Resident Evil 7 Errors, Crashes, Performance, FPS, Sound, Bugs and Related Problems

Zarathustra[H]

Extremely [H]
Joined
Oct 29, 2000
Messages
38,739
As a sign of the times, I think we've all become used to various bugs and other problems in games on launch day. Resident Evil 7 may not even be out yet, but SegmentNext already has a list of the top 8 issues they have been having, and how to fix them. They also state it is a work in progress, and will be adding to it as needed.

So, if you are a fan of the series, and can't make yourself wait until Capcom gets around to patching everything, head on over there for some good suggestions on how to work around some common problems.

I wish we could just go back to the good old days of games being fully functional at launch.

The game will be available on PC along with other platforms and as far as PC version is concerned, it's not a bad one. Performance wise, the game works great and most of you are expected to have a smooth experience. However, it's a PC game so yes, there are going to be issues due to the diversity of this platform. So if you are facing any Resident Evil 7 errors or any other issues, feel free to browse through the following issues and their possible fixes/workarounds.
 
Last edited:
I - for one - wish we could just go back to the good old days of games being fully functional at launch.

T

I blame fat, bloated code, caused by lazy programming, which in turn is a result of cheap storage and performance.

the old days, you had to write small, efficient code, due to the limitations of the hardware.
 
I blame fat, bloated code, caused by lazy programming, which in turn is a result of cheap storage and performance.

the old days, you had to write small, efficient code, due to the limitations of the hardware.

I would imagine that is certainly a contributing factor.

I tend to think that the biggest contributor is that digital distribution has made it so easy to patch things, to the point where management types can say "who cares, we need to launch on time, we can patch that in our first patch". Every once in a blue moon having a tiny issue not hold up launch, if it is quickly patched after, I guess is OK, but I feel like we have gone full on "slippery slope" on this one.
 
I would imagine that is certainly a contributing factor.

I tend to think that the biggest contributor is that digital distribution has made it so easy to patch things, to the point where management types can say "who cares, we need to launch on time, we can patch that in our first patch". Every once in a blue moon having a tiny issue not hold up launch, if it is quickly patched after, I guess is OK, but I feel like we have gone full on "slippery slope" on this one.

This.

Been saying the same for years. I miss the days when if you released a POS game your company went bankrupt.
 
Can I add #9?

No VR on the PC for a year! I even had this game in my basket last night until I read that.
 
Several of those issues were present in the Steam demo, so they might not apply to the final.
In terms of whether studios should hold games back or not, I'm torn. In most instances, the games ARE playable by the majority of users. They could be playing and enjoying the game rather than waiting for an absolutely perfect version to hit in 2 months. Yet, we don't want repeats of Assassin's Creed Unity and Batman Arkham Knight either. I think I'm okay with minor errors and even performance hiccups as long as they aren't too bad or they aren't universal. Fact is, I'd rather have something to at least attempt to play right now than wait 2 months with nothing at all.
 
Current generation of game programmers and producers don't give a shit. It's "Get the money! We'll fix it later!" attitude.
 
Like capcom has ever in their fucking lives put out a single functional PC port.
 
I blame Millennials and their "I want FAST! Cheap! Good Quality!" demands.

Dammit grandpa, can't blame the whippersnappers for everything. They aren't the ones in project management in these companies yet. That is still being led by people that think games should take as long to code as ET for the 2600 still.
 
Like capcom has ever in their fucking lives put out a single functional PC port.

While they were horrible for a while, they've gotten better. Ultra Street Fighter 4 on the PC is borderline flawless. Resident Evil 6 and Street Fighter 5 might not be your cup of tea, but the PC ports are/were terrific.
DMC and the last couple of Dead Rising games too.
 
Dammit grandpa, can't blame the whippersnappers for everything. They aren't the ones in project management in these companies yet. That is still being led by people that think games should take as long to code as ET for the 2600 still.

I believe ET took 8 weeks to code up.
 
I tried reporting my issues on the demo via a negative review and got down-voted into oblivion by crazy white knights trying desperately to bring the game above water for some reason. I didn't even mention anything about the format just that the input lag was so high I couldn't move the character. The steam community behind the game seem that it is either perfection personified or a literal pile of fecal matter. I just wanted to play a scary game and instead I got something completely unplayable and the complete hate of a bunch of strangers. I know it isn't Capcom's fault but I haven't seen any feedback on the issues.
 
Just another AAA beta release that people pay good money for, a downright bloody joke.
 
Like capcom has ever in their fucking lives put out a single functional PC port.

Lost Planet 1, Lost Planet 2, Lost Planet 3, Devil May Cry 4 and SE, DmC, Dragon's Dogma, Resident Evil REmaster, Resident Evil 0 HD, the new Resident Evil 4 port, Resident Evil 5, Resident Evil 6, Mega Man Legacy Collection, Resident Evil Revelations, Resident Evil Revelations 2, Dead Rising, Dead Rising 2, Strider, Ducktales: Remastered, Ultra Street Fighter IV, Street Fighter X Tekken. The actual quality of some of those games is questionable but the ports themselves are not.
 
"I wish we could just go back to the good old days of games being fully functional at launch."

Maybe if the Internet collapsed and stayed that way would video game companies be forced to delay releasing titles, in physical format only, because they could no longer deliver patches and hotfixes online. I remember in the mid-90s when patches were delivered free of charge on floppy disks, and I also remember when games were never patched (Atari 2600, Intellivision, Commodore Vic-20, Commodore 64, etc.). Any bugs that evaded a developer's Q&A department weren't usually game-breaking, and were even regarded by players as a quirky feature, such as the occurrence in the Combat cartridge that was bundled in with the Atari VCS in which driving alongside a wall and then turning into it would teleport a tank across the screen.

Atari%202600%20Combat.jpg
 
While they were horrible for a while, they've gotten better. Ultra Street Fighter 4 on the PC is borderline flawless. Resident Evil 6 and Street Fighter 5 might not be your cup of tea, but the PC ports are/were terrific.
DMC and the last couple of Dead Rising games too.

I had no issues with Resident Evil 5.
 
I blame fat, bloated code, caused by lazy programming, which in turn is a result of cheap storage and performance.

the old days, you had to write small, efficient code, due to the limitations of the hardware.

I remember I had a 8bit version of Missile Command that ran in around 12K. Many years later I got an almost identical version that ran on Windows.

Size - 700K.

I often think that long development cycles are there to enable a sense of "hey in two years the hardware will handle the sloppy code just fine!" attitude.

Those 8bit coders were true artisans!
 
Last edited:
I remember I had a 8bit version of Missile Command that ran in around 12K. Many years later I got an almost identical version that ran on Windows.

Size - 700K.

I often think that long development cycles are there to enable a sense of "hey in two years the hardware will handle the sloppy code just fine!" attitude.

Those 8bit coders were true artisans!


True, and I agree. Making as much as possible run on limited hardware is truly a lost art on the PC these days, but on the flip side, would you really be willing to pay for the extra cost of optimizing to that level? it's not cheap. yes, games are more expensive now than they once were, but there has been inflation, and frankily, so much more goes into a game in 2017 than in 1984. Composers, live orchestra recordings, huge numbers of high polygon 3d models, etc. Compare that to some sprite and a cheesy bleepy 8bit chiptune*, and its easy to see where the money is going.

Besides, hardware specific optimizations start becoming a problem in a fragmented multi-configuration market

(*not to put down chiptunes, there are many I love...)
 
True, and I agree. Making as much as possible run on limited hardware is truly a lost art on the PC these days, but on the flip side, would you really be willing to pay for the extra cost of optimizing to that level? it's not cheap. yes, games are more expensive now than they once were, but there has been inflation, and frankily, so much more goes into a game in 2017 than in 1984. Composers, live orchestra recordings, huge numbers of high polygon 3d models, etc. Compare that to some sprite and a cheesy bleepy 8bit chiptune*, and its easy to see where the money is going.

Besides, hardware specific optimizations start becoming a problem in a fragmented multi-configuration market

(*not to put down chiptunes, there are many I love...)

Weren't original NES games about 1983 about $40-$45 and games now 34 years later are $60? So which was over/under priced I wonder. Considering expansions and DLC, those are sold far less than original games, but I think it is the answer the industry is using for an increased needed in sale price in a market that will not tolerate it. I remember the increase to $60 was met horribly and it was the xbox and ps2 I think that were the big ones to start that? I can't remmeber when PC games started that trend. I feel like music and movies have had a down tick in prices in the same amount of time (correct me if wrong, doing this all from my broken memory and not google).

I know it is a bit off topic. I would bet the next $10 increase will happen with the 'next gen' of console systems.
 
Genesis and SNES games were traditionally $49-59. Some were randomly upwards of $75 like Phantasy Star 4.
By the end of that generation, games that weren't on sale were $59. You can pull up old ads featuring the EA Sports titles and they're all $59.
 
Weren't original NES games about 1983 about $40-$45 and games now 34 years later are $60? So which was over/under priced I wonder. Considering expansions and DLC, those are sold far less than original games, but I think it is the answer the industry is using for an increased needed in sale price in a market that will not tolerate it. I remember the increase to $60 was met horribly and it was the xbox and ps2 I think that were the big ones to start that? I can't remmeber when PC games started that trend. I feel like music and movies have had a down tick in prices in the same amount of time (correct me if wrong, doing this all from my broken memory and not google).

I know it is a bit off topic. I would bet the next $10 increase will happen with the 'next gen' of console systems.


I think it's very difficult to say, there are so many variables.

First off, $45 in 1983 is equivalent to almost $110 today due to inflation.

Built into that cost, the cartridges had physical hardware costs, shipping and distribution, retail costs, etc. that a modern digitally distributed software only title either doesn't or has much less of.

Modern titles sell in much higher volumes, and thus bring in more money, despite being cheaper when adjusted for inflation. They are also distributed digitally without hardware/packaging costs in most cases, which means so much more of the final cost actually goes to the developer.

Its also a much larger undertaking to produce a modern game (for the reasons I mentioned above). Many 8bit era titles were written by a one or two guys in a week or two. These days you have composers, orchestras, videographer, huge 3d art departments, story writers, directors, you name it. Many AAA titles are now in league with blockbuster movies when it comes to production costs. Some have even exceeded them.

It really feels like comparing apples and oranges.
 
Weren't original NES games about 1983 about $40-$45 and games now 34 years later are $60? So which was over/under priced I wonder. Considering expansions and DLC, those are sold far less than original games, but I think it is the answer the industry is using for an increased needed in sale price in a market that will not tolerate it. I remember the increase to $60 was met horribly and it was the xbox and ps2 I think that were the big ones to start that? I can't remmeber when PC games started that trend. I feel like music and movies have had a down tick in prices in the same amount of time (correct me if wrong, doing this all from my broken memory and not google).

I know it is a bit off topic. I would bet the next $10 increase will happen with the 'next gen' of console systems.

Wrong, SNES and N64 games were 60 dollars well before the Xbox and PS2.
 
Unsurprisingly it seems the UWP-gimped windows store version is especially bad..unplayable for many.

https://www.neowin.net/news/windows-store-version-of-resident-evil-7-reportedly-plagued-by-performance-issues

I'll be sticking with Steam on this one, reviews are pretty high (9/10).

I still had a $100 Microsoft Gift certificate from the Vive Black Friday promotion, $100 off and $100 Microsoft Store GC, so I used that to by RE 7 on the Windows Store. Just got a chance to play for 10 minutes this morning but so far it's running great at 4k maxed out with the exception of ambient occlusion. I personally haven't had any issues with Forza Horizon 3 or Gears of War 4 either. GoW 4 is now in the test suite on [H] and seems to well regarded here.
 
There are some major winners in the Windows store...but there are also some games that are oddly gimped, too. It's a crap shoot.
 
Back
Top