was this kind of performance acceptable back then? were people even as obsessed with tech advances as they do today? like complaining about not getting stable framerates on starfield using dlss and stuffi'd imagine your rooms gonna turn into sauna from all the excessive heat sli'ing two 7900 gtxes
>>10939379Oblivion gate is worst case scenario. It ran much better elsewhere
>>10939379Nobody actually cares about tech anymore. Nearly every game worth playing that comes out looks like it could have been released at any point in the last 20 years.PC gamers cared about it then because they had to. A PC you build in 2003 would be playing Oblivion at barely above slideshow framerates.
>>10939379because of the hyper saturation of enthusiast culture that exists today it's hard to say when people would have been more obsessed about the zeitgeist in the past but tech advances were certainly more likely to be a hard limit on your ability to play a game at all. the current status quo of people slumming it on nearly 10 year old hardware playing 1080p wasn't a thing back then.
Oblivion ran horribly but people took what they could get to be able to play it.
>>10939379>>10939392>>10939393>>109393951024x768 was the standard resolution back then, retard. Many people still played in 800x600, or 640x480 even. Also, Oblivion and other bethesda games have a shit ton of graphical options in the ini files. You could even turn off all the lighting and make the shading completely flat, which would double or even triple your framerate.
>>10939446>Calling people retards while promoting playing Oblivion while it literally looks like a d-tier N64 game.What a joke.
>>109393791280x1024 is the 4K masturbatory res of the 2000s. Many people, if not most, played at 800x600 or 1024x768.
>>10939379>>10939446But to answer your question OP, yeah, modern PC gaymers are bitchy as fuck. They need to waste 2000 buckaroos on a gaming PC and play at 180 fps 4K ultra or else the game is unplayable. Sure there are straight up broken games like City Skyline 2 and Dragon Dogma 2, but PC game optimization has never been better, except for unreal 5 games. The realer problem is there's zero innovation in things that actually improve gameplay. AAA is all about graphic whoring, MMO grinding, spending 70000 hours training in counter shart or frot nite, and romance simulator for fujos and queers now, unlike 20 years ago.
>>10939468>They need to waste 2000 buckaroos on a gaming PC and play at 180 fps 4K ultra or else the game is unplayable.you are an old good meathead faggot. the most popular gpu on steam by far is a 1060
I played it at like 15fps at the lowest possible graphics settings and had a fucking blast. PC gamers nowadays are whiny shits.
>>10939452We cared about innovation more than graphics back then. Also it still doesn't look anywhere as bad as switch "games".
>>10939473That is oblivion with rather high settings in a higher than standard resolution.
>>10939470It's been RTX 3060 for quite some time now.
>>10939476whatever, point stands. acting like people only tolerate the bleeding edge today is retarded.
>>10939446>1024x768 was the standard resolution back then, retard.Found the third worlder. By the time Oblivion was out 1600x1200 was already more widely adopted, and it wasnt rare to see people gaming at 2048x1536. 1024x768 was only a standard for office tier low end monitors and systems, like the ones you probably had.
>>10939485Of course the silent majority don't, but modern gaming discourse is filled with trannies like this: >>10939491
>>10939494People are retarded, nothing new. I occasionally watch a digital foundry video where they compare shit like 2 types of anti-aliasing and it's literally the "it's the same picture" image in action. You can see the same visual artifacting in the "good" image that's in the "bad" one. Tech spergs are a blight on video gaming and have been for decades now.
>>10939494He ain't wrong tho (regardless of whether or not he's a tranny). I bought a 1280x1024 17'' LCD in 2005, and it was relatively mid-end by that point. You had various other flavors of 4:3 and 5:4 above it.
>>10939379I was watching some videos about retro PC games the other day. I forgot how relatively slow hardware used to be when it came to running games of that time, it couldn't run or barely run 60fps on the best setups. I'm actually glad that we have this large amount of power nowadays. I wouldn't want to go back to the times of HDDs, disc drives, slow internet, low-RAM amounts, etc. However I think some things used to be better back in the day.
>>1093961760 fps was an expectation for 2d console platformers, not 3d PC games. It is actually an arbitrary framerate in the case of PC monitors anyway, because 60 hz wasn't even the standard.
>>10939632>he never played competitive multiplayer online games
>>10939674What popular online shooter had Oblivion tier system crushing visuals? I certainly can't think of any. Quake 2? Quake 3? Counter Strike? UT? UT2k4 even? Toaster tier requirements.
>>10939685>>10939674Toaster tier years AFTER they launched. When UT99 and Q3 released there wasn't a card and CPU combo in the world that could get consistent 60+ fps. I remember the colossal bitching around Q3 because it "artificially" favored Voodoo 2s and cards with multi-texturing which was considered bullshit by people who bought into the nVidia hype. PC seething is the same now as it ever was.
>>10939379I'm pretty sure I just turned Shadows to low and played Oblivion on a Radeon 9800 pro. If you're weren't dumb you could make games work respectfully on older hardware.
>>10939379Oblivion is not retroFuck off
>i'd imagine your rooms gonna turn into sauna from all the excessive heat sli'ing two 7900 gtxestop tier bait desu
>using fucking Oblivion to judge thisThese are 640x480 benchmarks btw
>>10939379Those numbers are higher than Morrowind. Also,the answer is - sort of but no. You'd also lower your resolution and tweak settings, lower res to 800x600 or lower and you could get 2-3x as much FPS. You could also turn off HDR and go with just bloom lighting or whatever. I remember being to get okay framerate with a 6600GT before I got my 8800.Again - that shit still ran and still runs better than Morrowind.
>>10941436It is kind of wild how each Elder Scrolls game runs better than the previous. V runs better than Oblivion, too.
>>10939685Actually all of those didn't have toaster requirements when they came out.We used to play Quake 3 with graphics cards with vertex lighting at 640x480 and still get like 30-40FPS.Similar for all the others. They only have toaster reqs for modern toasters really. Also, getting smooth play in UTK4 even requires maintaining 300FPS to not be jittery... so even if you could get "good framerate", it wasn't enough for great gameplay.Every single one of those and even Quake 1 also had guides online to tweak out framerate... because you know... if they ran amazing on everyone's toaster when they came out, no one would be doing that and those sites wouldn't exist. But they did and do.
>>10941442Eh, that's only partially true. Daggerfall runs better than Morrowind, all the DOS ones do. It's the fully 3D ones that do what you're saying and yeah... Speaking of V, here's a throwback!youtube.com/watch?v=Sr7NP_4Hrts
>>10941041What went wrong with modern CPUs and GPUs?
>>10941704They are way more powerful so the additional heat isn't that controversial. Lower end cards are still in a comparable range, though.
>>10942941>Lower end cards are still in a comparable range, though.Not really.The lower end of the market has been pushing power limits ever upwards to the point that single slot cards have become a thing of the past along with GPUs that are sub 75W TDP that get their power from the PCI-E slot only.Even the mid range of the GPU market has been pushing steadily ever upwards from the true mid range. To keep it somewhat retro focused, I'll use 2007/2008 as an example with NV's Tesla (88/9xxx range).The 8800 GT was the it just werks king in 2007 and had a TDP of only 125W, a single slot card, the entry level cards 8300/8400 25/45 & 50W cards, the 8500 GT was a mere 30W and 8600 GT/GTS were 47 & 60W. The mid range was the 8800GT if we're being honest because the upper end of tesla was the GTS/Ultra 135/143/150 and 171W cards.If we look at NV from say Maxwell refresh onward (GTX 9xx) the 950 has a "low power" variant, a 75W TDP card, right out the gate it's swinging higher than older generations.The regular 950 is 90W and the 960 (this is where the midrange starts) is 120W, the TDP of the low and mid range cards are competing with the mid and high end of previous generations for TDP costs.970/980 & Ti were 148/165/250W. We can skip pascal and go to Turing & Ampere/Ada, these have a lot of variants but the low & mid range are pretty fucked.70/90/130W for the 3050, x60/170 Ti/200, x70/220 Ti/290, x80/320 Ti/350 x90/Ti 350/450Ada x50/150 this card is a myth, x60/115 LOL LMAO Ti/160/165, x70/200 Ti/285, x80/320, x90/425/450 Ti/600From Maxwell refresh > Ada their TDP limits pushed past even farther. There's now nothing that occupies the space that cards like Tesla/Curie did. Even AMD struggles to release sub 150 card, that market has pushed upward since the mid 2010. The low end card doesn't exist today in a true sense.
>>10943864That's because the low end/low mid range does not exist in dgpu form any more. There's no point to a 4010-tier card when the CPU comes with a comparable GPU built in. My CPU alone can play crysis at 60fps.
I used to mod Oblivion to look like this and god I miss it. Ok, to be sure the contrast and saturation are cranked to eyebleed levels, and this was some of humanity's earliest experiments with ambient occlusion so it looks like someone pressed a sheet onto some wet ink, but damn I loved making fantasy even more fantastical.
>>10939491You're talking out of your ass. Where the fuck were people playing games at 2048x1536 and 1600x1200 in the 2000s?
>>10940117It came out in 2005 and runs on Windows XP. It just barely meets the rules.
>>10945528you could play pc games that where 1 or 2 years older than your gpu at 1600x1200. I had a radeon 9700 in 2003 and it did 1600x1200 in many games
There's never gonna be vibes like 2000s pre-skyrim japanese modded Oblivion again
>>10945541richfag
>>10945558even a geforce4 MX does 1600x1200 in Quake3
>>10945532It came out in 2006 and runs on SP3Not retro
>>10945592any pc game up to 2007 is allowed
>>10945603No it’s not, 2001 is the cutoff for PCCrysis is not fucking retro
>>10945569At what framerate?>>10945592>This board is for the discussion of classic, or "retro" games, including consoles, computer games, arcade games (including pinball) and any other forms of video games. Retro gaming means platforms launched in 2001 and earlier, and official game titles for those platforms released no later than December 2007 (homebrew console games made after this date will be permitted). The Microsoft Xbox, Nintendo GameCube, Nintendo Game Boy Advance, and Sony PlayStation 2 will now be considered "retro".Learn to read.
>>10945592>>10945790Also, Oblivion doesn't need SP3. SP3 came out in 2008, and Oblivion ran on XP well before that.
>>10945617Cutoff is December 2007. Read the sticky.
>>10939379Starfield looks and plays like a game from 2014, Oblivion looked and played like a game from 2006.
>>10939617One of my favorite things about PC gaming is playing old games at max settings and with other modern benefits.It's based.
>load SiN on modern computer>"this should run great">game literally takes 20 minutes to loada lot of curious bottlenecks still exist in old code
>>10939475So what? You gonna shit yourself over it? Jesus, fix your life.
>>10945790>>10945795>>10945798That is for consoleOblivion does not belong on this board,
Oblivion was too modern for my dinky PC so I never played it. To this day in my head there are two Oblivions, the shitty real one, and the one in my imagination that was pure kino before my mind learned about bethesda jank
>>10945859This anon gets it.
>>10945551knowing we'll never go back and it'll never be like it was makes me sad. Beautiful oblivion mods
>>10945859I do that with alot of older games. Going back and playing thru them with maxed up puffed up settings and graphics at max. It's beautiful and it makes me love the games all over again as I replay thru them.
>>10945923Re-read the fucking sticky. It says "platforms", NOT consoles. Windows XP is a platform.
>>10945798'member when they had to revise the newly revised rules because crysis qualified as retro? Fun times.
>>10945862Biggest issue of sin is hardcoded UI size so out of the box it is tiny at modern resolutions.
https://web.archive.org/web/20130516152408/http://www.1up.com/news/bethesda-responds-oblivion-issuesyou think they knew this industry was doomed to fall into the absolute shitshow that it is in our current timeline when bugthesda released this blantant dlc ripoff?
>>10946524>needing to look up archive.org to remember Horse Armor>dude look at this news article I found, now I know everything about back then!!!Zoomers are such contemptible fucking shitstains.
>>10946043Here's hoping they don't get revised again.
>>10947605that article doesnt exist anymore so that's why anon used archive. Rent free
>>10939379>was this kind of performance acceptable back then?It's still acceptable right now.Oblivion is a lowAPM game. It's not a tense RTS, fighting, or hack-n-slash where relatively low framerate actually cripples your ability to play.It's certainly not optimal, though.>were people even as obsessed with tech advances as they do today?Yes.
>>10945862PC emulator with functional save states is long overdue.
>>10945819And it ran like absolute ass when it came out. SF ran stably and got a 60 fps update down the road unlike that. And did you forget how people were ridiculing Oblivion's bloom and ugly models? Or downgraded forests? REmake, RE4, Mafia, Pete's King Kong, Fable, SH3, these games are all older and looked better.
>>10939685> Quake 2Included software renderer mode because 3D accelerators weren't widespread at the time of lauch. The best videocard at the time was Voodo 2. Voodo 2 SLI if you were a richfag.I'm positive that you wouldn't hit 800x600@60 with one card ever.
>>10948353UT99 was based for having a software renderer when Quake 3 didn't have one.
>>10939471As prices and budgets go up, so do people's standards. Unfortunately games put focus on the size of assets rather than the scope of games.
>>10939471>I played it at like 15fps at the lowest possible graphics settings and had a fucking blastSo did I. Say, I vividly remember beating Black & White with a Voodo 2/166 MMX machine.> PC gamers nowadays are whiny shitsI hated low performance with passion.The abovementioned game wast the first one that I started when I got a machine with a GeForce 2 GTS and it was amazing.Fuck that noise.
>>10945321>That's because the low end/low mid range does not exist in dgpu form any more.>There's no point to a 4010-tier card when the CPU comes with a comparable GPU built inI do somewhat agree with APU's being more common on the low end for poverty people in the third world but the mid range GPU going poof is worrying along with the continued push on power limits & TDP.NV's next series of cards are testing at 250-600W. If their lower end the mid range GPUs are clocking in at 250W that's already 100W more than their previous mid range in the pascal era and 130W off of their lower end mid card the 1060 by 130W. If you look at turing the 250W TDP is even 35W above the 2080.DGPUs with lower power limits & TDP are still useful as cards driving displays especially when paired with the povvo APUs.So yeah, I agree there's no point in the 4010 type cards but there's very much still a market there for 4050 type cards at 120W or less and even for cards like a 5070 at 150-175W TDP.This constant push on raising power limits to force performance has really gotten out of hand and it's not helped by NV's terrible GPU boost technology. The cards are massively inefficient if not kept under control with software like MSI AB to force frequency curves & clocks. Those 215W cards when running at stock & boost clocks undervolted are 115-120W for stock, boost, 145-150W and 185W-190W at their max clocks; under NV's default boost those cards go straight to 210-215 TDP. When their entry level cards hit 250W.Going back to that original post about room saunas, NV have a power limit problem with their cards and their solution has been to feed them more juice and it's only getting worse with their next gen? Grim is what that is. That power limit problem didn't exist back then because they had smart engineers and a bunch of card ranges, now they slim it down and throw power at the wall.
>>10948304Yeah maxing around 40 fps with a bit of overhead on a low APM game is alright, it's even doable with FPS so long as you're smart.That overhead and frame pacing is what matters, you slap that X1900XT on with a frame limiter set at 40FPS and your monitor running at 1280x1024/120hz and it'd feel alright. 40 FPS is half the distance to 60 for response time and double very, very nicely @ 120hz. It's one of the better strobing setups you can achieve with ULMB.The difference between then and now to get that good game feel is in the additional tools and software we have. I'll always take 120 fps or 60 FPS over 40 but I'll also always take 40 over 30. What >>10945541 says is a good enough look into how things were, you could after a GPU generation or two push games farther, that's why you'd upgrade and upgrade and it only got better in the 7th console gen where you had cards in the next gen offering 150%+ performance in the same power profile. Revisiting old games was a blast.Also you didn't need to be a richfag either, card prices were more sane, selling on the 2nd hand market was easier too and you got a good ROI when upgrading gen to gen.
>>10939379I don't know, weren't Bethesda games locked to 30FPS?
>>10948997>The difference between then and now to get that good game feel is in the additional tools and software we have. I'll always take 120 fps or 60 FPS over 40 but I'll also always take 40 over 30.Also we effectively have one resolution right now.You used to be able to lower your resolution on a per-game basis and it still looked fine.Only recently we started to kind of sort of get this ability back with a DLSS/FSR.> Revisiting old games was a blastStill is.
>>10949095>You used to be able to lower your resolution on a per-game basis and it still looked fine.>Only recently we started to kind of sort of get this ability back with a DLSS/FSR.Scaling came a long way too, it was kinda forced on us by 4k but we did get integer scaling (eventually in late 2018) which is great on 2160p (540, 720, 1080 etc) and with real gsync monitors came good enough scaling with their 6 tap scaling, and NV packaged their 5 tap scaler into their drivers eventually. If you wanna see how big a difference it is you can toggle it in your GPU drivers from display > GPU to check. It'll only look better on display if you have a gsync module built into your monitor tho.Integer scaling was weird, for years you had to use software tools and it was very shit, windowed mode, difference in mouse DPI (had to cut by half) because NV & AMD didn't wanna touch it and Microsoft didn't want to take responsibility either. Eventually Intel & NV caved and AMD eventually followed. That's improved playing old games a lot.On the DLSS/upscaling side, DSR got better too, rather than just being usable at 2x or kinda blurry we got the DLSS scaler packaged into DSR for clean scaling at 1.25x etc.>>10949021Some of them were locked to 60 due to physics bugs.
>>10949095alsooooooOn the motion blur & clarity side, when refresh rates finally hit 100-120 hz we finally got backlight strobing. It's better than the packaged overdrive solutions monitors come with but-It's effectively useless if you can't keep a stable framerate but works alright with integers too. If you have a 120hz compatible monitor and you miss how sharp your CRT looked in motion you can mimic it.
>>10949117Where do you view the likes of FSR1 for scaling old games? Most pertinent to games with fixed UI sizes. Pic related - it is running at 1440p and using FSR1 to 4k.
>>10939510CRTs were still more popular at the time. My CRT could do 1280x1024 even before that but only at 60hz which was unpleasant to look at. Most others I knew were similar and we used 1024x768 or less for higher refresh rates. LCDs were known to be a bit crappy at the time too, being too dark with input lag.
>>10949130>Where do you view the likes of FSR1 for scaling old games?It's alright, use it if you don't have access to a 5 tap, looks better for some games than others. If you can use say nvidia image scaling (5 tap) w/ or w/o sharpening or integer scaling you should use that instead but anything's better than trusting your display to scale it since that's a gamble. If it's a 2d, sprite game or low poly, you shouldn't really be using FSR if you can integer scale or 5 tap. NV have had IS since the 20xx series, backported it to pascal iirc after they were shat on and AMD patched it into their drivers so you'd only really experience it if you're on a GPU from before 2014-2016.It's not really retro but I replayed Deus EX HR last year which had a fixed UI size (strange for a 2011 game), it was better to just run it at 720p integer scaled and call it a day over breaking out a rig of helping hands and magnifying glasses to see what the fuck was going on. I thin FTL runs at 720p native too iircI don't mind aliasing or jaggies as people call 'em. I'd rather run a game at a lower res without AA scaled cleanly but luckily older games still used good ol' MSAA/SS rather than FXAA/TAA as you see in modern PBR titles. I grew up in the transition from the 4th to 5th gen and my dad got me into PC gaming late into the 5th gen and start of the 6th.I'm on board with people like this fella >>10928184 that think bilinear filtering sucks. If you can integer scale, use DGvoodoo if it's a compatible game and focus on the game.
>>10948976>NV's next series of cards are testing at 250-600WThose are the maximum power limits being tested retard.
>>10950179Yes and it's entirely too fucking high basedboy
>>10950179>>10950231What you gonna do, buy AMD? LOL we all know you won't so deal with it.
>>10951056>What you gonna do, buy AMD? LOL we all know you won't so deal with it.I just might Jen-Hsun. If they meet my demands of 200% performance in the same TDP range for a reasonable upgrade price then sure.The only game I "need" to play in 4k is NieR Automata and I can get by on 1728p in a custom resolution.You ain't funding Drakengard 4, you ain't funding a full on balls to the wall D1-3 remake either so suck my fucking dick. Old games run fine on old cards.What you gonna do when I pass over your card? Shit your panties and cry? The AI market is always there for you bro, just chase that dragon bubble and you'll be fine.Give it a single gen and AMD can even gap close on you, they're almost there right fucking now bro.You might wanna jog down to your engineering lab and check on the idiots and their nuclear reactor, they're out of touch with people who play old games bwo.
>>10951056>What you gonna do, buy AMDI sort of already did
>>10951107Yeah and what did it get you? A second class experience.>no dlss>even worse framegen>inadequate ray tracing>poor compatibility with games (vs nvidia)>broken opengl performanceYou basically bought a game gear in 2024.
>>10951115>A second class experienceIt does everything that I want.I have a dedicated Windows PC with 3070 and I haven't truned it on for a year and a half.
>>10951131>I have a dedicated Windows PC with 3070 and I haven't truned it on for a year and a half.Sounds like the problem is you.
>>10951323I just don't need it.
