So are the devs going to optimize it for "low end" and "mid range" hardware?The game on its own looks interesting but this horrible optimization scares away.How come I can play all previous AAA games like Control,Far cry 5,etc on maximum settings but this ♥♥♥♥ barely gives 40fps on lowest(according to videos on youtube, didn't test it myself)?This looks like an unfunny joke since Prey(another game from this dev company with very similar level of graphics) runs perfectly at over 60fps on max. graphics
What happened,dear Arkane studio,why did you downgrade the performance of your games this.much?And by the way IIRC Prey was made on the same engine... Seriously,I need explanation

If you can play Control on maximum settings, then you will run this game flawlessly.
It has frame drops in some areas, but in the majority of the game you will run it at 60+ fps.
I have finished both Control and Deathloop with an RX 580 8 GB and a Ryzen 5 2600.

Originally posted by Laicus:

Originally posted by $ D@rk Re@per $:

Do you know what are "complex" graphics? Doesn't seem so.Deathloop is unoptimized joke of a game,period.6GB VRAM usage on minimal settings is NOT normal.Not a single game from 2020 or earlier requires this much and quite a lot have FAR better graphics

It's you don't understand the meaning of the words "more complex than". Reread my post more carefully, and maybe it will reach you. Game does not require 6 GB VRAM, I have no problems playing on a GPU with 4 GB VRAM and with High textures. Optimization is not perfect, but it's not bad either.

1.it's literally said that 6gb is required minimum
2.if you have a 6gb card it will eat 6gb
3.your game is using RAM because your GPU has not enough VRAM
4.how are the graphics more complex?are you kidding me dude?whats so special about it?

Originally posted by TestaMatta89:

If you can play Control on maximum settings, then you will run this game flawlessly.
It has frame drops in some areas, but in the majority of the game you will run it at 60+ fps.
I have finished both Control and Deathloop with an RX 580 8 GB and a Ryzen 5 2600.

No I won't.But yes I can play Control on maximum with decent fps and no stutters/freezes.Your card has 8GB VRAM which is quite A LOT.My GPU doesn't even give 60fps on fricking LOWEST settings

Originally posted by $ D@rk Re@per $:

1.it's literally said that 6gb is required minimum
2.if you have a 6gb card it will eat 6gb
3.your game is using RAM because your GPU has not enough VRAM
4.how are the graphics more complex?are you kidding me dude?whats so special about it?

No matter what is written, the main thing is that the game works fine on a weak mobile GPU with 4 GB VRAM, with High textures and a resolution 2580x1080, without fps drops, stutters and crashes, and in 1920x1080 the performance is much higher, in this resolution you can play normally even on GTX 1050 Ti. In DEATHLOOP, the locations are much larger than in Prey, and have more objects, more detailed textures, more NPCs, these are more complex scenes. Game is normally optimized, your cries are not justified.

Originally posted by Laicus:

Originally posted by $ D@rk Re@per $:

1.it's literally said that 6gb is required minimum
2.if you have a 6gb card it will eat 6gb
3.your game is using RAM because your GPU has not enough VRAM
4.how are the graphics more complex?are you kidding me dude?whats so special about it?

No matter what is written, the main thing is that the game works fine on a weak mobile GPU with 4 GB VRAM, with High textures and a resolution 2580x1080, without fps drops, stutters and crashes, and in 1920x1080 the performance is much higher, in this resolution you can play normally even on GTX 1050 Ti. In DEATHLOOP, the locations are much larger than in Prey, and have more objects, more detailed textures, more NPCs, these are more complex scenes. Game is normally optimized, your cries are not justified.

you are lying,1050ti barely runs this ♥♥♥♥ according to videos on utube
2580x1080?u are joking

Originally posted by $ D@rk Re@per $:

you are lying,1050ti barely runs this ♥♥♥♥ according to videos on utube
2580x1080?u are joking

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FPkAo7Fu_6Y
In FHD, without an upscale, GTX 1050 Ti gets 40-50 fps at Very Low and 35-45 fps at Low, and this is a test, apparently, before the update that improved performance. Approximately the same result (even slightly higher) is obtained on a mobile GTX 1650 Ti in a resolution 2580 x 1080, while setting textures to High does not affect performance, the main thing is that there is at least 16 GB RAM. There are places where fps drops to 30-35, but there are not many of them.

Originally posted by Laicus:

Originally posted by $ D@rk Re@per $:

you are lying,1050ti barely runs this ♥♥♥♥ according to videos on utube
2580x1080?u are joking

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FPkAo7Fu_6Y
In FHD, without an upscale, GTX 1050 Ti gets 40-50 fps at Very Low and 35-45 fps at Low, and this is a test, apparently, before the update that improved performance. Approximately the same result (even slightly higher) is obtained on a mobile GTX 1650 Ti in a resolution 2580 x 1080, while setting textures to High does not affect performance, the main thing is that there is at least 16 GB RAM. There are places where fps drops to 30-35, but there are not many of them.

Well my gtx 1060 3gb also runs it at 40fps on lowest settings.And this IS NOT GOOD for this kind of GPU.Judging by graphics I expected stable 60fps on high-highest
This.is.bad.optimization.
Never had to turn down everything to lowest in any game before
Hell I have 40-50fps in RDR2 on a mix of medium and high settings...

Originally posted by $ D@rk Re@per $:

Well my gtx 1060 3gb also runs it at 40fps on lowest settings.And this IS NOT GOOD for this kind of GPU.Judging by graphics I expected stable 60fps on high-highest
This.is.bad.optimization.
Never had to turn down everything to lowest in any game before
Hell I have 40-50fps in RDR2 on a mix of medium and high settings...

Low in the new game may correspond to the Medium/High in the older one. Bad optimization is when fps drops below 30 on weak GPUs of the new generation (RTX 3050), but DEAHTLOOP can be played normally even on the ancient 1050 Ti, this is normal optimization, so don't exaggerate.

Originally posted by Laicus:

Low in the new game may correspond to the Medium/High in the older one.

But it doesn't LOL

Originally posted by Laicus:

Bad optimization is when fps drops below 30 on weak GPUs of the new generation (RTX 3050), but

Dude...bad optimization is when game doesn't show stutterless 60fps on medium-high settings on the most common GPU which currently is gtx1060 according to steam and other GPUs with the same performance level

Who the f*ck is exaggerating here?

Originally posted by $ D@rk Re@per $:

Originally posted by Laicus:

Low in the new game may correspond to the Medium/High in the older one.

But it doesn't LOL

Regarding Prey, it is.

Originally posted by $ D@rk Re@per $:

Dude...bad optimization is when game doesn't show stutterless 60fps on medium-high settings on the most common GPU which currently is gtx1060 according to steam and other GPUs with the same performance level

On GTX 1060, 45-65 fps is obtained with Medium graphics, this is a good result, if your GPU has any problems due to 3GB of VRAM, this is not surprising, such a volume is no longer relevant, your GPU is outdated, put up with it and do not shift the blame to the game.

Originally posted by $ D@rk Re@per $:

Who the f*ck is exaggerating here?

You, and not just exaggerating, but doing stupid trolling.

Hi guys, sorry for offtop, but can some1 help me with 2 online achives? kill colt and copy him?

id at least like them to fix whatever issue is causing people to not even be able to launch the game. i try and it crashes every time.

Prey has a different engine, DEATHLOOP has bigger levels, and even on Mid/Low, the graphics are more complex than Prey on High. Although there are definitely performance problems, for example, fps drops in non-standard resolutions and after minimizing-expanding the game window. But GTX 1650 is enough for the game, so I wouldn't say that it has poor optimization. I'm waiting for gameplay fixes, not optimization improvements.

Originally posted by Laicus:

Prey has a different engine, DEATHLOOP has bigger levels, and even on Mid/Low, the graphics are more complex than Prey on High. Although there are definitely performance problems, for example, fps drops in non-standard resolutions and after minimizing-expanding the game window. But GTX 1650 is enough for the game, so I wouldn't say that it has poor optimization. I'm waiting for gameplay fixes, not optimization improvements.

Do you know what are "complex" graphics? Doesn't seem so.Deathloop is unoptimized joke of a game,period.6GB VRAM usage on minimal settings is NOT normal.Not a single game from 2020 or earlier requires this much and quite a lot have FAR better graphics

Originally posted by $ D@rk Re@per $:

Do you know what are "complex" graphics? Doesn't seem so.Deathloop is unoptimized joke of a game,period.6GB VRAM usage on minimal settings is NOT normal.Not a single game from 2020 or earlier requires this much and quite a lot have FAR better graphics

It's you don't understand the meaning of the words "more complex than". Reread my post more carefully, and maybe it will reach you. Game does not require 6 GB VRAM, I have no problems playing on a GPU with 4 GB VRAM and with High textures. Optimization is not perfect, but it's not bad either.