Dishonored 2 PC Problems?

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
How many of you guys out there are playing Dishonored 2 on the PC? Are any of you having problems like all these guys are? If you look at the Steam reviews for the game, there are a ton of negative reviews due to low frame rates and poor image quality on both the latest and greatest Radeon and GeForce cards.
 
Uhg. I sensed this would be the case when Bethesda changed their review policy. I've heard that, bugs aside, it's actually a good game. Here's hoping that they fix it asap.


Also, in case anyone has forgotten - don't preorder games unless you are prepared for the real possibility that what you bought won't work as expected/advertised.
 
Did it come out early? The Steam store still lists it as a pre-order with a release date of tomorrow.
 
It sounds like the console versions are having some performance, bug, and even crashing issues as well. Gee, no wonder Bethesda changed their review policy right before this game came out. It's almost as if they knew it would be a disaster at launch.

BHenry said:
Did it come out early? The Steam store still lists it as a pre-order with a release date of tomorrow.
Click to expand...

Yeah, it seems to be out not for people that pre-ordered it and reviewers have copies in hand (or on hard drives as the case may be).
 
I just played about an hour, didn't see any issues. But the character models especially the faces are not up to standards. The game almost looks like Bioshock infinite, sligtly better only. But the gameplay is much better than that was.
 
I'll know later tonight. I have a feeling it's going to work just fine.

Your average Steam reviewer... I'll just say, I don't trust the cleanliness of their Windows installations, ability to update drivers, sense to know when an upgrade is needed, and the cognitive functions necessary to not just push all sliders to maximum on a brand new game.

Sure, I bet Arkane needs to get a patch out right away (and I've read that they are working on it) but the game isn't even officially out yet. They'll have a patch out in a timely manner I imagine. In the meantime, I'm definitely going to try it out as is, and actually don't expect any issues.
 
J3RK said:
I'll know later tonight. I have a feeling it's going to work just fine.

Your average Steam reviewer... I'll just say, I don't trust the cleanliness of their Windows installations, ability to update drivers, sense to know when an upgrade is needed, and the cognitive functions necessary to not just push all sliders to maximum on a brand new game.

Sure, I bet Arkane needs to get a patch out right away (and I've read that they are working on it) but the game isn't even officially out yet. They'll have a patch out in a timely manner I imagine. In the meantime, I'm definitely going to try it out as is, and actually don't expect any issues.
Click to expand...
THIS 1000x

From computers that have not been restarted since Reagan was in his first term to having 2 or more anti-virus programs running at the same time.
The average joe should stick to consoles, less can go wrong.
 
Bethesda's response was that you really need a super beefy rig to run this game on Ultra. The recommended requirements are for the High preset not the Ultra preset, so you need to best the recommended specs by quite a bit to flip that flag. It would be nice then if they would give us the specs to use Ultra.
 
Bethesda has updated the Dishonored 2 launch FAQ with tips to help people that are experiencing performance issues. Most of the recommendations are of the "turn X setting down" variety and the company does say that 1440p is only for high end systems running GeForce GTX 1070 or GTX 1080 cards. No word on a timeline for a patch.

General recommendations
  • Avoid using Alt-Tab when playing. Relaunch the game if you see performance dropping after using Alt-tab.
  • Avoid having background applications running in addition to the game.
Video Settings
  • If you have performance issues, try lowering the resolution.
  • Use 1440p resolution only if you have a very high-end GPU ( GTX 1070/1080 or equivalent)
  • Keep the V-Sync activated, especially if you have large framerate fluctuations.
  • If you have framerate under 30 fps, adjust the “Adaptive Resolution” between minimum (50%) and default value (75%).
Advanced Settings
  • Use the “Auto” presets: this should adjust your visual settings without impacting your framerate.
  • If you still have performance issues with “Auto” presets:
  • Try deactivating the “TXAA Anti-Aliasing”
  • Try lowering the texture details
 
Or optimize the damn game and nobody should use that engine? Dunno. I think someone said it was Rage like issues due to the Id5 engine but this is a modified build on Id6?

Anyway, looks like it runs like crap unless you have a 1070+
 
Obviously they must optimize this game i.e. dumb down the graphics for eveyone, more.
 
With so many other great games out there I don't know if i will even end up buying when it goes on sale. I enjoyed the first one but i have no time for poorly optimized PC games anymore. Back to BF1 !!
 
Hmm I am getting around 46-60 FPS while I play. It hasn't crashed on me yet though I only played through the tutorial, the first mission and just started the second mission. That's with a 980Ti at 2560x1600 in Win 7. Settings are the preset Very High and then I took shadows down one notch to High. I am using borderless widescreen.
 
Avoid using Alt-Tab when playing. Relaunch the game if you see performance dropping after using Alt-tab
Click to expand...
I wonder why alt-tabbing is messing up the perf?
If you have framerate under 30 fps, adjust the “Adaptive Resolution” between minimum (50%) and default value (75%).
Click to expand...
This game defaults to 75% of the actual resolution?


I see a day one performance patch in the future
 
Thats a response I would have expected to hear 20 years ago.

But, I guess no one is gonna come right out and say "We wrote shit code. Sorry. Here's how to deal with it".
 
Alt-Tab messed with Skyrim too. For some reason Bethesda games don't like you looking at another window.
 
Ah, been awhile since I've played skyrim (can't say I've noticed much issue with FO4 though)
 
Shmee said:
Bethesda's response was that you really need a super beefy rig to run this game on Ultra. The recommended requirements are for the High preset not the Ultra preset, so you need to best the recommended specs by quite a bit to flip that flag. It would be nice then if they would give us the specs to use Ultra.
Click to expand...

Then I have a super beefy rig, because I have zero issues on 1440p ultra.
 
just because a game runs slow doenst meant it not optimzied well.

If a game runs slow and still looks liek crap then we can talk. i just really hate how people take for granted that their machine should run anything because well ego.
Its not uncommon in the past for games that want to press the envelope that people had to settle with low fps for new grade of graphics until new an better HW came out.

you have to take the "result" into account as well

--- edit ---
full disclosure i haven't played the game so I'm not stating anything in regards to the game
 
ChoGGi said:
This game defaults to 75% of the actual resolution?
Click to expand...
Actually I only noticed it last night. And yes it does default to 75%. I changed it last night to be 100% and on my system I saw a bit of a drop in spots to 40-43 fps. It wasn't scientific so it could have just have been the area I was in because I was just playing normally. I was playing the second mission while the numbers I saw previously were for mainly the first mission. Still it makes a noticeable difference at 2560x1600, if this is how it is set for 1080 displays it'll probably look absolutely horrible with lower pixel densities.
 
I'm seeing framerates anywhere from 30-60fps at 4K Ultra settings with TXAA enabled. I did the Pre-rendered Frames to 1 trick to smooth out the microstuttering. On the whole it's a very playable gaming experience and a fantastically fun game to play.
 
I haven't played this game, but I would only call a game unoptimized is if you can't get it running well no mater what settings you run.

On the other hand, if you can't run it at a specific resolution or setting that you think it should run at on your system, that doesn't mean it's unoptomized.
 
bigdogchris said:
I haven't played this game, but I would only call a game unoptimized is if you can't get it running well no mater what settings you run.

On the other hand, if you can't run it at a specific resolution or setting that you think it should run at on your system, that doesn't mean it's unoptomized.
Click to expand...

Well... the thing is... when a game in 2016 sorta-kinda has roughly the same visual fidelity as Bioshock Infinite from 2013, but you need a GTX 1080 for 1440p to run it at the highest settings smoothly then I would dare call it unoptimized.
 
sutyi said:
Well... the thing is... when a game in 2016 sorta-kinda has roughly the same visual fidelity as Bioshock Infinite from 2013, but you need a GTX 1080 for 1440p to run it at the highest settings smoothly then I would dare call it unoptimized.
Click to expand...

Visual fidelity might be a base way to judge optimization, but it's a bit more complex than that. We've reached the point that even some things which are now being focused on, such as lighting or shadows, stuff which adds little to the overall fidelity, can kill performance. That said, I don't trust Bethesda one bit. They've never been known as having stable, bug free games. And with Arkane using their own internal engine, it wouldn't surprise me as being not as optimized as other, more mature engines.
 
Nytegard said:
Visual fidelity might be a base way to judge optimization, but it's a bit more complex than that. We've reached the point that even some things which are now being focused on, such as lighting or shadows, stuff which adds little to the overall fidelity, can kill performance. That said, I don't trust Bethesda one bit. They've never been known as having stable, bug free games. And with Arkane using their own internal engine, it wouldn't surprise me as being not as optimized as other, more mature engines.
Click to expand...

Problem is that if it doesn't really contribute to the overlook it isn't worth overdoing. I remember way back when Morrowing came out it made me go out and buy a new PC. Bought a shiny new rig whit a spanking new GeForce 4 Ti4200 128MB card, thinking "That ought to do it". Cranks up graphics settings, loads game, right 200fps in doors. Thats the ticket! Steps out, 35fps in the city. :joyful:
 
sutyi said:
Problem is that if it doesn't really contribute to the overlook it isn't worth overdoing. I remember way back when Morrowing came out it made me go out and buy a new PC. Bought a shiny new rig whit a spanking new GeForce 4 Ti4200 128MB card, thinking "That ought to do it". Cranks up graphics settings, loads game, right 200fps in doors. Thats the ticket! Steps out, 35fps in the city. :joyful:
Click to expand...

The days of a game getting you to upgrade are long gone though. Origin was notorious for requiring you to buy a high end computer for every one of their series, such as Wing Commander and Ultima were released. And even with Morrowind, a lot of it has to do with technology changing so rapidly back then. 1998, the top end computer had 450 MHz. Four years later we were at 2 GHz. And while processors certainly have had more cores added on these past four years, it's just not the same, especially when many games still don't utilize them.

I certainly agree that dropping 50% performance for a slight bump in visual quality isn't worth doing, but I'm not the developer. Maybe they had a reason for it. Still, for the average Joe, seeing 50k polygons on the screen increase to 100k polygons is much easier to notice a visual bump of 10 million polygons bumping to 40 million. Diminishing returns and all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top