> Textures are losslessly compressed> That means that a lot of compute is wasted to decompress the textures> Mod comes in and pre decompresses the images on disk> Your system does not need to waste time on each texture> Game now runs better at the cost of 8-12GB of storage.This is similar to what Call of duty does but in Call of Duty's case you end up with a download totaling 300GBGranted I am of the opinion that game textures these days that especially in the case of Monster hunter wilds you could cut down their resolution in half and have better performance with little to no visual quality loss.
>>726004387>/v/ discovers that "optimization" is trade-offs and is more complicated than typing the right code in
If only that anon was smart enough to understand how retarded that made him sound just now.
>>726004387Japs are worse at coding than jeets
>>726005609Yes and no.UE5 does have a lot of defaults which are more fit for rendering movies rather than games.Also there's this culture of game developers effectively clicking "optimizations on" for example when they turn on nanite and expect it to fix their terrible game)You are actually supposed to implement a lot of your own optimization solutions tailored to your game(a.k.a. write code)
>8GB VRAMlmao
>>726004387Game stuttered like hell with my 4080 super (16 gigs vram)Runs much smoother on my 7900XTX with 24 gigs vram. Hits around 19-20 gigs vram usage.Don't use high res textures unless you have 24+ gigs vram for Wilds.
>>726004387probably since ps5 has hardware for decompressingps5 > pc
>>726004387my question is how do these "high quality" uncompressed textures still look so bad?
>>726005609Game looks the same (and still runs like shit anyway).
>>726007565not ultra quality textures you have to download separately
This game pissed me off because with the textures set to high, it would crash consistently in oil basin. But if i downloaded the ridiculously oversized high def texture pack and set it to medium, it wouldn't.Texture quality in general is stupidly taxing in this game in particular, dont like it.
>>726004387Storage is cheaper than vram I am fine with uncompressed textures in most cases
>>726004387It has to have been a really shitty compression format to have that much overhead.
>>726007565If you are talking about the fuzzy pixels I think that's due to temporal anti aliasing.
>>726008170When you think about the fact that an entire scene may have thousands of very high end textures it suddenly makes sense how it can create kind of a bottleneck.
>>726004387I have a 5080 and this game makes my 9600k scream for death
>>726008649It shouldn't be decompressing it every frame though. Once the texture's in vram, that's it.
>>726004387people don't realize this, but this is actually just because it's a straight ps5 port with zero pc optimizationps5's architecture uses its storage as a low latency buffer for its shared memory pool and has the throughput to decompress on the fly whilst saving storage space, this is why most multiplatform games are like 1/3 smaller on ps5
>>726008825Yeah according to the DF article this mod helps cards with 8GB VRAM mostly.
>>726004387Explains why it runs better on the PS5 since it has a hardware decompressor.
Is there anyone who unironically bought a 40 series card
>>726005609optimization =/= compressing for less spaceoptimization = implementing ways for the game to run better by minimizing the need for extra computing resource during gameplayin this case, NOT compressing the texture at the cost of 11-16% of its install size IS optimization, which they didn't
>>726004387There is no such thing as lossless texture compression in a DirectX game you nodev retard, All BC and DXT textures are compressed inherently
>>726004387Really makes you wonder what the point of tech like DirectStorage is when you still end up with results like this
damn, now i can watch baby pajeet take a stroll in almost 60fps!
>>726004387No.Textures should be high res.Render res should be low.Less performance wasted is preferable either way. Good demonstration. A shame compressed textures aren't displayed compressed.Ah, you said lossless.A nice option for PC. Not required for Console versions.MH Wilds was the best looking game ever made then they downgraded it.No texture filtiering eg pixelated, square pixels, can get away with lower resolution textures. Very low. Should. Should like MGS have shadows for eyes etc.Build a lot in such looking engines. Big world worth looking around.If there is performance to spare then more action. More architecture. More complexity. Build the endin better. Granding.More in refusing the unnecessary representation, inclusion and ascociation.Something serious. Some (player) (and all) saved uninfected. Solid to build from. Liquid to sustain playing as the lifeblood of what it all asks for.
>>726014519Based schizo
>>726004387>Granted I am of the opinion that game textures these days that especially in the case of Monster hunter wilds you could cut down their resolution in half and have better performance with little to no visual quality loss.Yes, game studios deliberately waste space with dozens or hundreds of gigabytes of excessively high quality/badly compressed textures, models, cutscenes, and so on, for the express purpose of making it less likely for customers to install competing games for lack of space.I can't find it anymore but this was literally explained in a leaked design document for some CoD game or something I read a few years ago, and every goddamn AAA studio has since picked up the trend.
>>726004387>Granted I am of the opinion that game textures these days that especially in the case of Monster hunter wilds you could cut down their resolution in half and have better performance with little to no visual quality loss.You can see the result in-game for yourself by dropping texture quality to Medium, looks like absolute ass
