overreacting. A 2060 for 1080p native, low settings @60 fps seems fine to me? Especially since we are talking some form or RT, which btw i don't know why people are surprised, we have been moving in this direction for a while now since most ue5 titles use software lumen by default with usually no option to turn it off. Also ID tech is incredibly performant and you don't have to use Full RT or PT as that is incredibly demanding in all titles, period. Non Path Traced requirements are more than reasonable especially since we are talking about targeting native resolutions at 60fps.
7:22 The discrepancy in the expected ray tracing performance between minimum requirement AMD and Nvidia GPUs may simply be due to the 2060 Super is the lowest Nvidia GPU that can *both* run RT *and* has 8GB+ VRAM. So the 2060S may be unnecessarily powerful, whereas the RX 6600 may be more what's actually the minimum.
I'm quite sure there is not much discrepancy between RX6600 and RTX 2060 on RT performance because RX6000 family was facing RTX3000 family (in other words RX6600 is more recent than RTX2060) and RT capabilities of RX6000 series is comparable to RTX2000 series which are both much weaker than RTX3000 family. Also RTX 2060 have very poor RT performance.
@@GuigEspritDuSage Yup. It just goes to show how the Nvidia mind share is affecting people's idea about AMD. RDNA2 has slightly better raster-to-RT performance ratio than Turing in usable workloads. It's not until you force Turing down to 20FPS that RDNA2 falls completely appart and starts hitting 7FPS or some shit. Also, Ampere and Lovelace have identical raster-to-RT ratio. As in, if a Lovelace card is 20% in raster than a given Ampere card, then it is also (only) 20% faster in RT. The big jump was Turing to Ampere. Unfortunately AMD did the exact same thing from RDNA2 to RDNA3, but rumors insist that RDNA4 is going to be the "Ampere moment" in RT uplift.
That's not what the chart says, it says if you want complete max settings with full RT then a 4090 will be required, to be honest you will be surprised what cards will run at different settings, the beauty of PC gaming is the ability to choose to dial down or dial up different settings to get the performance your happy with, I feel sorry for console players as they clearly will not have a fun time with this
Lazy development slop in a nutshell. A) "Just use DLSS/FSR/XeSS to overcome our poor optimizations if you wish anything more than 60FPS" B) "Yeah, baking lighting really isn't our thing, we'll just use the extremely taxing and little effort way to enable RT on this" Will definitely skip this one. :\
I agree with the 2nd point. But for your 1st point is not completely true. For the 1080p and 1440p non path-traced modes. They do not require upscaling or frame generation to reach 60fps. A 7700xt is weaker then a 6800xt so if you play at native 1440p 60fps with that card before, you will be able to play this game with the same settings.
If I don't want ray tracing (which a lot of people don't want to too) I just need to turn off ray tracing right ? Why do I need a ray-tracing able card to play the game ? I don't understand
game requires at least 6 year old GPU to run! Honestly I'm surprised it has taken this long, back in the day you'd get games requiring hardware features of GPUs that were no more than two years old. Now THAT was frustrating. The real crime here is that GPU value is currently so bad that this is an obstacle rather than a push forward. Battlemage having something relatively affordable is a good start, hoping AMD at least also follows suit with the low end of the 8000 series being affordable. I've given up on cheaper nvidia GPUs lol.
Back in the day graphics were evolving at a steady pace. This game doesn't look all that great. The cpu req seems even more egregious since this isn't some huge open world game that takes things to the next level
@@acf8888 Yeah, in some ways I feel like we're pretty stagnant in terms of actual visual output, but requirements climb as the methods we're getting those graphics at are far more demanding. The CPU requirements make some sense though given the require RT nature of the game. I mean they're still too high for "high settings' but I bet if you turn down shadows to medium or something it'll help dramatically and a 5600x or something will be ok for high/medium 60fps.
We've reached a point where higher, optimized graphics are a substantial time cost. Devs should stick to the same graphics until the tech allows for easy adoption. This whole "you need a spaceship to run this unoptimized garbage" isn't a great selling point.
@@Torso6131 I didn't realize the min target was 60 fps. 3600 isn't bad in that case. 3600 equivalent Intel is a 9600k though. Not sure why they would list a 10700K for 60 fps.
Same with Displate stuff. They can give you all the discounts in the world, but the shipping price makes it more expensive than the total for buying posters elsewhere.
We're 3 generations into ray tracing and it still tanks performance so badly that it needs frame gen and DLSS to compensate. I get that it saves developers time, but maybe it's just not as viable as Jensen would have us believe.
This looks like RDR2 at best, but has hardware requirements way beyond even the max quality settings of that 2018 game, which could run on the Xbox One (at a 30ish FPS for sure, but it running at all on what's considered the weakest of the pure home consoles). And at worst on PC, its minimum was 2-3gb vram cards, not 8gb barely able to run the lowest quality setting at 1080p 60p. (and these hw requirements were made before they added Denuvo before launch)
Before watching the video, I'll just say that there are games that already default to only having Ray Tracing ability, such as UE5 games like Avatar, even though it operates in a software ray tracing mode, the game itself only uses Ray Tracing, so the concept isn't entirely new in that regard, but I think it is not well known, and this will only increase (as it should) over time, it was expected, to be honest.
Exactly. As PC hardware features progress, of course there will be new requirements that rely on that hardware to run the game. This isn't the first time this has happened either because there was a time where a dedicated GPU was a requirement when people would normally render the game with just a CPU and a software renderer. The fact that consoles have RT hardware also enables developers to make this sort of decision if they deem it necessary for their game.
@@sd19delta16 Exactly, and I will echo the requirement of Mesh Shaders, it happened when Alan Wake 2 came out, cards without hardware mesh shader support were not supported. As technology progresses, and games require new features, it is natural, and inevitable for new requirements to be made.
Yep, this is what happens when Nvidia pays game devlopers to favor their hardware, but the funny thing is that it's still going to run like absolute crap on something like an RTX 2060 or 2070.
Look...if game devs can´t make a game on 60 FPS ultra without DLSS on UPSCALED 4K for best GPU out there we all maybe should have wait with all that ray-tracing. Can´t imagine buying 4090 and then having to play with settings :D :D
It's been obvious that this is coming. Half the games that TPU has done performance tests for this year had software RT always on. The 2060 is a 6 year old entry level card. Could you image thinking a gtx 560 would run new releases in 2016 at 60fps, when it was 6 years old.
But the fact that the 8 year old GTX 1070 still can run Black Myth Wukong, Alan Wake 2 or S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 2 is proof that newer GPUs age hold up better than older generations before the GTX 1000 series.
@@niebuhr6197 how well do think a gtx 270 was doing in games released in 2016 when it was 8 years old? Way worse than the 1070 does in 2024 games. New releases have always pushed hardware available when they launched. Outside of the pandemic years. But global supply shortages causing a console generation, that started off weak for when it laucnhced, to get an extra 2-3 years of support is rare. It's easy to pick out the people who started PC gaming after 2020.
I really wish studios would finally realize that going above 60 fps is priority for many players instead of some demanding fancy ass graphics. Once I got a 165hz screen I can no longer play comfortably on 60 fps, it's way too choppy.
DLSS 3 Frame Gen required to reach 60 FPS? Do they not understand how Frame Gen works at all? Unless they are saying 60 FPS and then you turn on frame gen to try and get up to around 120 or so.
Theoritically speaking i think you can double it if the game is very cpu limited , however even then from the examples i've seen it's not a consistent 2× fps
@ZenAndPsychedelicHealingCenter I know that forcing RT in itself in the current market is mostly negative, but, if they are gonna force ray tracing, might as well do it the right way (hardware based,) for example, look at metro exodus, it got an RT exclusive version and it was a success.
Now go to Steam’s charts and see what percentage of gamers even own computers that meet the “RECOMMENDED” requirements for full ray tracing. They just launched a game that only 0.7% of gamers can play at these specs. (I’m pulling that number out of thin air but you get my point.) Talk about doomed to failure.
The thing about this is in addition. To being easier - it uses less resources. Ray Tracing over regular lighting is expensive. If there’s only Ray tracing it’s far less expensive - just more so than baked lighting
"Full Raytracing" is Path Tracing right? This explains the GPU Hardware Raytracing Requirement. its Black Myth Wukong all over again, it has Path Tracing aswell and ran like shit.
In technical terms, path tracing and ray tracing are the same thing, I don't know why people started making them two different things. So the term Full Ray Tracing probably means what you think of when you think of path tracing.
It's sad to see Daniel's videos have this awful of a comment section. Ray Tracing is ubiquitous now, iGPU's have it for several generations, and the cheapest cards that run this game at 1080p/60 are like 150$, double the cost of the game. Furthermore, the game seems to run well on it's non path tracing mode, 7900XT being enough for native 4k/60 is very good. Path tracing being included as a forward looking mode you can enjoy when replaying the game in the future is also a positive addition, there's no need to whine about PT mode's performance when you can play without it.
The RTX 2060 being the bare minimum card in new AAA games is more than reasonable considering it’s a six year old card. And this always happens whether it’s PC or it’s consoles. Developers will eventually drop the older tech to pursue the advantages new tech gives them which does unfortunately mean leaving some people behind, and I get that sucks. But that’s just the way it has to be if we want games to progress technologically and that’s the way it’s always been. It’s fantastic that people have been able to coast on their 10 series GTX cards for as long as they have, I coasted on my 1070 for much longer than even I anticipated. But to expect devs to always cater to nearly decade old PC hardware is just absolutely spoiled baby behavior. There’s many examples of games having absolutely bloated specs and being unoptimized, we don’t know if this applies to Indiana Jones until the game actually comes out, but this is MachineGames working in iD Tech which is probably the most performant engine on the market. I expect the game to be very scalable, which is what we should want and expect out of a PC game. My 3080 probably won’t be able to run this game with path tracing at the settings and frame rate I want, am I throwing a hissy fit that my four year old card will struggle to run a clearly experimental high end future proofed feature? No. It just is what it is, either I wait to upgrade or I’m content to run the game without it and the game will still look pretty good.
do we really care about the visuals so much? what about the gameplay or the fact that it's an indiana jones games, which i don't know about the rest but i personally don't give a fook about? what does it matter if the visuals are out of this world if the game is mid or if nothing on the market can even handle those graphics?
You can look at the trailer it looks about the same graphically as uncharted on PS4. With these requirements it's gonna run like shit on consoles as well. This game is gonna bomb
@@metalface_villainNo one cared about the visuals until these PC specs requirements were revealed. The game just doesn't look good enough to justify these requirements.
For the 4k ultra preset, the requirement in performance would actually be the 4070ti but it has 12GB of VRAM. From a video of a benchmark guy that has been taken down due to embargo we see him using a 4080 super at 4k ultra non full rt and reaching 96 ish fps in a Baghdad like city but having 15gb allocated and 13.6Gb used on msi afterburner. So i guess it's that. Also that video made me quite happy because i was feared being a single player game the game would run slower than a fast fps focused like doom but it runs pretty well. Before the 4080super he used a 3060ti and reached 68fps at 1440p high native. GREAT
Good catch. There's no such thing. It's either i7 13700k or i9 13900k. My guess is the latter. They screwed up. And at 3.0 GHz? Compared to an AMD CPU at 4.7 GHz? Oh... it can boost up to 5.80 GHz.
@@wolveric0 yes you did. This is Intels secret weapon for destroying the CPU demand that ray tracing induces. Only serious gamerZ know about it. fRaMeS wIn GaMeS.
IMHO, needless. These games today are so focused on the looks and there is no substance. And we are forcing these upgrades for GPUs that don't seem to have any tangible benefit as we are still at 60 fps. I'm sure there will be mods that could change this, but still, I think this is ridiculous.
Just cancelled my pre-order. Got a 7900XT last year that crushes everything. RT however cost is still way too high on perf. Appearently no FSR either 😕 I will wait till we get some benches.
If you have a 7900xt you definitely could run this on at least 1440p. The requirements to the right are for path tracing which is why they are so ridiculous
Who preorders games anymore? That's insane. There hasn't been a single game in the past 7 years that releases finished. Just let the game cook for awhile and pick it up on it's first Steam sale.
I also own a 7900XT (absolute beast of a GPU) and suddenly lost all my hype in this game. This recent trend where games have always on RT with no option to turn it off needs to stop!
Uh oh. I have exactly the lowest spec PC for this, but if it really runs at 60fps with raytracing, then that's gonna be a lot better performance than most modern games without RT.
This reminds me of the time when pixel shader started being a requirement back in the early 2000's. Or 3D accelerator required back in the late 90's. We knew it was coming sooner or later.
@@thetranya3589 back then it was progamming marvels, software engineering at its finest, right now modern games can barely run on modern hardware... lazy ue5 devs ruining gaming
No not really. Ray tracing adds nearly nothing to games. It certainly doesn't add realism, it looks incredibly fake. And frame generation is a regression, it adds latency and worse graphics to games.
@@thetranya3589 the reason people whine, is for a couple of reasons: Generational uplift has gotten worse Nvidia who has the best RT has been greedy with vram and price Cpu generational improvement has stalled except for 9800x3d AMD does not have great RT
I would wager the 3 Not fully ray traced modes line up pretty close with consoles. Minimum = Series S Recommended = Series X Ultra = PS5 Pro Or actually maybe PS5 Pro will be more analogus to the minimum fully path traced mode, as it's a better spec match than non-FRT Ultra
I think the 6600 isn't the fastest one either. But it's quite an experience to see my 6600 as minimum quite often 😮 And in this case even a faster CPU.
If its done well then its actually doing pretty well, I can play Metro Exodus Enhanced Edition 1080p high settings with Raytracing and I have a mostly stable 60fps, without the RT setting enabled it goes to like 80-90
Hmm, I don't think it's that bad actually. the 2060 is not a huge requirement these days, and according to the Req's the 2060 will be able to run native 1080p at 60 fps. I think what freaks people out is that it says "Low preset", but remember "low" in a 2024 game does not have to mean "ugly". Take a look at Alan Wake 2 on low native 1080p, I would not call that an ugly looking game, it's just we know that it can be way more "pretty".
jacking up requirements and requiring specific hardware just cause industry has gotten too greedy to design games in a way where they are optimized. You can make games look this good without any ray tracing lmfao, galee
Heh my $1500 build I just bought a little bit over a year ago can only play at recommended settings (Its a 13th gen i5, with a 4070). What a world we live in, so much for longevity.
Yeah, devs are always full of shit with their CPU requirement claims. I have a 10600k, not that I was going to get this trash game, but guess I can't now even if I wanted to! LOL
@@squeakytot yeah but they recommend a 3600 for amd side and a 10700k is a 9900k basically and the 9900k is pretty much 30% faster than a 3600. I feel that this game will show a preference to amd cpus
I don't understand why the requirements for AMD is so lower compared to its competitors. From CPU to GPU, until now am frustrated to look system requirements on NVIDIA and Intel CPU, i feel like its not good place they have kept it😢😢😢
@raanans.a8992 Fair. I wonder if it'll be fine with a 9900k. 3600 is still 6c/12t, which is 4 threads more than a 9700k. It makes sense that the requirement is "lower" based on the idea that the Ryzen parts for that generation always had more threads against the same tier Intel until the Intel 12th gen.
I mean this had to happen at some point. As someone with a high end PC ray tracing/path tracing can be absolutely transformative when done right. My prediction is, by the console generation after the next, ray tracing will be the lighting standard in the industry and wont be something you can turn off.
Why would we not need new games? This looks great. But the "requirements" are madness. You don't even turn frame gen on unless you are already at at least 50fps.
@@Funnky It wasn't very well optimized but as patches came out it got better and better, I could run the game on low/medium on an i5 760, 750Ti and 7GB of ram at a pretty stable 60fps outside of novigrad. Try using a CPU this much older than the game in modern times (especially UE5 game)
@@Tom3kkk What are you talking about? I5 760 is 4.5 years older than Witcher 3. A very close comparison right now is Ryzen 5600X which is now over 4 years old. You can't be suggesting that 5600X is no longer a viable CPU and it doesn't run modern games, lol. And in terms of GPU, 750 Ti was released a year before Witcher 3 so it was a modern GPU at that point (it was a pretty low-end one bu you used low/mid settings as you've said so it makes sense). Witcher 3 was a very demanding game at the time it released. Especially on high/ultra settings, it was used to benchmark new hardware for years. I don't know why people are trying to rewrite history.
Dont forget to vet whatever seller you are choosing on jawa. You will get scammed if you arent lucky or careful, luckily jawa has a decent reimbursement policy which saved me.
Nothing about this chart actually makes sense once you dig into the details. I believe that "mistakes were made" and the only way to know how it will perform is to wait for reviewers to test it on a variety of configurations.
Exactly my thoughts as well. It will probably perform like a current demanding title hitting 120 or so fps with a 4080 at 1440p dlss quality with frame generation.
Pretty sure Metro Exodus pc enhanced requires a RT capable card too. But this game is doing 'full ray tracing' or 'path tracing', so yes, you need a modern or somewhat system. The 2060 came out in 2018, 6 years ago. People complaining "my 8 year ago gpu (1000 series or older) should still be fine!!!"
I think it's a case of Pathtracing on a 4090 will do like 50-55fps at those settings without FG, but they can't say 60fps,... so they say use FG to breach to 60FPS (and it'll be higher than that ofc), while everyone seems to think this means the game will run at 30fps without FG, we will see very soon I tend to think it'll be sub60 for sure without FG but nowhere near 30fps baseline.
I'm betting on it can run at 45 fps which is "no man's land" so that's why they say turn on frame gen. But that's for the Nvidia sponsored "burn a hole in your desk because your computer exploded" settings...
Path tracing in Cyberpunk with a 4090 at native 4k ran at about 20 fps without upscaling. With upscaling it gets up to 40-ish. So FG up to 60 makes sense for the stated specs if it is using a similar tech. Still not a great way to play a game, but it hits to golden marketing number.
I was waiting for this to happen. Most people don't understand that the real value of RT isn't visual quality, in fact it's more of a mixed bag in that regard, but that it's saving developers a ton of time when it comes to lighting and everything that's required for that. But as long as games support non-RT systems, these big cost advantages are simply not there. I'm curious how the game will do, especially with the, for their time, great predecessors. It'll be hard to have a risky sequel plus an artificially reduced number of potential players.
I have a 4070 and I can play Cyberpunk 2077 @ 1440p with Path Tracing RT and everything maxed out and it's playable. Hard to believe that this looks better than that.
Replace "devs" with "management" and you have the correct assumption. Developers who have the capability to work around engine inefficiencies are expensive and the process takes a lot of time. And what is worse: You never know if you're wasting your time. Sometimes a long cycle of careful analysis and coding leads to very small gains. Other times you get a massive boost. Other times you get a massive boost in only some parts of the game, so the FPS goes from 60 to 300 and back to 60 depending on which direction you look in. And all of this is "incompatible" with a management style that boils down to "Plug numbers into a spread sheet".
these requirements feel like they are just thrown together without much thought. Remember how awful and demanding STALKER 2 system requirement was for 4k @ 60 FPS ? Well, I'm getting 110-140 FPS @ 4k DLSS Quality + Frame gen with nexus engine.ini tweak mods and BenchmarKing optimization guide on my weak ass i5-10400F with a TUF 4080 Super. It's never that bad, they just over estimate everything and blindly put out these requirements
I think we should remember that Ray tracing can be heavy on the CPU as well which would explain why the CP requirements go up as the raytracing requirements go up
Machinegames is clearly going for a state of the art visual makeup for Indy. First real fully ray traced title which environments were designed with accompanying techniques in mind. This is a good thing. On one hand the gaming community hates on the Xbox Series S for holding up the technological advancement of the current gen titles but when the developers try to create a game with high system requirements floor the uproar is all the same. Gamers once again show that they do not know what they want and very easily forget that games are a commodity item and nobody is required to purchase them. Nevermind the game not being out for the public yet as it still might be very scalable and playable on the lower end systems. People have already made up their mind which sucks because it shows that they are not ready for truly next gen titles.
Required hardware ray-tracing is just... frustrating. Very frustrating. It doesn't exactly effect me, because I have a decently ray-tracing-capable system, but most of the world doesn't. Edit - Going off of the replies, seems like it's a 50/50. But that's still a lot of people imo. And that would just be the people who use Steam and take part of the statistics stuff So that means the game is (to my knowledge) locked off to most (edit-50% of) people unless they play it on console, but even then- it'll probably be very disappointing graphically (on console). Edit - Also, just realized the *CPU* requirements. I have a 7700XT, but a R7 5700x o_o bro. At least I'm between the minimum and recommended, but still. Edit 2 - I imagine my settings like this Preset: Medium/Low (if it allows that) Res: 1440p Upscaling: Quality FPS - 60-90 It's not terrible, but I have better settings and performance on Cyberpunk 2077! Idk. This whole thing is just- sickeningly laughable. Edit 3 - Idk, maybe I and others are being overdramatic. But a forced hardware raytracing just *feels wrong.* It feels like the 4090 only came out two years ago and now this game looks like it'll give it a run for its money. *Damn.* It's possible for lower-end folks to play it, but... idk. We will see when the game drops. I'm seriously worried about the quality, FPS, and overall performance for everyone, whether they have a 3060, 7700xt, or 4090.
Its like Alan Wake 2 and Mesh Shaders, a lot of people still have an RX580, whcih doesnt support Meshn Shaders and made the game run at like 1-3 FPS, so it locked A LOT of people from playing it (which is why it failed, rather than only being on Epic or no Physical Edition). If they start adding RT to the games without it being option, it will lock a lot of people from playing them.
let them do this, the game will flop cuz of the reason you mentioned. do these people think that all of a sudden everyone will go buy a 40 series card or whatnot just to play an indiana jones game? xD
Actually about 50% of the systems on the latest Steam hardware survey have GPUs that would meet the minimum requirements for this game. More people are on capable RT hardware than you think.
Check out Jawa for epic deals! jawa.link/OwenDec24 Use code OWEN10 for $10 off your first purchase!
You have to explicitly state that Jawa is an advert, per youtube rules.
@@tappy8741 Yes. I've called it out in a number of ways. There is the "this video is sponsored" notification RUclips applies automatically when I clicked the button when uploading. I also wrote it in the video description. I also had it in the chapter timestamps, but your comment helped me notice that the timestamps were not working properly, which I have now fixed.
@@tappy8741 Also at 4:58 I specifically state "and a huge thank you to Jawa for sponsoring today's video". So it is also clearly stated in the video itself.
@@danielowentech Ok fair. I missed the notification popup, did skim the video description but missed the sponsor acknowledgement because the sentence didn't start with "Sponsored by", and there's no chance I would've seen the disclosure at 4:58 because I had already clicked off at 3:40 when the sponsor was slapping me in the face. The content of the video at that point seemed liked it led to the sponsor and by missing the disclosures I felt that the entire video was going to be a stealth advert.
You've done absolutely fine and can ignore my comment.
edit: One improvement you can take on board or ignore, literally say sponsored by when you do the sponsor spot so my finger can subconsciously skip it before my brain starts throwing up at an advert. Every other youtuber I watch does this and it works great.
@@tappy8741 It's obvious it's an advertisement.
A 4080 on 1440p with balanced upscaling and frame generation hitting 60fps is criminal.
Actually insane.
You know you don't HAVE TO use the path tracing?
4080 also does 4k60 at ultra, the path tracing inclusion is just a great forward looking feature for future hardware, makes them game worth replaying in 5+ years.
Yes, this is why nobody should have bought a Nvidia 4000 series card primarily based off of ray tracing. Waiting on Next generation GPUS made more sense.
Who doesn’t love 30fps FG’d up to 60 😂
@@0M0rty yh 4k ultra settings look better to me than 800p upscaled to 1440p path tracing. But some like to flex that they are playing with path tracing than actually enjoying the game.
R.I.P GTX 10 series and RX 5000 series cards
Rip? They have been dead for at least a couple of years now. It’s not 7+ year life span. It’s 3 to 5 years max. The rx 5000 is past 5 years of age.
Well, the definitive RIP, I am slowly building a new setup to replace my RX 5700 XT setup.
@@furynotes 🤡
10 series is dinosaur era already. 1080 is slower than even 6600
My 1080ti is still in the fight at 1080p. Wasn't going to buy this slop anyways.
Imagine playing a game at lowest graphics then turning on Ray tracing. Like who does that.
so u don't understand what raytracing is used for by devs? ok
@@lokilaufeyson7035 Why should he care?
@@kunka592 He literally said "Who does that?" which makes him care to an extent.
amd ?
@@kennethpereyda5707 no
Using frame generation just to get 60 fps is fucking insane. And it’s on 4080 top spec pc…
In my experience it verges on unplayable. Input lag i think is considerably worse than at standard 30 fps.
Are y'all retarded or something? Were you straight up not listening or are you just dumb? Those are the PATH TRACING requirements, path tracing has ALWAYS been really hard to run. The normal specs are actually really good considering it's a AAA game with ray tracing always on. No way in hell were people expecting an Arc A580 to play at low settings, ray tracing, 1080p native 60fps on a AAA game.
That's only with full RT though right? I'm seeing 4k native 60 FPS with a 4080 at Ultra Settings in the video (9:56) and the chart, can someone correct me if I'm wrong? I'd like to pick this up if it comes to Game Pass but if I'm wrong I might just play something else
This is a game for RTX 5000 cards. I'm pretty sure Jensen gonna use this game to show us how his 5090 destroys our peasant gpus.
5090 isn’t even announced yet
@thecrimsonkid3574 i meant gonna use. Srry, english is not my native language so i made this mistakes some times.
@@thecrimsonkid3574 It will be shortly. We practically know everything except price about it at this point.
@@andersjjensen im pretty sure prices have been leaked (based off of a yt comment), 5090 is like 2.1k i think, i might be wrong.
EDIT nevermind i just looked it up this leak was probably fake
@@jakdadkaj4546 The prices can be adjusted right up until the moment where the leather jacket walks onto the stage and start flapping his lips. It's the single factor we can never predict because it is fundamentally arbitrary.
kudos for requirement chart, they are not hiding anything. but requirements itself are through the roof.
@@daniil3815 I would say they rather seem to scale well. 1080p 60fps without upscaling with an extremely low end 6600 (non XT) seems very well optimized. Path tracing on the other hand not so well, basically requiring a 4090. But that's probably not bad optimization and rather the fact that we aren't advanced enough for real time path tracing yet.
Spot sponsored game by NVIDIA
Difficulty: Easy
They are trying to do with Ray Tracing, what they tried with PhysX. Lets hope this fails as hard.
@@DesoloVir The reason PhysX failed was because almost no one cares about physics in games, and it's not visible in promotional screenshots. RT lighting not only looks great, but also speeds up development time. So no RT will stay with us and the end goal is to replace raster completly with RT.
just disable FULL RT and enjoy the game, you don't have to play with FULL RT and you don't have to use DLSS (play native or use FSR), most games look stunning even without RT. AMD gpus can run raytracing starting from rx 6000 series (almost 5 years old) so if you can't run this game is mostly due to your pc being old. Realistically even if you had a 5700 xt (the best gpu before the 6000 series) it would still struggle to run modern games WITHOUT RT and it's totally fine because it was comparable to a 2070 super or to a rtx 3060. Xbox Series S can run this game, if your PC can't either it's old or you made bad choices when purchasing it
@@DesoloVir Yeah keep dreaming. That ship sailed when the first console shipped with RT support. RT is the future of real time rendering and is here to stay.
@@Extreme96PL You literally can't tell the difference between RT on and Off without the smoothness drop of the lost FPS in like 99% of scenes and games. On occasioan you can, but saying it looks good is massively subjective. It looks different. Often just brighter or more blownout. And in some games it misses the intended mood since it wasn't made scene by scene like Re village. The only true positive is it saves corporations money.
That jump, from 2060Super to 3080Ti, apparently there is nothing in between...
VRAM is king
Well low setting 1080p and high setting 1440p is a big jump in itself. Medium/high 1080p and low/medium 1440p are missing
And the game is not even looking that good. All the trailers, b-roll footage is from PC version running 4090. The same goes to footage from preview event.
1440p high is very demanding, close to 4k high DLSS Balanced. Also, 8 GB can't run this.
@@samgragas8467 It literally can according to this chart
In 2024/5, I suspect this requirement will push more than a few folks away. Does my rig support it? Yep. Do I always opt for frame rate over ray tracing? Also, yep.
I’m only ok with this if the game is very well optimised, considering it’s not UE it might be, moving to RT is easier for devs and I can’t fault them for taking that route.
@@fletcherchambers7175 yeah the low FPS on the specs is more of a concern to me that the GPU requirements. RT GPUs are old enough it’s not odd to require it, but if you are gonna I’d want it to still hit high FPS
@@George-um2vc honestly I get you, UE is impressive but it’s gotten to the point I see it and it’s a negative. Most devs don’t seem to be the best at optimizing it and it stutters to shit. I know it can run well, look at Fortnite, but most devs don’t literally make the engine lol
It will push more people to upgrade pc also, because every new game now have high min requirements
RTX3060?
Full Ray Tracing on Ultra: RTX 4090 4k DLSS on Performance + FG on for 60fps? Seems like the game is very unoptimised
You know how heavy rt is right?
Or it’s so advanced in terms of graphics (which it doesn’t seem like in the trailers) that is needs a 6090
Alan wake 2 at the same setting -> 90fps
@@Shahzad12357 cyberpunk pathrracing gets more fps than this game on 4090
I think it's a case of Pathtracing on a 4090 will do like 50-55fps at those settings without FG, but they can't say 60fps,... so they say use FG to breach to 60FPS (and it'll be higher than that ofc), while everyone seems to think this means the game will run at 30fps without FG, we will see very soon I tend to think it'll be sub60 for sure without FG but nowhere near 30fps baseline.
Go outside and see the sun rays irl. That's the best ray tracing anyone can ever get
and it is free for now XD
NOTHING is required. Just don't buy the game, it's that simple.
This is an awful prospect for the studio. Machine Games clearly hasn't thought this through
Yeah, I'm just passing on this. Even if I buy the 5080, I'm not supporting this.
so a game ive looked forward to over years i just dont buy and play it because the devs decide to put ray tracing required ? i dont think thats the answer
Glad I have Gamepass for this
if you can't RT - then the choice was made for you.
R.I.P. 16GB of system memory and 8GB of vram
Not yet as it at least still can run the game on the minimum requirements.
There is no excuse for not having more than 16gb ram theses days. For vram intel’s affordable gpus are coming soon
@@mikeramos91recently got another 16gb kit to get 32gb and it was only an extra $24 its well worth it
@@mikeramos91 It’s partially true if you still got a PC with 8GB RAM. Then you should go for 32GB and skip 16GB. But if you have 16GB RAM right now then you still can wait until games really require 32GB and then upgrade to either 32GB or 64GB.
16 GB has been dead for a couple years tho
This will be the norm now, Ray tracing was never for us. it was for the game devs. It makes making game easier by far, no need to bake all lighting. More and more games will just ignore the old way to save money and time.
it's sad.
@@Borneovi_Flier it's sad that developers can make games in a faster and easier way? isn't that what people have been wanting?
@@tomwatts9822 I dont recall people wanting 200 flops a year, having to pay thousands on a pc to barely reach 60fps and having all of that combined just to play a game that looks like it needs glasses but ok
Awesome, if it was "never for us", then they just made it easier for the customers to not buy their product.
"You wanna play this tech-demo? Pay $70-$80 for it, please..." Hahaha! what a joke bro 😂
@@tomwatts9822 did you mean lazier? Look at Silent Hill 2 remake or Alan Wake. Most of its "mods" were performance optimizations. Any game made with UE5 uses the same tech of letting lumen, nanite, and raytracing do all the heavy work of lighting with games becoming bloated multi-million dollar messes
Bad optimization like that should not be acceptable. Are developers that incompetent nowadays?
talentless too , every engine will become ue5 :P
I say this is OK optimization. Most other gamers use those same specs to run the game at 720p 30 FPS.
new devs don't know how to make a good code. they playing now with all the technology like a Lego, without thinking too much.
The gaming industry is in shambles oh my. From GPUs to the pc requirements adding frame gen just to hit 60fps to the closure of dozens of studios each year. 😂😂😂😂 also frame gen adds so much pc latency what’s the point of hitting 60fps with FG if the latency is astronomical?!
You're so right ! I completely agree with you, this is why I don't play modern games anymore, I only play retro games on emulators. :)
And that’s with dlss on performance. That means extra unsharp image (although in 4K dlss perf ain’t that bad) and then you get to 35ish frames and then FG, it’ll be terrible
It's why I barely play anything from the western AAA games industry.
With full pathtracing. Are we just being dense and ignoring that on purpose?
Its path tracing that requires frame gen. Yall are so uninformed
Reaching an all time low holy fuck
"Can it run Crysis?" now becomes "can it run Indie?"
difference is Crysis was actually a groundbreaking game in graphics. This is just cartoon looking standard fair game. Crysis to this day at max settings still looks as good as this game.
@@Toutvidsok
imo after crysis, it was can it run horizon forbidden west
@@Toutvids You are never going to get leaps in visual fidelity like that again. There was always going to be a point of diminishing returns as we approach photo realism and all improvements here on are going to seem minor to those who don't know where to look.
It's not that bad, most other games minimum requirement need lower gpu but it targets 720p 30. Indie Target 1080 60
No way to turn rays off, I wonder how that will affect reviews when you have no a/b comparison. Do you just look at it and pronounce it "good"? Oh look at the nice shiny pretty rays everywhere. So nice... Hmmm. Thanks for the heads up.
Can't wait to pay premium for ray tracing just to play boring cutscenes and engage in some gameplay (optional).
Exactly what i was thinking. It is insane . all those games wich are graphical so demanding turn out to be terrible games. Nice visuals but boring af gameplay.
You don't know that though
@@BastianRosenmüller Honestly those kind of games should be slapped with new Genre aka Interactive movie game or something.
@@griswo3272 You can kinda tell just from the short videos on the Steam page. Seems very much like Ryse son of Rome to me. It was visually impressive for the time but it was QTE, the game. This game seems to be mostly exploration and puzzle solving with some very basic combat here and there. Or like that Matrix game that never came out idk but yeah seems like a tech demo to me.
So true. Even Veilguard is a better game because at least it's an RPG.
How is it that developers think frame-gen to 60 is ok?
I imagine theses are all highly knowledgeable people with great technical understanding far beyond my spectrum who put these charts together. But why do we keep seeing this?
FG is useless to me, yeah it almost double the framerate but the input lag stay the same so if you get 30fps without FG, with FG you'll almost hit 60fps with 30fps input lag.
it is NOT, these games are made by the most incompetent woke trash that couldn't care less about optimising their game, i mean asscreed shadows apparently half of the developers are all interns, just rubbish.
i doubt these decisions come from the devs, the devs just do the testing and get the info
@@metalface_villain yea it‘s probably marketing but you‘d guess there‘s some sort of discussion between the two and a sign-off? Maybe the 60fps number was just more important if the game really is that heavy.
@@YannBOYERDev Both Nvidia and AMD recommend at least 50 FPS base for FG so i don't understand your complains.
Customer: But I don’t wanna use RT .
Machine games: what are you poor ? You can’t afford a 4080 or 4090 ?
Customer: I am .
I can afford a good GPU I just don't like RT.
Nobody has to buy rtx 4090 or 80. We don't need to Mslop Games and their game.
@@YannBOYERDev seems like gaming isn't for you. Ray tracing and path tracing is the future of gaming graphics.
@@YannBOYERDev You don’t like the best possible lighting available? You don’t like that games can now look photorealistic? You don’t like that devs can now spend their time on optimizing a game instead of wasting it on tedious chores like lighting?
@@thetranya3589if it's not affordable l fucking don't. This is like saying the future of gaming is VR... Ok then look at the specs you need to run such thing
Look forward to playing this in 5-10 years when the PCs catch up to the developers lack of restraint.
@@dogfrog9543 restraint from what? Optimization? None of these games have the visuals to justify the hardware requirements.
How do you know?
@@Akkbar21 know what? That these games don’t look good enough for the hardware demands? My eyes and brain can clearly tell.
@@PneumaticTire kinda crazy how people still cant tell if a game is a scam or not after countless flops
most graphically demanding games has always been like that, most people have new hardware and can only play older games.
games are pushing way to hard all kinds of graphics features and we still have LOD pop in, horribly short view distance of objects and foliage.
but sure, give us detailed uncanny valley characters with cringe animations and voice lines.
idSoftware historically never cared for reaching the most fps's ever, but to keep a consistent framerate target, that is why their games and engines are very stable and feel fast.
In the olden days they used to hard lock their engines at 60fps (because that was what most PC monitors displayed anyway...) but that ended with RAGE, they don't do that anymore.
But they still target their games to 60fps, is a target minimum not a maximum now, so yes the game will run above 60fps, if you have the hardware for it.
Also sadly, some people forgot and others don't know, that before Epic became a famous third party engine developer, it was idSoftware engines that powered most famous games around, HL1 and even HL2 Source Engine, were based on idTech, call of Duty, Medal of Honor just to mention a few, but there's plenty more.
IMO If there's one thing idSoftware is good at, is making FPS's and custom game engines for their games.
Btw the main guy that created Cryengine 2 (Crysis 1 engine) Tiago Sousa, is on the idSoftware engine team, so is not like they don't have known talent onboard.
Doom eternal ran on a damn toaster and doesn't have crazy requirements. It still looked great too! These other lazy devs just need to be shut down already.
8:22 No Daniel, that checks out. The more you crank up RT the more BVH structures need to be calculated, and that operation is not hardware accelerated. AMD actually published an interesting whitepaper on how UE5's Nanite (a technology that dynamically lowers polygon count with distance from the camera) is fundamentally incompatible with pre-baked BVHs and, sadly, the development of GPU hardware BHV calculation. Almost all modern game engines have something like Nanite, so it wasn't a stab at Epic in particular. But the crux of the matter is that this situation really complicates a gradual transition from raster lighting to RT lighting because polygon reduction with distance frees up a lot of shader power.
That said: The CPU requirements made zero sense. There is not a single instance that I'm aware, of outside turn based strategy games, where an AMD 12 core CPU out performes the equivalent 8 core model.
I have seen tests proving you are wrong. Any RT is the same cause once you turn it on the amount of BVH structures don't scale up in most games.
Is that cpu statement in reference to Warhammer? 😂
@@samgragas8467 If you only turn on RT for contact shadows then you only need BHVs for moving objects. If you turn on global illumination then you need to BVHs for everything. So if the engine doesn't scale that, and simply calculates all BHVs as soon as one RT feature is turned on then someone made the dumbest fckng blunder imaginable. But obviously: Once you go to global illumination, and only increase ray count and render resolution of reflections as the settings levels go up, then the CPU utilization is the same.
What is even the logic between making a game that alienates so much of your potential buyer base? I mean I assume even consoles will struggle to run this game at a stable 30 fps. Pure insanity.
You do know games on console can still run RT at 60fps right? Spider-Man 2 literally doesn't have a non-RT mode because their RT is so performant. Indiana Jones is running on the Doom Engine which set a precedent for optimized RT as well.
Consoles are meant to be the performance floor of the generation, if someone can't match their performance and capabilities 4 years by getting a mid range 6 year old card for a modern release then that is on them. Basically any entry level gaming PC built within the past 6 years could run this game at 60fps 1080p native which I think is plenty reasonable.
over 50% of steam has a gpu that's the minimum spec or higher
@@tomwatts9822 This game is gonna lose money even if it had low requirements. They are shooting whatever is left of their foot.
it’s a good thing that they force people to buy new hardware imagine if they still had to make games for the xbox 360 because they didn’t force people to switch you should be thanking them tbh
@@11cat123gotta love how whiney gamers are. They complain that devs are still making games for PS4 and they are holding back new releases, then 5 minutess later complain that a new game won't work on hardware from the last gaming generation.
I think people are overreacting. A 2060 for 1080p native, low settings @60 fps seems fine to me? Especially since we are talking some form or RT, which btw i don't know why people are surprised, we have been moving in this direction for a while now since most ue5 titles use software lumen by default with usually no option to turn it off. Also ID tech is incredibly performant and you don't have to use Full RT or PT as that is incredibly demanding in all titles, period. Non Path Traced requirements are more than reasonable especially since we are talking about targeting native resolutions at 60fps.
7:22 The discrepancy in the expected ray tracing performance between minimum requirement AMD and Nvidia GPUs may simply be due to the 2060 Super is the lowest Nvidia GPU that can *both* run RT *and* has 8GB+ VRAM. So the 2060S may be unnecessarily powerful, whereas the RX 6600 may be more what's actually the minimum.
I'm quite sure there is not much discrepancy between RX6600 and RTX 2060 on RT performance because RX6000 family was facing RTX3000 family (in other words RX6600 is more recent than RTX2060) and RT capabilities of RX6000 series is comparable to RTX2000 series which are both much weaker than RTX3000 family. Also RTX 2060 have very poor RT performance.
@@GuigEspritDuSage Yup. It just goes to show how the Nvidia mind share is affecting people's idea about AMD. RDNA2 has slightly better raster-to-RT performance ratio than Turing in usable workloads. It's not until you force Turing down to 20FPS that RDNA2 falls completely appart and starts hitting 7FPS or some shit. Also, Ampere and Lovelace have identical raster-to-RT ratio. As in, if a Lovelace card is 20% in raster than a given Ampere card, then it is also (only) 20% faster in RT. The big jump was Turing to Ampere. Unfortunately AMD did the exact same thing from RDNA2 to RDNA3, but rumors insist that RDNA4 is going to be the "Ampere moment" in RT uplift.
We already know that if 4090 mentioned in system requirements, the game is horribly optimized. Requiring 2k$ gpu to run is just disgusting.
That's not what the chart says, it says if you want complete max settings with full RT then a 4090 will be required, to be honest you will be surprised what cards will run at different settings, the beauty of PC gaming is the ability to choose to dial down or dial up different settings to get the performance your happy with, I feel sorry for console players as they clearly will not have a fun time with this
Lazy development slop in a nutshell.
A) "Just use DLSS/FSR/XeSS to overcome our poor optimizations if you wish anything more than 60FPS"
B) "Yeah, baking lighting really isn't our thing, we'll just use the extremely taxing and little effort way to enable RT on this"
Will definitely skip this one. :\
I agree with the 2nd point. But for your 1st point is not completely true. For the 1080p and 1440p non path-traced modes. They do not require upscaling or frame generation to reach 60fps. A 7700xt is weaker then a 6800xt so if you play at native 1440p 60fps with that card before, you will be able to play this game with the same settings.
Perfectly said. I hate modern gaming. And with RT, it doesn't even look any better than games made from 2014-2018.
At least Metro exodus made an entire seperate game version
you expect devs to do that? nah man, not gonna happen
If I don't want ray tracing (which a lot of people don't want to too) I just need to turn off ray tracing right ? Why do I need a ray-tracing able card to play the game ? I don't understand
@@ahihi7706 Because it’s how the game is made. It’s not optional.
@@ahihi7706 Because they're too lazy to implement a non ray-tracing lighting solution.
@@ahihi7706 because that's more work for the devs.
60fps native res targets are awesome to see
game requires at least 6 year old GPU to run! Honestly I'm surprised it has taken this long, back in the day you'd get games requiring hardware features of GPUs that were no more than two years old. Now THAT was frustrating.
The real crime here is that GPU value is currently so bad that this is an obstacle rather than a push forward. Battlemage having something relatively affordable is a good start, hoping AMD at least also follows suit with the low end of the 8000 series being affordable. I've given up on cheaper nvidia GPUs lol.
Back in the day graphics were evolving at a steady pace. This game doesn't look all that great. The cpu req seems even more egregious since this isn't some huge open world game that takes things to the next level
@@acf8888 Yeah, in some ways I feel like we're pretty stagnant in terms of actual visual output, but requirements climb as the methods we're getting those graphics at are far more demanding.
The CPU requirements make some sense though given the require RT nature of the game. I mean they're still too high for "high settings' but I bet if you turn down shadows to medium or something it'll help dramatically and a 5600x or something will be ok for high/medium 60fps.
We've reached a point where higher, optimized graphics are a substantial time cost. Devs should stick to the same graphics until the tech allows for easy adoption. This whole "you need a spaceship to run this unoptimized garbage" isn't a great selling point.
Yes this steady push up in requirements would be less insulting if GPUs weren’t so expensive and in the case of NVIDIA VRAM gimped.
@@Torso6131 I didn't realize the min target was 60 fps. 3600 isn't bad in that case. 3600 equivalent Intel is a 9600k though. Not sure why they would list a 10700K for 60 fps.
Jawa is nice it is like 30% more expensive than ebay after shipping!
Same with Displate stuff. They can give you all the discounts in the world, but the shipping price makes it more expensive than the total for buying posters elsewhere.
We're 3 generations into ray tracing and it still tanks performance so badly that it needs frame gen and DLSS to compensate. I get that it saves developers time, but maybe it's just not as viable as Jensen would have us believe.
its not viable at all. Its a scam to get dummies to pay more for nothing
It's path tracing not ray tracing, god the majority of this comment section is so dense
I like the detailed system requirements chart but for me, it's one of those games I'm going to play in 6 - 8 years once I upgrade to a 7080.
This looks like RDR2 at best, but has hardware requirements way beyond even the max quality settings of that 2018 game, which could run on the Xbox One (at a 30ish FPS for sure, but it running at all on what's considered the weakest of the pure home consoles). And at worst on PC, its minimum was 2-3gb vram cards, not 8gb barely able to run the lowest quality setting at 1080p 60p. (and these hw requirements were made before they added Denuvo before launch)
Before watching the video, I'll just say that there are games that already default to only having Ray Tracing ability, such as UE5 games like Avatar, even though it operates in a software ray tracing mode, the game itself only uses Ray Tracing, so the concept isn't entirely new in that regard, but I think it is not well known, and this will only increase (as it should) over time, it was expected, to be honest.
Exactly. As PC hardware features progress, of course there will be new requirements that rely on that hardware to run the game. This isn't the first time this has happened either because there was a time where a dedicated GPU was a requirement when people would normally render the game with just a CPU and a software renderer.
The fact that consoles have RT hardware also enables developers to make this sort of decision if they deem it necessary for their game.
@@sd19delta16 Exactly, and I will echo the requirement of Mesh Shaders, it happened when Alan Wake 2 came out, cards without hardware mesh shader support were not supported. As technology progresses, and games require new features, it is natural, and inevitable for new requirements to be made.
We all knew this was bound to happen sooner or later
Yep, this is what happens when Nvidia pays game devlopers to favor their hardware, but the funny thing is that it's still going to run like absolute crap on something like an RTX 2060 or 2070.
Look...if game devs can´t make a game on 60 FPS ultra without DLSS on UPSCALED 4K for best GPU out there we all maybe should have wait with all that ray-tracing. Can´t imagine buying 4090 and then having to play with settings :D :D
This game's DOA.
It's been obvious that this is coming. Half the games that TPU has done performance tests for this year had software RT always on. The 2060 is a 6 year old entry level card. Could you image thinking a gtx 560 would run new releases in 2016 at 60fps, when it was 6 years old.
But the fact that the 8 year old GTX 1070 still can run Black Myth Wukong, Alan Wake 2 or S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 2 is proof that newer GPUs age hold up better than older generations before the GTX 1000 series.
@@infernal-toadwell it barely gets 30 some fps on low settings 1080p. After all it cant run AW2 without upscaling.
@@niebuhr6197 how well do think a gtx 270 was doing in games released in 2016 when it was 8 years old? Way worse than the 1070 does in 2024 games.
New releases have always pushed hardware available when they launched. Outside of the pandemic years. But global supply shortages causing a console generation, that started off weak for when it laucnhced, to get an extra 2-3 years of support is rare. It's easy to pick out the people who started PC gaming after 2020.
Was Avatar not also mandatory of Raytracing? Because it was not able to switch of RT.
I really wish studios would finally realize that going above 60 fps is priority for many players instead of some demanding fancy ass graphics. Once I got a 165hz screen I can no longer play comfortably on 60 fps, it's way too choppy.
Oh no. You CANT?! Sure you can buddy.
lol
1st world problems
@@Akkbar21 nope it feels like a powerpoint
@JohnSmith-ro8hk yeah and games are 1st world entertainment so it makes sense
DLSS 3 Frame Gen required to reach 60 FPS? Do they not understand how Frame Gen works at all? Unless they are saying 60 FPS and then you turn on frame gen to try and get up to around 120 or so.
You will never double your fps with FG, that is impossible. 60 --> 100 at best case scenerio.
@@bilbobaggins8794 ive seen cases where when I lock my fps it’ll literally double from 60 to 120
@@stowyck Yes. I meant you cant double uncapped fps, where gpu usage is around %99.
Theoritically speaking i think you can double it if the game is very cpu limited , however even then from the examples i've seen it's not a consistent 2× fps
@@lynackhilou4865 That is why I said %99 gpu usage
Its a Free market and a Free Country, If you don't like the requirements, don't buy the game
Yeah, the non stop complaining is something else at times
Anybody can play this game 10 years later with their "modern hardware"
For a game that uses ray tracing as a base requirement, this is both a good thing and a bad thing, let's see how things turn out.
There's absolutely nothing good about it. Ray tracing is there to make up for the sub par graphics in games.
@ZenAndPsychedelicHealingCenter
I know that forcing RT in itself in the current market is mostly negative, but, if they are gonna force ray tracing, might as well do it the right way (hardware based,) for example, look at metro exodus, it got an RT exclusive version and it was a success.
Does not matter what the requirements are if nobody's going to play the game. :DDDD
It's a day one release on game pass.
@@reallyeffingcooltechnodude So you saying people will eat fecal matter if it is free?
@@reallyeffingcooltechnodude So you saying some people will eat 5h1t if it is free?
@@MEMETIZERas a sales person, yes.
This is a commercial for that website disguised as a discussion about Indiana Jones smh
Now go to Steam’s charts and see what percentage of gamers even own computers that meet the “RECOMMENDED” requirements for full ray tracing. They just launched a game that only 0.7% of gamers can play at these specs. (I’m pulling that number out of thin air but you get my point.) Talk about doomed to failure.
Those Steam numbers are always off do to Counter Strike players with potato computers.
@@thetranya3589 which are still the majority of people on Steam. How does that change anything?
So? Do you need to run with "FULL RAY TRACING"?
4090 alone has more then your 0.7%. Hardware requirements are bs anyway
@@Toutvidshis point is that those aren’t the people that will be buying a single player Indiana Jones game.
The thing about this is in addition. To being easier - it uses less resources. Ray Tracing over regular lighting is expensive. If there’s only Ray tracing it’s far less expensive - just more so than baked lighting
"Full Raytracing" is Path Tracing right?
This explains the GPU Hardware Raytracing Requirement.
its Black Myth Wukong all over again, it has Path Tracing aswell and ran like shit.
That's what I saw someone in the comments mention...
In technical terms, path tracing and ray tracing are the same thing, I don't know why people started making them two different things. So the term Full Ray Tracing probably means what you think of when you think of path tracing.
I'd assume, otherwise what they are saying is that the RTX4090 won't even get 30fps at 4K native.
@@lharsayi guess I will play 1440p high medium raytracing on my 7900xtx can we set it to low
@@lharsay If it is anything like Cyberpunk's path tracing, the 4090 will get around 20 or so fps at 4k native.
It's sad to see Daniel's videos have this awful of a comment section.
Ray Tracing is ubiquitous now, iGPU's have it for several generations, and the cheapest cards that run this game at 1080p/60 are like 150$, double the cost of the game.
Furthermore, the game seems to run well on it's non path tracing mode, 7900XT being enough for native 4k/60 is very good. Path tracing being included as a forward looking mode you can enjoy when replaying the game in the future is also a positive addition, there's no need to whine about PT mode's performance when you can play without it.
The RTX 2060 being the bare minimum card in new AAA games is more than reasonable considering it’s a six year old card. And this always happens whether it’s PC or it’s consoles. Developers will eventually drop the older tech to pursue the advantages new tech gives them which does unfortunately mean leaving some people behind, and I get that sucks. But that’s just the way it has to be if we want games to progress technologically and that’s the way it’s always been. It’s fantastic that people have been able to coast on their 10 series GTX cards for as long as they have, I coasted on my 1070 for much longer than even I anticipated. But to expect devs to always cater to nearly decade old PC hardware is just absolutely spoiled baby behavior.
There’s many examples of games having absolutely bloated specs and being unoptimized, we don’t know if this applies to Indiana Jones until the game actually comes out, but this is MachineGames working in iD Tech which is probably the most performant engine on the market. I expect the game to be very scalable, which is what we should want and expect out of a PC game. My 3080 probably won’t be able to run this game with path tracing at the settings and frame rate I want, am I throwing a hissy fit that my four year old card will struggle to run a clearly experimental high end future proofed feature? No. It just is what it is, either I wait to upgrade or I’m content to run the game without it and the game will still look pretty good.
I mean if it blows our socks off when it comes to visuals I'm all in.
But it probably won't
do we really care about the visuals so much? what about the gameplay or the fact that it's an indiana jones games, which i don't know about the rest but i personally don't give a fook about? what does it matter if the visuals are out of this world if the game is mid or if nothing on the market can even handle those graphics?
You can look at the trailer it looks about the same graphically as uncharted on PS4. With these requirements it's gonna run like shit on consoles as well. This game is gonna bomb
@@gregghuge3270 Nah it looks way better than Uncharted 4,I played all of them and this game graphically looks good.
Fuck graphics man, I'd happily go back to 360 era visuals if we just got games that ran well and played well.
@@metalface_villainNo one cared about the visuals until these PC specs requirements were revealed. The game just doesn't look good enough to justify these requirements.
For the 4k ultra preset, the requirement in performance would actually be the 4070ti but it has 12GB of VRAM. From a video of a benchmark guy that has been taken down due to embargo we see him using a 4080 super at 4k ultra non full rt and reaching 96 ish fps in a Baghdad like city but having 15gb allocated and 13.6Gb used on msi afterburner. So i guess it's that. Also that video made me quite happy because i was feared being a single player game the game would run slower than a fast fps focused like doom but it runs pretty well. Before the 4080super he used a 3060ti and reached 68fps at 1440p high native. GREAT
Only commenter with a brain in this comment section
ive got a stroke reading this
This is the WORST part of PC gaming.
I can't run a game like that.
What GPU do you have?
Big ups for the very slick sponsor segue :)
i7 13900k?, did i missed something from intel 13th gen?
lol
Good catch. There's no such thing.
It's either i7 13700k or i9 13900k.
My guess is the latter. They screwed up.
And at 3.0 GHz? Compared to an AMD CPU at 4.7 GHz? Oh... it can boost up to 5.80 GHz.
@@wolveric0 yes you did. This is Intels secret weapon for destroying the CPU demand that ray tracing induces. Only serious gamerZ know about it. fRaMeS wIn GaMeS.
@@zdspider6778The 13900K boost up to 6Ghz. 13700K is pretty much 12900K with overclock (i have both) Edit:it was 6Ghz for the KS, 5,8Ghz for the K.
Forcing raytracing? Yeah no, no sale.
IMHO, needless. These games today are so focused on the looks and there is no substance. And we are forcing these upgrades for GPUs that don't seem to have any tangible benefit as we are still at 60 fps. I'm sure there will be mods that could change this, but still, I think this is ridiculous.
no money to hire lighting artist.
Just cancelled my pre-order. Got a 7900XT last year that crushes everything. RT however cost is still way too high on perf. Appearently no FSR either 😕 I will wait till we get some benches.
Idk how this is supposed to run on a console
If you have a 7900xt you definitely could run this on at least 1440p. The requirements to the right are for path tracing which is why they are so ridiculous
Who preorders games anymore? That's insane. There hasn't been a single game in the past 7 years that releases finished. Just let the game cook for awhile and pick it up on it's first Steam sale.
@@JeremyBell Many people do, gamers either don't care or have stockholm syndrome
I also own a 7900XT (absolute beast of a GPU) and suddenly lost all my hype in this game. This recent trend where games have always on RT with no option to turn it off needs to stop!
Uh oh. I have exactly the lowest spec PC for this, but if it really runs at 60fps with raytracing, then that's gonna be a lot better performance than most modern games without RT.
This reminds me of the time when pixel shader started being a requirement back in the early 2000's. Or 3D accelerator required back in the late 90's. We knew it was coming sooner or later.
This is exactly correct. People didn’t whine about it back then, though, they were excited for progress.
@@thetranya3589 back then it was progamming marvels, software engineering at its finest, right now modern games can barely run on modern hardware... lazy ue5 devs ruining gaming
No not really. Ray tracing adds nearly nothing to games. It certainly doesn't add realism, it looks incredibly fake. And frame generation is a regression, it adds latency and worse graphics to games.
@@thetranya3589 the reason people whine, is for a couple of reasons:
Generational uplift has gotten worse
Nvidia who has the best RT has been greedy with vram and price
Cpu generational improvement has stalled except for 9800x3d
AMD does not have great RT
@@thetranya3589Compare the graphics jump from 90s to early 2000s and the "jump" from 2016 to now
I would wager the 3 Not fully ray traced modes line up pretty close with consoles.
Minimum = Series S
Recommended = Series X
Ultra = PS5 Pro
Or actually maybe PS5 Pro will be more analogus to the minimum fully path traced mode, as it's a better spec match than non-FRT Ultra
That's crazy because the 2060 can barely do RT lol
Which is why their "full RT" minimum requirement GPU is the RTX 4070.
I think the 6600 isn't the fastest one either.
But it's quite an experience to see my 6600 as minimum quite often 😮
And in this case even a faster CPU.
My old 2060 would cry when I told it to render a single gigaray. It looked like crap, too, because I had to crank up DLSS as well.
@@beirchExactly I dont know how people aren't understanding this. Non path tracing modes aren't using frame gen
If its done well then its actually doing pretty well, I can play Metro Exodus Enhanced Edition 1080p high settings with Raytracing and I have a mostly stable 60fps, without the RT setting enabled it goes to like 80-90
If I have the choice I often end up disabling RT features in game just to save on energy consumption.
Those RT cores sure suck up a lot of juice.
why do they target 5-10% of the market?
They don't. The most popular GPU is the RTX 3060 which is already faster than the RTX 2060S which needed for a 1080p 60FPS experience.
Hmm, I don't think it's that bad actually. the 2060 is not a huge requirement these days, and according to the Req's the 2060 will be able to run native 1080p at 60 fps. I think what freaks people out is that it says "Low preset", but remember "low" in a 2024 game does not have to mean "ugly". Take a look at Alan Wake 2 on low native 1080p, I would not call that an ugly looking game, it's just we know that it can be way more "pretty".
Another game to go on my "not even worth pirating" list!
It's not worth that.
Great video! Yes i would love to see this game benchmarked. If nothing else to see where future games are going.
jacking up requirements and requiring specific hardware just cause industry has gotten too greedy to design games in a way where they are optimized.
You can make games look this good without any ray tracing lmfao, galee
I look forward to more games like this. Finally, we can start to see some true Next-Gen games.
What's with these games with insane requirements that don't even look that good?
Imagine spending 1k on a gpu just to hit 60fps with DLSS. Criminal.
Daniel are you testing POE2? Pleeeease do it. Thanks
Heh my $1500 build I just bought a little bit over a year ago can only play at recommended settings (Its a 13th gen i5, with a 4070). What a world we live in, so much for longevity.
i7 10700k for MINIMUM specs is crazy
Guess my 9600k would struggle to get to 30fps in 1080p
What a time to be a PC gamer
It's because a 10700k has 8 cores with 16 threads. A 9700k has 8 cores and 8 threads. I imagine the hyperthreading is important.
Yeah, devs are always full of shit with their CPU requirement claims. I have a 10600k, not that I was going to get this trash game, but guess I can't now even if I wanted to! LOL
@@squeakytot yeah but they recommend a 3600 for amd side and a 10700k is a 9900k basically and the 9900k is pretty much 30% faster than a 3600. I feel that this game will show a preference to amd cpus
I don't understand why the requirements for AMD is so lower compared to its competitors. From CPU to GPU, until now am frustrated to look system requirements on NVIDIA and Intel CPU, i feel like its not good place they have kept it😢😢😢
@raanans.a8992 Fair. I wonder if it'll be fine with a 9900k. 3600 is still 6c/12t, which is 4 threads more than a 9700k. It makes sense that the requirement is "lower" based on the idea that the Ryzen parts for that generation always had more threads against the same tier Intel until the Intel 12th gen.
I think the only surprise is how long it took. The 20 series is 6 years old!
this game is indiana jones and the temple of doomed. they Modern Audienced it
Cant wait for Indiana to tell me about his HE/HIM pronouns for half an hour.
As long as it's not about a "strong independent woman," or some other prodigy taking over like with Spider-Man 2, I think we should be fine.
Honestly, I think they chose an RT baseline as an excuse for poor sales. That or Nvidia made it worth their while.
I mean this had to happen at some point. As someone with a high end PC ray tracing/path tracing can be absolutely transformative when done right.
My prediction is, by the console generation after the next, ray tracing will be the lighting standard in the industry and wont be something you can turn off.
I'm happy with my older games like Witcher 3 and so on. Who needs these, seriously?
Why would we not need new games? This looks great. But the "requirements" are madness. You don't even turn frame gen on unless you are already at at least 50fps.
Witcher 3 was also hard to run back then from what I remember.
Witcher 3 has RT now. I’m happy with it on.
@@Funnky It wasn't very well optimized but as patches came out it got better and better, I could run the game on low/medium on an i5 760, 750Ti and 7GB of ram at a pretty stable 60fps outside of novigrad. Try using a CPU this much older than the game in modern times (especially UE5 game)
@@Tom3kkk What are you talking about? I5 760 is 4.5 years older than Witcher 3. A very close comparison right now is Ryzen 5600X which is now over 4 years old. You can't be suggesting that 5600X is no longer a viable CPU and it doesn't run modern games, lol.
And in terms of GPU, 750 Ti was released a year before Witcher 3 so it was a modern GPU at that point (it was a pretty low-end one bu you used low/mid settings as you've said so it makes sense).
Witcher 3 was a very demanding game at the time it released. Especially on high/ultra settings, it was used to benchmark new hardware for years. I don't know why people are trying to rewrite history.
Dont forget to vet whatever seller you are choosing on jawa. You will get scammed if you arent lucky or careful, luckily jawa has a decent reimbursement policy which saved me.
Nothing about this chart actually makes sense once you dig into the details. I believe that "mistakes were made" and the only way to know how it will perform is to wait for reviewers to test it on a variety of configurations.
Exactly my thoughts as well. It will probably perform like a current demanding title hitting 120 or so fps with a 4080 at 1440p dlss quality with frame generation.
Pretty sure Metro Exodus pc enhanced requires a RT capable card too.
But this game is doing 'full ray tracing' or 'path tracing', so yes, you need a modern or somewhat system. The 2060 came out in 2018, 6 years ago. People complaining "my 8 year ago gpu (1000 series or older) should still be fine!!!"
I think it's a case of Pathtracing on a 4090 will do like 50-55fps at those settings without FG, but they can't say 60fps,... so they say use FG to breach to 60FPS (and it'll be higher than that ofc), while everyone seems to think this means the game will run at 30fps without FG, we will see very soon I tend to think it'll be sub60 for sure without FG but nowhere near 30fps baseline.
I'm betting on it can run at 45 fps which is "no man's land" so that's why they say turn on frame gen. But that's for the Nvidia sponsored "burn a hole in your desk because your computer exploded" settings...
Path tracing in Cyberpunk with a 4090 at native 4k ran at about 20 fps without upscaling. With upscaling it gets up to 40-ish. So FG up to 60 makes sense for the stated specs if it is using a similar tech. Still not a great way to play a game, but it hits to golden marketing number.
I was waiting for this to happen.
Most people don't understand that the real value of RT isn't visual quality, in fact it's more of a mixed bag in that regard, but that it's saving developers a ton of time when it comes to lighting and everything that's required for that.
But as long as games support non-RT systems, these big cost advantages are simply not there.
I'm curious how the game will do, especially with the, for their time, great predecessors.
It'll be hard to have a risky sequel plus an artificially reduced number of potential players.
I hope Doom Dark Ages isn’t like this. Indiana Jones is in the ID Tech Engine.
I'd say expect higher requirements for DOOM too because they are not targeting PS4/Xbox One hardware anymore.
Seeing these is scaring me for GTA 6
They can't afford to lose the potato systems, it is gonna run easily at 1080p low.
based on all these specs, i wonder if Steam gonna get a whole lot of refund requests based on game won't launch, or won't run well issues
upgraded to a z690 12700kf combo + rx6800 exactly a year ago. No plans of playing this game but good to know I meet the recommended specs.
I have a 4070 and I can play Cyberpunk 2077 @ 1440p with Path Tracing RT and everything maxed out and it's playable. Hard to believe that this looks better than that.
@Daniel Owen I would definitely be interested in a benchmark video for
this game!
The 'devs' are more concerned with other things. They can't be bothered creating a good and optimised game.
Replace "devs" with "management" and you have the correct assumption. Developers who have the capability to work around engine inefficiencies are expensive and the process takes a lot of time. And what is worse: You never know if you're wasting your time. Sometimes a long cycle of careful analysis and coding leads to very small gains. Other times you get a massive boost. Other times you get a massive boost in only some parts of the game, so the FPS goes from 60 to 300 and back to 60 depending on which direction you look in. And all of this is "incompatible" with a management style that boils down to "Plug numbers into a spread sheet".
these requirements feel like they are just thrown together without much thought. Remember how awful and demanding STALKER 2 system requirement was for 4k @ 60 FPS ? Well, I'm getting 110-140 FPS @ 4k DLSS Quality + Frame gen with nexus engine.ini tweak mods and BenchmarKing optimization guide on my weak ass i5-10400F with a TUF 4080 Super. It's never that bad, they just over estimate everything and blindly put out these requirements
Well Bethesda owns Machine games and Id software now. Could be Todd from Marketing made the Req's 😀
More reason NOT to buy this game
Thank God I have GamePass.. I should be able to run it tho.. most likely
What are the other reasons? Because Todd has his hands in it?
I heard this game was the best indiana jones game made by far
I mean, it's not Creator Engine, soooo, pretty good reason TO buy the game
L take
I think we should remember that Ray tracing can be heavy on the CPU as well which would explain why the CP requirements go up as the raytracing requirements go up
I just don't get it why game requirement keep increasing 🗿
and miost of them don't looks better than few years ago other games.
@diuran1919 yes
push sales of newer cards
@@mikeramos91 That doesn't make game studios any more money.
Machinegames is clearly going for a state of the art visual makeup for Indy. First real fully ray traced title which environments were designed with accompanying techniques in mind. This is a good thing.
On one hand the gaming community hates on the Xbox Series S for holding up the technological advancement of the current gen titles but when the developers try to create a game with high system requirements floor the uproar is all the same. Gamers once again show that they do not know what they want and very easily forget that games are a commodity item and nobody is required to purchase them. Nevermind the game not being out for the public yet as it still might be very scalable and playable on the lower end systems. People have already made up their mind which sucks because it shows that they are not ready for truly next gen titles.
Required hardware ray-tracing is just... frustrating. Very frustrating.
It doesn't exactly effect me, because I have a decently ray-tracing-capable system, but most of the world doesn't.
Edit - Going off of the replies, seems like it's a 50/50. But that's still a lot of people imo. And that would just be the people who use Steam and take part of the statistics stuff
So that means the game is (to my knowledge) locked off to most (edit-50% of) people unless they play it on console, but even then- it'll probably be very disappointing graphically (on console).
Edit - Also, just realized the *CPU* requirements. I have a 7700XT, but a R7 5700x o_o bro. At least I'm between the minimum and recommended, but still.
Edit 2 - I imagine my settings like this
Preset: Medium/Low (if it allows that)
Res: 1440p
Upscaling: Quality
FPS - 60-90
It's not terrible, but I have better settings and performance on Cyberpunk 2077! Idk. This whole thing is just- sickeningly laughable.
Edit 3 - Idk, maybe I and others are being overdramatic. But a forced hardware raytracing just *feels wrong.* It feels like the 4090 only came out two years ago and now this game looks like it'll give it a run for its money. *Damn.*
It's possible for lower-end folks to play it, but... idk. We will see when the game drops. I'm seriously worried about the quality, FPS, and overall performance for everyone, whether they have a 3060, 7700xt, or 4090.
Last I checked the Steam hardware surveys, most gamers on Steam right now have an RTX 3060 Ti.
Thank Nvidia for that. Also thank them for upscaling frame generation injection into games.
Its like Alan Wake 2 and Mesh Shaders, a lot of people still have an RX580, whcih doesnt support Meshn Shaders and made the game run at like 1-3 FPS, so it locked A LOT of people from playing it (which is why it failed, rather than only being on Epic or no Physical Edition). If they start adding RT to the games without it being option, it will lock a lot of people from playing them.
let them do this, the game will flop cuz of the reason you mentioned. do these people think that all of a sudden everyone will go buy a 40 series card or whatnot just to play an indiana jones game? xD
Actually about 50% of the systems on the latest Steam hardware survey have GPUs that would meet the minimum requirements for this game. More people are on capable RT hardware than you think.