The Last of Us Part I PC Port Receives 77% negative ratings on Steam, due to poor optimization
Click here to post a comment for The Last of Us Part I PC Port Receives 77% negative ratings on Steam, due to poor optimization on our message forum
cucaulay malkin
Don't even have to check who paid for this to happen. This time they sabotaged their own hardware on steam deck too ? lol
Spets
TheDeeGee
See the 4070 Ti 12GB is just fine, it's developers that need to get their heads out of their asses.
Vlooi
You are really getting old and tired with this anti-AMD train. Time to get off....
Horus-Anhur
The moment people saw the Iron Galaxy logo, we knew we were in for trouble.
aufkrawall2
Ultimate responsibility lies with Sony though. It's this kind of bad decision-making that will get them crushed by Microsoft.
SpajdrEX
It's AMD optimized game, which means, let's make the game to use at least 16GB VRAM, so any 3080(Ti), 4070Ti will sucks 😀:D
cucaulay malkin
Every AMD sponsored game these days launches with a vram leak. Not a coincidence.
It'll come back to bite their cusomers it the ass though, when 4070 launches with 12g and 7800xt with 16g, their precious 6700xt's 12g will crash at 2560x1440 and higher.
Horus-Anhur
Yes, because every game that uses more than 8Gb of vram, like your 3060Ti has, must be poorly optimized.
cucaulay malkin
What ? I don't even know who you are.
But if you're looking for the information on the subject, an easy way to begin is to check release notes for game patches. There are usually vram leak fixes/nvidia-specific optimizations in amd sponsored games after gpu tests are on YT channels already . At few reputable sites like computerbase.de do updates after the patches, but that is beyond what people want to be fed on YT. Sensationalism sells, and people gladly accept paying for broken games in advance.
Kaarme
AMD is still a multi-billion company and has been in the market from 1969, only a single year later than Intel. Jensen Huang was still sucking a lollipop when AMD was already designing electronics. And now you are saying AMD is such an insanely incompetent commercial enterprise that they are actually paying other companies to hurt AMD products? Don't you realise how silly that sounds?
It shouldn't be a shock to you that most games these days are released with big or small problems. The two home consoles are running AMD hardware, yet even that doesn't save PC ports, when running on AMD based PCs, from problems. Sometimes those ports work better on Nvidia graphics cards, despite the original obviously have been AMD optimised due to being a console design. That's simply because Nvidia dominates the PC gaming market, so the third-rate company doing the PC porting pays more attention to Nvidia compatibility. Nevertheless, those companies try to spend as little money in their operation as possible, and the results speak for themselves. It's the same old story in any industry.
coth
It's not necessarily the game is bad, it's just devs with poor skills and low qualification for the job. Guess the studio that has been doing the port is done now.
Loobyluggs
This is all about Joel, don't believe the hype.
toyo
That's not the question, the question is how are these games that want so much VRAM better in visual fidelity than games that run on 8GB.
Where is the progress we get for the requirement increase?
schmidtbag
I really don't understand how games like this get released. If this were the first installment of the game and within a month or two of console releases, I'd say it's BS but definitely understandable, in the sense that the devs just didn't have the time to optimize. But they had plenty of time to get this right; it's not a highly anticipated game, so there was no benefit in rushing it out. Perhaps they didn't pay the devs enough to optimize, but there is very obviously a much greater loss in revenue when the game just isn't sellable.
I wonder if this game might actually perform better in Linux than Windows - Valve provides a pre-compiled shader cache for Linux (I'm pretty sure they don't provide one for Windows).
Horus-Anhur
In a way, we the gamers are also to blame. We continue to buy broken games on release. Even with pre-orders.
Gaming companies are not being punished by consumers, for making bad games.
Denial
Gamers in general don't know what's good for them long term. Honestly, people in general don't - they think short term. They'll complain but they'll support it anyway. It's like that in everywhere.
Semi-unrelated but I can't wait for the Microsoft Gamepass/Mass Merger to come back and bite all the gamers in the ass, 5 years or so from now. Going to be great when Microsoft jacks the game pass fee up to like $30 a month, they own all the studios and lots of gamers for the past 5-10 years haven't purchased any real games just been gaming passing it and now they have to pay that fee to play anything lol
Horus-Anhur
Wise words.
And in the case of MS and Gamepass, we already have signs of that.
This week MS ended the 1 month trial. This trial had a lot of limitations, but it was a great way to try the service and play games for free, for a whole month.
Pryme
They had 3 months trial that was really good back then, ended up to 1 month until terminated. Business as usual. As I know MS, I ensure that they will stick the knife in the back of the gamers, is just a matter of time.
This situation with Last of Us, that I would like to play one day, is why I no longer buy and play games at launch. Lets wait until is nice and easy on performance.
Ghosty
Same happened with The Division 2. Crashes after 5 or 10 minutes. It was never fixed.
