The Truth About the Monster Hunter Wilds Beta Performance

[@shivasanjeevmana]

Ruri, i think the trepidation people have with the beta performance is that there have been so many examples of betas/demos not running well with promises of good day 1 performance only to launch with jank performance. MH team has earned the benefit of the doubt but i cannot fault someone for not believing the devs.

[@robotdeniro-csgo5986]

Too many examples is wording it kindly. It has almost never happened that a poorly performing beta got turned into a well-performing game on launch. Thats just not really a thing.

[@saverx1775]

I couldn't agree more, im always telling people that this is the very best thing they can show us and that this is what they should expect at launch. Any improvements they make before launch is always welcome but my hopes of this game being good at launch (performance wise) are much lower after the beta. They have earned alot of good faith among the community but so did CDprojectred and many others...

[@kevadu]

Eh, I think you guys are missing an important point here. There are a lot of "betas" that are done like a week or two before a game releases. Obviously nothing is really going to change then, there simply isn't time. This beta was almost four months before release. The game appears to be quite feature complete and was at least stable. Bug fixing and optimization are always going to be the last things in the development cycle. That's the main thing they're going to be doing for the next four months. There is absolutely room for things to improve.

[@robotdeniro-csgo5986]

@@kevadu I dont think anyone is saying they cant improve the game by release. What is being said is that the level of improvement required for it to run reasonably well is way too high and unrealistic. Just look at the game requirements. Those arent based on the beta or some fairytale iteration of the game. Those are the reqs for the full game. That means they know that the games performance is going to be bad even after launch.

[@e.Z4r-gamer]

Exactly, especially because as I heard Monster Hunter Wilds uses the same graphics engine as Dragons Dogma 2, and you could see how optimized the game was

[@doublet3n672]

After DD2, people have a right to be worried about performance issues in open world games made on the RE:ENGINE.

[@shimik11]

DD2 was the full game and had no demo, this is a beta, its not comparable buddy.. MH is now capcom big money maker too, if you think they're not gonna try everything to make it run good then you're delusional

[@vyg3313]

@@shimik11 World was shit at launch, and shit still in terms of framerate. So who is delusional huh ?

[@shimik11]

@@vyg3313 yeah and its their best selling game ever, nice try dummy..

[@vyg3313]

@@shimik11 New gen + fanboys + ps3, thats all budd. Japanese people love this series a bit too much. Plus even now a lot of fanboys saying that they are don't care about optimization, they just want to play a new game

[@vyg3313]

@@shimik11 Plus even if this a beta test why they run it on such horrible build huh? What's the point of shooting in your own head and decrease money outcome?

[@Ballerkack]

I've never seen a "performance" mode THIS bad on PS5 or SeriesX. How do other studios do it? What's the problem? Is it the developer? Is it the engine?

[@James-cr8mt]

It's gotta be the game engine. The RE Engine is just not designed for open world games; dragon's dogma 2 made that VERY clear.

[@Ballerkack]

@James-cr8mt Even DD2's mediocre new performance mode is nowhere near as bad as this. We'll see if they can do something about this one too after a while. 🤷‍♂️

[@Chloe-yl6yy]

I had a 7 year career in game dev, with 4 of those years in QA. You're mostly correct with your research into game development - there's no point optimising earlier than this as not everything will be done (visual polish etc) so you're correct in saying that optimisation happens at the end. QA will be happening throughout the development cycle though, not just towards the end - QA just have to suffer through the crappy framerates and such.

[@mSierraEngineer]

Fellow Dev here. I agree with your statements. Capcom will most likely have a more optimized version for us in the near future.

[@Hoichael]

don't conflate optimization with general polish. While some (minor) forms of optimization usually come last, the bulk of (major) optimization HAS to happen at earlier stages of development. If anyone is actually interested I'll provide some examples. you're half right about the visual polish part but the implied dynamic doesn't apply in this case since like 99% of visual polish is already done, at least for the elements accessible in the "beta". i'm just saying, people should temper their expectations. while the full release will likely see some negligible improvements i can promise you it won't be anything substantial.

[@IainG10]

How finalised do control schemes tend to be in betas like this one? The inability to overlap keybinds (or make combination binds like Ctrl+LMB) was a serious issue for me, but I also know how much I don't know about game development.

[@johnofwar0160]

@@Hoichael More or less this. If the game does not have rock solid 60FPS now it likely will not at launch either. The focus will likely be on game-breaking bugs first and work from the top down and optimization will take a back seat unless there is time to get to it before launch.

[@MrH-GB]

@@mSierraEngineer The good thing is they almost always do demos for Monster Hunter, so at least we can see if it runs better on a newer build. They've said the build we played was 3-4 months old, so by launch that would be about 8 months old and that's a lot of dev time, so I'm hoping we get a good product in the end as I love the series but was massively disappointed in how the beta ran on my system.

[@petercottantail7850]

0:18 not just the mh community, everyone who covers pc stuff is pointing and laughing at this situation. obviously outside the box is going to be more ruthless and apathetic

[@Cptraktorn]

It's called we do a little coping and hoping and ignoring the dragons dogma in the room.

[@Ramotttholl]

sounds like a fellow LINUX user. still waiting on DD2 to run better on it. (though in the mean time i already played through it once flawlesly on Windows dualbooted.)

[@ant135]

@@Ramotttholl lol DD2 Is legit the worse performing game I have even played in my entire life. I did play it on ps5 so yea I know a high end pc would be better but still does not make it alright and know one should need a 2k PC to enjoy any game.

[@egordon7543]

@@ant135the game has performs e mode in console now basically, it runs at around 60 pretty well now

[@ant135]

@@egordon7543 yes but why was it not released with a performance mode like basically every other game out there?

[@Vertilgung]

exactly imagine putting fucking FRAME GENERATION as a base thing in your SPEC recommendation ffs

[@letssuperfuntime]

I cancelled my preorder and i advise anyone, even the Uber mega fans like me (been playing since ps1), to cancel as well. Doesn't matter what your opinions on the matter are, you're potentially normalizing this extremely damaging industry practice by giving them guaranteed money for a shoddy product. Let the game come, and then get reviewed and scrutinized...and then make your choice. There's no rush.

[@LaserTractor]

Same As a long time fan since 2009 and PS5 player - I feel you. Beta just shattered my mood and honestly hopes. Because there is no way they will improve it that significantly Gotta return to my Iceborne I guess..

[@EternalOhm]

The beta's performance was very concerning. I loved MH: World too, so it's unfortunate to see MH: Wilds like this. 3 months is not a lot of time to fix things for a game, and we've seen time and time again that most games that had a bad Open Beta a few months from release were just slightly better on release but still with widespread problems. I want to be wrong with this about MH: Wilds, but it doesn't look good.

[@stefan1360]

You should be more worried about the micro transactions that have been worming their way into this franchise more than performance issues for one title in an open beta.

[@GodEater015]

Bye. Don’t let the door hit you on the way out. Imagine thinking a beta is going to be fully optimized.

[@117-0]

@@GodEater015 You know how many times we've been told by a developer with a bad open beta that they'll optimize the game a few months from release just for the game to be just as bad at release? Or the fabled day 1 patch that will fix everything (it doesn't). Nobody is expecting fully optimized, what is being expected is DECENT, which would show the developers have this and the launch should perform quite well. But that's not the case here, and people are rightly worried.

[@RageGamingVideos]

Solid video man.

[@ErioArubino]

Quick reality check: - game looks about the same as world (a game that came out like 6 years ago) - Map size feels the same, you can run for into an invisible wall / map boundary in like 20 seconds from any location - game is coming out in like 4 months - built on an engine thats not meant for this type of game - DD2 still runs poorly - Insane min/recommended spec requirements that NEEDS FRAME GEN to target 60 fps - With frame gen and upscaling it looks blurry and has really bad artifacts and delay depending on the gpu - ps5 looks even worse - Beta didnt, but the release will have Denovo - AAA price 70-120$ game thats going to have multiple paid dlc and day one dlcs Yet somehow you and Rurikhan have become capcom apologists and somehow believe its all our fault for being *concerned* because: - You magically think everyones running on 10 year old drivers and bios versions - Everyone apparently has a "budget" gpu and some offbrand temu cpu? - We should hand wave away any performance concerns because its a beta and "its going to get better - trust me bro" - Its supposedly only a server stress test??? - so we shouldn't worry about performance?? lol wut? We don't have any way of possibly knowing the state of the rest of the game. It could be a bug riddled mess for all we know, so don't pretend like capcoms dedicating all their time to just fixing the performance lol With capcoms record theres 0 chance they fix it by launch bro I'm sorry but using stuff from like 4 years ago should bare minimum be playable without frame gen If you want this game to do well, you should stop trying to pretend like these issues dont matter. Yes its a beta but *FIRST IMPRESSIONS ARE EVERYTHING* Who would preorder a game thats coming out in 4 months when it runs poorly and graphically looks very very mediocre on their system? Please put your thinking cap on and just admit that this is concerning.

[@dragonflyer4656]

@@ErioArubino lol no

[@ErioArubino]

@@dragonflyer4656 lol yes

[@b.b6656]

@@ErioArubino You're purposely misunderstanding the reality you claim to check. "Trust me bro" works with the Monster Hunter series because it stands for 20+ years of top notch developement. They made something like Rise work well, on a glorified gameboy. Also you don't understand the reality of game engine developement but claim RE engine is not made for those games. Rise/Sunbreak are RE engine games, even running on the Nintendo Switch. In that time Capcom already released their vision of their own proprietary game engine: RE Engine, developed specifically for those kind of games. Both Monster Hunter and RE are developed with each other in mind. Still and steady in developement. You dont understand the reality of those developements and Rurikhan gives you a trustworthy opinion on the matter. Calling him a capcom apologist while he gives an overview of the BETA state is ridiculous.

[@ErioArubino]

@@b.b6656 No, "Trust me bro" doesnt work when the majority of the series runtime and business model has been reusing the same exact maps and monsters for every single release on a few maps with like 5 small instanced zones, and making a few small changes here and there. Like fr bro no one who worked on those older games is going to be in the trenches fixing these performance issues on wilds. Like your argument makes no sense when the majority of the series releases have been for handhelds and portable systems where they had those tiny zones lol. World had so many problems at launch that eventually got fixed, but it was pretty bad. The reason why Rise ran acceptably is because it visually looks worse than monster hunter tri lol. Like its worse than a ps2 game lmao and had a lack of content for years. And the map isnt nearly as dynamic as world or wilds. And no i dont find the guy who posts 5 monster hunter videos every day, and potentially relies on being in capcom's good graces as a source of income super trustworthy. Especially when their takes have been nonsensical so far. They arent experts in this issue, and their takes have been pretty painfully out of touch/nonsensical so far. I havent watched Rurikhan as much but rage gaming pumps out slop, and so far his coverage of wilds has been nothing but sunshine and rainbows.

[@arisenpai]

26:56 absolutely. and personally, I went from "potential pre-order buyer" to "let's see the first impressions at launch day skeptic" after this beta. I'm on PS5 and honestly the low resolution scared me away. maybe I should've played on a smaller screen...

[@AlessandroParisi95]

It’s a fucking beta, not a demo

[@AlessandroParisi95]

It’s a beta not a demo. You are too dramatic

[@arisenpai]

@AlessandroParisi95 No. I'm being honest. They took a risk by making this public in this state. Time will tell if it was worth it.

[@gavinw1184]

It was more of a network / server test than anything else from what we can tell. I mean, it’s a 4+ month old build of the game. I doubt the performance will be perfect at release, but I can pretty much guarantee it’ll be noticeably better than this.

[@Kukakkau]

@@arisenpai The big point of this beta was opening up to cross platform elements which they haven't done before. Optimisation comes later in the dev cycle. But as always, never pre-order anyway. You gain nothing extra and can only be burned by it.

[@xYarbx]

Big issue I found was that the game did not run properly on 8GB vram cards even tho they advertised. That's why people even with 4070 were on the struggle buss.

[@Elmis66]

my 4070 was giving me 100+ fps at 1440p with DLAA and frame gen, almost all settings at max. Pretty much stable 60 with DLSS Quality, no frame gen and settings on high. I wonder what other specs these people had to struggle with 4070 because I don't think it was an issue of their GPU

[@shivasanjeevmana]

There is a pretty big cpu bottleneck so you will probably get bigger gains with a better CPU than a better GPU.

[@gabagandalfoftheweed]

@@Elmis66 From my experience, the "upscaling" feature caused lots of problems

[@NachoChippzzable]

My 4070 TI Super, 32 gigs ram, AMD Ryzen 7 7800x3D was able to play on Ultra everything with no noticable frame drops or anything. Granted I realize I have a pretty beefy machine but still this game seems soooo inconsistent for everyone. We also have to realize that when the game launches there will be day one game driver updates that should smooth some the things graphic card wise at least for people.

[@timtim1145]

​@@Elmis66If you don't mind me asking, what CPU do you currently use?

[@leoryzap]

My problem here is capcom not saying this upfront. One JPEG saying "This is a beta to test the multiplayer features. This performance isn't indicative of the final product" would've solved all of this. You shouldn't have to do this for them.

[@epsilon1372]

while i dont remember them specifying multiplayer specifically, they did state the beta is not representative of the final product. it was on the beta page on their site when it was out

[@solomon9655]

Yeah if they simply had a few pop ups specifying things that will be/already are fixed it would’ve saved them a lot of bad press. Overall I’ve felt like this one mistake has led to most people walking away soured on the game, which sucks.

[@NaCl3P0]

They did release a JPG. It said that the recommended system requirements will need you to fake frames to get to 60 at 1080 resolution. Not even 1440 or 4K. 1080.

[@Keiichi4444]

@@NaCl3P0 on MEDIUM

[@AwwHeckASnek]

A lot of the performance issues really just come down to LOD's pulling the wrong models, too high quality or too low quality both, if they fix that bug alone it'll probably run far better than the beta.

[@serenity3157]

This is actually one of my problem that I didn't enjoy the beta that much. So many map assets that missing too even if I can run the game at 120fps max settings.

[@brutus319]

yeah even if they dont fix it or just do partially i believe modders will take care of that

[@Gef105]

I was one of the ones that discussed this with you on twitter. I hope they improve performance. Cause most people don't have a high end card/processors. I have a high end card with a medium range processor. Hope we get a demo with a Benchmark included in it.

[@TrickyJebus]

Thank you for shedding more light on it. this needs to be talked about more!

[@chrispreczewski]

You are right. This Open Beta Demo was 100% about network infrastructure testing. This is the first MH to launch simultaneously on PS, Xbox and Steam Day 1. They want cross play to work flawlessly. I am pretty confident the Native performance will be well improved at launch. The team already said the Frame Gen implementation was improved as to what it was during the beta.

[@BadEnd98]

Yeah, I had speculation they still using the build from first public demo even, slightly improved it with least effort possible to put it out for the OBT crossplay test, because it's already available as a slice of the game.

[@Volfur2251]

@@BadEnd98 its the same build from pax west, so its already 6-12+ months old of a build if not more

[@Vertilgung]

it will improve a little bit at most if any, stop coping. It shows that there 2 possible problems, the incompetence of the devs or the Engine itself maybe even both

[@Yoru_601]

denuvo is gonna be the icing on the performance

[@Kittysune12]

not only denuvo but they will also have built-in anti cheat.

[@Benri05]

Denuvo + Enigma + Obsidium, be ready for a triple special lmao.

[@Kittysune12]

@@Benri05 sound like special WWE fight absolute cinema

[@Vertilgung]

yes i would imagine the beta was not infested with denuvo, so it will also contribute decreasing the performance on a cpu bottlenecked Game even FURTHER by using denuvo anti temper that is increasing cpu load.

[@Kittysune12]

@@Vertilgung well it's also confirmed MHWild will have it's own anti-cheat too running alongside denuvo

[@kookieslayer]

The server stability impressed me for an open Beta. With another 3 months, I'm not too worried about the optimization.

[@whatxxxxyou]

Yes.. I was kicked 5 times by the server.

[@TearTheRoof0ff]

@@whatxxxxyou I guess it turns out they weren't impressed by the server stability after all, then.

[@Swerg20]

@@whatxxxxyou I didn't have any kicks and neither did any of my friends that played.. I have another friend who regularly gets kicked from everything time to time. Might want to check into your internet setup for any improvements that you can make

[@TheTekOr]

Got disconnected from lobby twice, twice had other players disconnect after I joined their hunt, once lost connection without being dropped out of the game, so I could fight the monster, but none of the abilities registered.

[@PlusOne2Crit]

@@Swerg20 Disconnects was a commonly brought up issue

[@sandukan1001]

I love monster hunter and this game is going to consume my life when it comes out and I also get that this was a network test. But I am stil very sceptical of how the performance is going to be at launch for most people, especially with the high reccomended settings with frame gen on to get 1080p 60fps. And it also has Denuvo, there are examples out there of Denuvo getting removed and the game getting a 20+ fps gain. I have faith in the monster hunter team in wanting to craft us a beautiful and fun game, I just hope that includes optimization/perfomance.

[@hellokatyfac3]

Yeah - I went from base world at 45-55 FPS in Astera and the INSTANT I installed Iceborne with Denuvo on it, sitting in astera had me at 15-18 FPS. If this is anything like that, then I have NO hopes for Wilds.

[@neogenesus]

Played MH world on PS4 with 30fps and totally enjoyed it. So much crying.

[@bastiancole3565]

Bought a 4080 super pc build just for this game because of how crazy the spec requirements are, so I should have no problem with this game, but idk how consoles are going to deal with this at all, not everyone has $2500 they can spend on a pc. We are getting to the point where game studios will have to choose between less than 20% of potential profits because only high end pc players will buy it, or for them to have to settle with console specs being their benchmarks so that most systems can run it. My 4080 super will likely do just fine until the card is no longer operational before I need to upgrade, because I suspect game companies will start to understand where the limits are that will make the difference between their game selling well or It selling not at all.

[@sandukan1001]

@@bastiancole3565 Also depends on your cpu, the game is very heavy on the cpu. But yeah you should probably not have much of a problem with a 4080 depending on the quality settings and resolution. Still tho, it's not going to run as well as it should. You will probably have 60 - 80+ fps while you should be getting 120+ fps with a 4080.

[@bastiancole3565]

@@sandukan1001 I have apparently the fastest cpu on the market, the amd 7800x3d and apparently even then there might be some bottlenecking. The game is just wholly screwed for optimization that would even give Ark Survival Evolved a run for it's money. We got 3 months since the beta before release so I hope they do something, otherwise we should hope for a change within the year.

[@albyvidz_]

Will definitely be playing in friends only sessions or lobbies if that's available still ✌️ Don't need to be stressing my pc for nothing

[@raravan]

People have all the rights in the world to be concerned about this game's optimisation, especially after the Dragon's Dogma 2 disaster.

[@tomatochip7923]

People have the rights to be concerned, but talking out of their asses doesn't help things. I have a RTX 3060 machine and am able to play the Beta for 18 hours on 30-45 FPS with mostly max settings apart from shadows and the like. So the example that Rurikhan was using about peeps complaining specifically about the RTX 3060 being unplayable is just them straight up lying. Or that people are smart enough to understand GPU names but apparently not when it comes to CPU. My CPU is a Intel i7-11700k. It ain't the latest, but it isn't incapable of running the Wilds beta. So when watching this video, it really makes me facepalm when he mentions that there are peeps outright lying about their 3060 performance or if they didn't, then it's just showing their ignorance in using a potato CPU and expecting miracles. But yes, concerns for the performance is valid for sure especially when we look at DD2. But at the same time, providing false reports is not gonna help the Devs nor the players. Edit: if 30FPS is called unplayable then wtf are game consoles? Just because the game is playable does not mean it invalidates the concern about optimisation. Why must everything either be running badly or perfectly? Stop exaggerating things and be honest. If you think 60FPS should be the standard then that's fine and nothing I said here invalidates that. But acting like your eyeballs cannot perceive 30FPS and play games with that frame rate is cap. Your eyes do not change perceivability just because standards and expectations change. The game is playable with a 3060 but it is more than understandable to expect more performance. Is this so hard to understand?

[@Benri05]

​@@tomatochip7923oof 30-45fps on a 3060 doesn't really inspire confidence, when World came out even a bad value gpu like the gtx 1060 3gb runs it at 1080p 60fps max settings natively and that gpu was around $199 back then. Now Wilds beta came, to match that fps at native without upscaling, you basically need a 4070 which runs it at 60-70fps 1080p max settings at native, and that gpu is $600.

[@moonrabbit2334]

​@@tomatochip7923 yeah no 30-45 fps is really concerning

[@tomatochip7923]

@@Benri05 I personally don't agree with generation pricing comparisons like that because we can all agree that the world during the gtx generation vs the world now in the rtx era has changed. In case that flew over everyone's head, we had a pandemic and 2 wars which may or may not still be ongoing. Inflation and the likes is a reality that no one likes but is what it is. Back to the point, which is "3060 is unplayable for me" as mentioned by Rurikhan saying that some were reporting that, I guess the question is do you think 30 FPS is unplayable? If so, I guess we should never have bought game consoles since games run mostly on 30 FPS on average on those. Yes nowadays, we have "performance mode" to let them go beyond but you get the point. My point is that, as an owner of an RTX 3060 machine since 3 years ago and managed to enjoy the beta for what it is, whoever complained about the GPU being the reason the game is unplayable is capping. Do I think this game is running perfect? No. Do I want the game to run at 60FPS with my setup? Sure, of course. But no, I do not think the game not running at 60 is called unplayable.

[@tomatochip7923]

@@moonrabbit2334 It's concerning, but it's not "unplayable"

[@AveratisArmada]

I had almost the same minimal requirements, except a 1660 ti rather than Super. My experience was terrible from the start because of the PS1 graphics glitch that never let off. FPS wise I found it playable and even a bit higher than the minimal, but the graphics were broken. I fought a dozen dorito Rey Daus anyway. If the graphical glitches are fixed, the performance would be on par with what's expected.

[@mrfluffykins7748]

@@AveratisArmada I also have a 1660ti and mine was playable but the textures weren’t great and my frame rate was around 30-50 with frame generation and medium settings. I had to mess with different settings because everything was polygons when I loaded it up for the first time

[@Dread.1.]

I 2nd this, 1660 Super wish we have dlss

[@toefu6182]

that's not even close to the recommended settings. you're at the bare minimum to play it in "720p", as written. I have a 1650ti on my PC and it runs smoothly if resolution is toned downed to as recommended(I set it as 1280*720p), and it run pretty smoothly with little to no issues so far. While on my other PC with a 7700XT, it runs smoothly with occasional issues.

[@AveratisArmada]

@@toefu6182 Well I did say it was near minimal. I was running 1440p with FSR3 on balanced, and I could get steady 30fps without frame gen since that just looked terrible on its own with too much ghosting. They did say they have a better implementation on the latest builds so that's reassuring. Although the 30fps on 1440p were with 21:9 aspect ratio to cut pixels out of the 4k tv I played with. On 16:9 it wasn't reaching 30. My complaint is about the graphical glitch that made everything look like a PS1 game mostly.

[@AveratisArmada]

@@mrfluffykins7748 I tried all settings and I couldn't get the glitch to go away, and even when something looked fine the textures were loading below minimal. What bothered me a lot was that even dropping everything to the lowest the VRAM was always above 6gigs which made no sense, so that was broken too.

[@JustTooSalty]

I'm not sure what was wrong on my end then, but my 2060 did not perform anywhere close to what you said in the video. It was so bad in camp or out in the wild. It was so bad at points in the camp, that I was getting single digit frames. I spent an my 2 hour play time on the demo, tweaking my settings without any hope. I even tested other modern games and they all worked without a hitch. Something was just seriously wrong, and its made me hold off on purchasing.

[@champ6436]

your cpu most likely. i mean even me with my rx6800 that is twice the performance of a 2060, i was basically hitting the same framerate has he did with his 2060 system ( i was playing with a mix of medium/high instead of low/medium and also with FSR). but still my system that is suposed to be twice as powerful couldn't go above 40 in the town area, and in busier section of the map or if i played with other player i would go in the 30s fps constantly.

[@brokemono]

I think the RE Engine just wasn’t cut out for these types of games. Monster Hunter Rise/Sunbreak was fine, but this engine was originally built for Resident Evil. Sure, "RE Engine" stands for “Reach for the Moon Engine,” but still. I get why they moved on from MT Framework, but MHWorld/Iceborne looked amazing and still does, could've done at least another MH game on it and kept upgrading the RE Engine to support the vision of their future games or something...But they did it this way and I think it will be fine in the end. With Dragon’s Dogma 2 and Monster Hunter Wilds, it feels like they’re compressing the files too much. Wilds is 140GB compressed (I'm guessing, might not be like DD2 was), now imagine how huge it would be uncompressed. A compressed game like that probably needs a stronger CPU for real-time decompression. Throw Denuvo and Anti-Cheat into the mix, and it’s guaranteed to not improve fps, so either decreases it or makes it harder to improve fps. Take Call of Duty MW2019 as an example. It was huge and looked amazing, and realistic, over 100GB, but it ran smoothly on decent laptops and could hit 60fps, even in its beta. Some games avoid heavy compression because of the performance hit, so they stay big. But MW2019 was far from perfect, it had buggy menus, network issues, and crashes...but FPS wasn’t a problem, at least in my experience. Plus, if you installed it on a hard drive, textures would pop in super slow, and you'd see polygons and blank textures just like Wilds. And yeah, for Wilds, some people probably overlooked storage requirements. Minimum specs clearly say “SSD required.” So we're mad about a beta playtest that's without official driver support, not guaranteed to perform well, and overlooking some of the minimum requirements...that's crazy. I get that some of us are worried because of what happened with Dragon's Dogma 2 and that's good, we should be worried but not this much worried. We just have to keep spamming the developers to focus on optimizing and help them by sharing our experiences with the playtest without being mad. I don't know anything for sure, I'm just spewing shit here but that's what I was thinking. Like you said, it's a network test, not performance test, release version will be fine.

[@Benri05]

Capcom is basically developing a new version of RE engine called the REx engine which is optimized for open world games, so you're not wrong.

[@ZhurTaa]

Good video im optimistic for release time will tell .

[@ricky_pigeon]

$2000 dollar PC, FSR enabled, "things were okay but wasn't reaching 60 fps". Yeah that's the problem. The game is blurry and it still performs bad and if you think it's going to get better... 1. They haven't fixed Dragons dogma 2, (But it's a different developer), No they literally made the game in the same building, they use the same engine so they can swap assets and developers between projects, thats how big studio's work, it's why they moved all their games to their own engine. But even if you have this idea, you are ignoring something else. 2. They are already selling the game with those requirements, they are not subject to change the requirements. So i guess now you cope and say "get a better PC". yeah, i have the best gaming CPU you can currently get right now and it still an unstable below 60 fps in the camp.

[@rurikhan]

When did I say get a better PC? I swear people hear me say whatever they feel would be the worse interpretation of my argument.

[@ricky_pigeon]

@@rurikhan not you directly, the people who have defended the performance in this game. I'm a big fan of monster hunter since 2008, i love this game but you look at Capcoms requirements 30fps(frame gen) as the recommended and it's disappointing, its AMD and Nvidia technology they are using and both of them only recommend using it above 60 fps. this kind of stuff will put people off the game. which it has. not a single one of my friends have pre ordered it. People defend this and thats why it is the way it is. Play their old game and you will see how amazing they look compared to other games on the hardware, like the PSP. Because Capcom used to care about optimization.. now... now its just complete lazyness. It's an absolute joke of what it used to be. people are so willing to accept poor quality.

[@rurikhan]

Personally I thought Rise on Switch was nothing short of a miracle. Dogma 2 was a kick in the teeth for sure, but other than that I was under the impression RE Engine has been delivering the goods. World and Iceborne had pretty good performance imho, save for the release of Iceborne where there were some issues, but that’s a different engine (MT Framework).

[@saiter6010]

@@rurikhan ''Anything under a 4080 is also unacceptable in those conditions.'' like you said in another comment, cmon man stop being so defensive about capcom.

[@JohnSmith-se7pp]

@@saiter6010 ikr

[@J.aime_le_pain181]

I didn't mess with the config on that weekend but my pc is around the recomended graphics. I chose the settings the game recommended and dang those textures where not it

[@robotdeniro-csgo5986]

Dont you love ugly washed out textures that make modern games look worse than games from 10 years ago?

[@BadEnd98]

​@@robotdeniro-csgo5986 No, simply the texture setting didn't work at all for the way texture streaming in the OBT. Basically a bug

[@roar104]

it probably defaulted you to upscaling on ultra performance and that'll make it look like shit

[@Gustaviustwinkelberry]

What is your gpu and how much vram is on it? Also how much system ram do you have?

[@J.aime_le_pain181]

@@Gustaviustwinkelberry 32g of ram, cpu is ryzen 5 5600 and gpu is radeon rx 6750 xt

[@PlusOne2Crit]

A 3060 is not a "budget" GPU. The 40 series is completely unaffordable, and unjustifiable, for the vast majority of players. For me, personally, the game ran perfectly on high but the desync was so bad that I would disconnect from my partner multiple times a hunt and, when I could stay connected, the monster lagged all over or we would end up seeing it in completely different parts of the screen. (On one kill it was dead on their screen for a solid 20 seconds whilst running to another zone on mine, only for mine to teleport back and do the death animation). Computers come in a million different configurations and this could be caused by any number of issues. Even with your research you are no more of a p.c. expert than me, or anyone else complaining, and I really think we need to leave this to people who actually do know what they're talking about to explain things. Lastly, I believe the reason this has put so many people off is because both the last 2 MonHun games were in an awful spot on release, (on p.c.), as well as Dragon's Dogma 2 having abysmal performance. Capcom have burned people multiple times. The beta demo needed a better showing as that was going to be most players first experience. If they have already optimized it further, as some have stated, that is the build we should have gotten. Not some outdated build that isn't going to be in the final version.

[@raruterofegb]

yeah a 3060 is by no means a budget option, is only 4 years old, shouldnt have problems having a game at 60fps for at least 2 or 3 years more honestly

[@toxicitzi357]

honestly, I don't even see how MHW:I's highest end shouldn't be playable in Wilds' low to medium settings.. unlike people are trying to make it out, World is Not That Old of a game and neither are those high end GPUs CPUs of that time, it's still among the more demanding games out there even to this day, with games like Armored Core 6 and Elden Ring being marginally more demanding in the same way you'd expect games to get gradually over time. well in any case, if this is where Wilds is heading? then I'll sit this one out throughout its release, stick to my PC for the "poors" that runs World at max settings and get into older entries, since I've already started playing GU anyway. This doesn't look like that time to upgrade an aging PC, that time will come in about a few years, rather this looks more like a desperate cope for these horrendous spec requirements.

[@ajb6071]

I have a mid range pc at this point: AMD ryzen 7 3800x 8-core 16 gig ram Radeon rx 5700. These are slightly under the recommended specs. I did customize the settings, some mid-high, most low. My system was able to run the beta at 50-60 fps with frame generations at 1080p. Not terrible at all. It would dip below 50 during Rey dues big FU lightening mechanic. I was worried that I was going to need to upgrade my pc but with optimization, it will run great! Agree with the benchmark. Awesome video man. Subbed.

[@Ocean5ix]

This game will be a problem... but hey, I'll play it for 1000 hours anyway. RE Engine lived long enough to become the villain. That engine is great and very optimized for relatively small and even medium sized areas (like Rise) but anything on the range of an open world is just miserable.

[@ch_hassan-PAK]

that is such a bad attitude - its no different than the mindless behaviour we see with other franchises. i guess this is why there is no point in optimising games

[@NoZeroGG]

@@ch_hassan-PAKthere’s not that much games like monster hunter that’s worth a few fps drops

[@akkitakara]

The claim that RE Engine is the issue after DD2 fails to understand how the actual implementation of engine-level systems works. DD2's performance was so terribly CPU bottlenecked because of how many NPCs the game features, and the engine did not feature an existing implementation for a mob-based NPC system, which utilizes techniques like animation instancing and component systems that better manage memory. I'll keep it simple by saying those systems allow for a much more scalable approach to implementing a more populated area but are much harder to implement than traditional methods. The DD2 team did not implement a system like this because they did not expect to need it and stuck to the more conventional approach where each NPC is simulated independently. By the time they realized how big of a performance hit this would cause, they were too far along to reimplement a more efficient system, so they just stuck with it, which is reflected in the game's poor performance. I don't expect Wilds to suffer in the same way, as there should be a lot less to simulate by design of the game. The main thing that could hamper performance, though, is LOD biasing. Still, as long as the Wilds devs can tune that system properly so system resources aren't wasted simulating stuff further away or that you can't see, there should be a significant uplift in CPU performance in the release version.

[@liambeddow8240]

I've been waiting for this!!!

[@fo0za954]

Thought the performance was below average on Series X. You had to choose between a playable version that looked really bad, or a good looking version with a framerate thats unacceptable in 2024. Im so bummed out by this i really hope they can improve this. Also the PC specs are way to high.

[@renzes123]

This was such a very informative well-put video! Honestly, this addresses all of the issues all the BETA complainers are whining about, especially those who have no idea about how hardware-updated their setup should be instead of just expecting all games to run 1080p 60fps on their computers. I hope this video reaches the entire MH community.

[@LordViettner]

Great video. A lot to learn from this, many people are quick to worry or point fingers now because of your Ubisoft's and Activision's that are releasing bad products. I think MH has earned the benefit of the doubt, I think that assuming the performance of beta is indicative of the final product is a logical fallacy, and I think, like you said, if you want to run budget hardware, you have to be willing to make concessions on performances. I did that on my first PC, which was a Ryzen 5 3600 CPU paired with an RX590 GPU. Again, like you said, there's a certain understanding of PC building/owning of "I may need to make hardware upgrades every 3 or so years if I want to keep up with modern titles at high performances." Thanks for this video man, I will be sharing this around because, while I understand why people are cautious, you make great reminders that there's still plenty of time left, and the optimization is a late-stage process.

[@epsilon1372]

hey i watched your video on this too! love your stuff man

[@LordViettner]

@@epsilon1372 my guy!

[@CowannV]

Really good analysis, thank you 👍🏼 I played the bêta on a i7 4790k paired with a 1070 and installed on an hdd. At 1080p i got 21-23 fps with dips at 17. At 720p i got 23-25 fps so I stayed in 720 even though it was blurry, but I didn’t experience any input lag so it was pretty playable and surprisingly snappy. I didn’t get any connectivity issues. A little laggy when consuming potions in a hunt with 3 other players on a full lobby. When switching to a private group on our own “world” it didn’t lag at all. I know an upgrade will probably be necessary but satisfied whith my old gear’s performance on this demo.

[@JustAFishBeingAFish]

@@CowannV Bro the fact you could open the gane on that is impressive.

[@mathlfr]

You'd be better buying a series X or ps5

[@meisterwu8922]

- 23 fps - "no input lag" - "snappy" God i wish i had that same mindset. It would save me so much money.

[@JustAFishBeingAFish]

@@meisterwu8922 on a 1050 tho?

[@CowannV]

@@meisterwu8922 don't get me wrong these perfromances threw me back when I had just an old vista PC or a low tier laptop. It isn't gre&at and I don't play games under 60 fps anymore. I won't play wilds with this hardware, It was hiddeous and mushy. But I wanted to test the bêta anyway with the gear I have currently, and I liked the gameplay.

[@paullewis560]

I think a lot of people do not understand their own PC so playing a BETA is more jarring for them. They expect a high end components to instantly make their PC some unstoppable monster, when in reality it is a lot more complicated and they may have to do some settings tweaking to get in running better.

[@Volfur2251]

honestly i've lost count how many people have complained after taking barely minimum specs and tried running it above recommended. Like are people refusing to upgrade there machines now or what

[@tomatochip7923]

This so much. People are making reports and throwing around GPU names as though they are comparing game consoles or something. With consoles, each model is identical so you can just compare experiences by just their models. With PCs, there are other components apart from the GPU that can influence components. But people, rather just irresponsibly throw GPU names without details and call the game unplayable on it because they apparently think the GPU is the sole component that runs games on the PC or something.

[@freaky3418]

this. i know half of the people complaining have like 250 active processes when they have the game open since they dont bother to optimise

[@dktorv3330]

The only thing I hated while playing was the monsters running away so much. I also hope the team launches a demo or benchmark as you say in the video. Nice video, cheers!

[@evans178]

Tip : Luring Pods cancels their running and make them stay

[@Nova-sama420]

anything under constant 60 real fps in not acceptable.

[@rurikhan]

Anything under a 4080 is also unacceptable in those conditions.

[@FalafelPlease]

@@rurikhanwhich is the root of the issue... No other game on the market has this requirement for 60fps. They clearly designed the game for 30 fps which is a giant mistake

[@Boamere]

⁠@@rurikhan nothing about this game should demand those requirements for 60 except for the fact it’s on the RE engine. It’s just the engine

[@Ramotttholl]

anything under 60... without FSR! as FSR works best when the FPS is high already.

[@Omnistorm860]

I think 60 should be the bare minimum everything should be running way better now days.... if the game releases with poor performance considering the fidelity that's going to hurt them. I run Star Citizen at 100+ fps and it's in alpha with waaaay higher quality so other games have no excuses. Optimizing games should be a priority

[@mikush95]

Finally someone whos not just crying and actually doing research about it really! And u've done a very good job thank you! Made it understandable for everyone now whos really listening.

[@wizborne637]

On PS5 I ended up playing in resolution mode to my own surprise, as frame rate mode just looked horrible and somehow felt worse to play. The resolution mode seemed more consistent and vastly cleaner compared to a muddy frame rate mode. I loved the game, but going back to World after I did sadly find myself feeling that overall it just has a nicer presentation. I know we’ve only seen a relatively small amount of Wilds, but Seliana felt so much brighter and nicer to be in than the camp in Wilds. I’ll still play the crap out of Wilds of course, but I do feel a bit sad to be left thinking Wilds will only truly shine when PS-bloody-6 comes out or something 😢 Fingers crossed this is just beta standards and in time it’ll shine, but imagine a monster Hunter game made in the Horizon Forbidden West engine.. and with dedicated Sony support..

[@EdgarLopez-fs3ui]

One of the few lvl headed creators that acknowldged this was a beta "network test". I also have faith. Im sure the game will way better on release. This will be contender for game of the year 🙏🙌

[@MrRenanHappy]

Denuvo and Anti-cheat coming over to destroy the performance again after the +3 fps gain from the updates of the release version. A 6800 XT is comparable to a 4070, the 6900 is a bit more powerful, probably equal to a 4070 Super.

[@MrBeefTot187]

No it’s the RE engine and it won’t get fixed! Look at dd2 it isn’t fixed still

[@samyt681]

removal of denuvo did nothing to world perf

[@MrRenanHappy]

​@@MrBeefTot187 They did improve the performance on DD2, still isnt great, but it is better.

[@Thevikingninja117]

@@MrBeefTot187you do realize this beta build is an old build right? Did everyone just up and forget the tgs showcase?

[@snowolf494]

There has yet to be proofs that Denuvo destroy performances, and Monster Hunter hasn't had an anticheat... ever? They never announced one for Wilds. This comment is pure rage bait.

[@amyrosechaqueta]

I think being cautiously optimistic like you are is the right mindset when it comes for this, specially when it comes from the MonHun team that really only hiccups performance wise was world on release, Rise with denuvo stutter fest and 3U on wii u running pretty badly. If we think about it, even since MH1 they had been able to keep consistent fps and a smooth frame pacing (One of the biggest cases was 4U, that even if it had to drop fps it never caused problems), I do worry that even after the optimizations the people on less powerful hardware cannot enjoy the game without stutters or graphical issues due to poor optimizations. Overall, I agree mostly with what has been said with your video! I would like to leave my experience of 8 hours on the beta on my rig: My cpu was a ryzen 5 5600, 16 gbs of ddr4 ram and my gpu a raden rx6600. The performance without upscaling was pretty terrible, from 18 to 32 fps at 720p windowed with constant stutters at lowest (even making sure to manually putting everything as low as possible except resolution scaling) With FSR I was able to get between 22 fps and 40fps with still terrible frame pacing on lowest. The worst part of them all was the 25 crashes i encounter, I wasn't able to finish more than the chatacabra hunt due to my game completely causing a full pc freeze after like 10 minutes into a hunt and this game is the only one that has caused me something like this. The CPU usage was almost maxout in all cores, the gpu was completely max out according to my pc I think the main issue are probably issues with AMD hardware specifically that are less notable or abstent on nvidia side with the beta, so hopefully it gets fixed on release!

[@notfoca11]

So I have an i7-14700k,32Gb and a 4070. With 1440p High settings with DlSS quality, fps went from 50 to 70ish with some dips to 40s near the trees with the vine traps(the worse place for perfomance in the beta excluding base camp). Nvidia frame gen seems really well implemented fps went betwenn 70 to 110, the input lag wasnt bad at all, although some inputs missed sometimes. I know the game will be optimized...still scared of denuvo

[@godtiermullet]

DLSS and Frame Gen are not recommended if you can't get at least 60 fps without those settings. What you will get instead is a lot of input lag.

[@kphuts815]

i have a 1440p screen with a 2070s, at medium everything runs fine (around 60fps with dlss balanced) but at high i ran into Vram issues. I do plan on upgrading before the full release.

[@zer0her048]

Who figured. The 4070 ti super has 100-110 fps on 1440p high by default. No frame generation needed. Not that I would use it because of the latency.

[@bakatemplargaming2430]

i was playing on a ryzen 5 3600 32GB ram and a 3060ti my on high with highs of 72fps and lows of 50 fps so whatever it is you guys are doing to your games yall are messing up your rigs or settings

[@bakatemplargaming2430]

immidently turn down shadows you dont need them they are only visual they do not affect gameplay other than pull compute power, turn off film grain bloom and any godrays you do not need those again only visual after just doing that you can play with everything else on high at a stable 50+ fps

[@NovaBushido]

Great video, my guy. I have an I9 13900K and XTX 7900 at 4K with everything at Ultra. I was getting around 40-55 fps. Frame generation kept crashing my game, but the one time I got it to work, I was at around 190-220 fps. I didn't notice any artifacting, but I wish I had to try it for longer. I hope Capcom allows a good amount of time for people who trust performance to try the game so people can get the full picture of how the game runs before they buy.

[@inspectahgex1910]

I hope on PS5 they let us configure individual graphics settings like they did with Rise

[@conerkrumme2604]

I think people were primed to over react about performance after the DD2 launch. I agree with your point on the whole, but I definitely understand where the community reaction is coming from.

[@Scoppy]

I'm concerned for the pc release considering not alot of pc users have what game devs consider high end pc's an handheld high end gaming pcs aren't even capable of running it as well

[@ickerolig]

Not gonna lie, I do understand people's worry and gripes with an upcoming game being resource heavy. Me like most people didnt have parents that would just say "ofc we will spend 2k because you don't think your pc is good enough" but at the same time, I want the new big titles that I play to give me that wow-factor. I love Rise to death, but that game really lacked that feeling that World gave me. Btw, Dragons dogma 2 is running very well at this point in time, im hitting way above a stable 120fps on that game that I couldn't even reach stable 60 in (even outside cities(same engine as Wilds)) so I do have a positive outlook on Wilds reaching a much better point than this beta at full release.

[@azyaschik]

​@@ickerolig I agree that it's important for games to give a wow factor with their graphics, but let's not equalize the wow effect with upgrading hardware to the highest end of the spectrum. Because there are games like Black Myth Wukong and Space Marine 2, which both can run smoothly on GTX 1660 and look pretty good at the same time

[@Volfur2251]

I think people have forgotten that pc gaming is a expensive hobby that usually requires upgrading your machine every 2-3 years to keep up with modern tech. Lets take this game as a example its primed for the RTX 5080/5090 Cards due to come out in 3 months and people are trying to run 1660 supers on ultra at 1440p.. makes no sense

[@Benri05]

​@@Volfur2251 If these are the graphics that require a 5090, then damn gaming is regressing lol, there are games on ps4 that looks better.

[@Jeraco24]

I was told on the monsterhunter discord the beta was also CPU bound. Checking my task manager my GPU was at 50 to 60% utilization but CPU was maxed out.

[@Cassapphic]

I wish they had announced there would be a benchmark for the game closer to launch alongside this beta because I think a lot of people after seein the very high reccomended specs, wanted to use this beta to try to see what the game would look and run like. On my 3060 with a 5600x I could get a stable 40-50 fps at mostly low settings with a few things set to medium and dlss enabled. It was... playable but I didn't like it I wouldn't play a game as long as monster hunter like this. Ideally What I want as a bare minimum is 1080p medium settings 60fps consistently, which is a ways out, and my friends have had a lot mroe issues, my friend's 4060 at 1440p was crashing often, and a friend who I know nothing about his pc was having a ton of visual bugs, his first rey dau kill was against origami rey dau and it was after a couple hours of trying to make the game function. The performance is definitely unacceptable in this state so I hope we get a good benchmark a month or so before launch so people get time to properly test their machines and time to find new parts (I'm considering upgrading to a 4070 so I can maybe try 1440p but at least short term to make wilds run way better)

[@Sonyc456]

We need a new Demo closer to launch to re-evaluate a more closely matching to the launch build of the game to see it against our PCs/ PS5s to make a purchase decision. If I have any hope its that Ruri can let the Community Managers this is something the community would like to have before launch. Please Capcom! :)

[@Socratezism]

on a i5 12400 and 3060 ti, 32 gb ram, nvme ssd. This is the first and only game i didnt have a good experience playing at 1440p. Any game i could go high settings at 60 fps minimum. Wilds beta i got at medium/low settings 40/45 fps, or 60/70 fps with fsr+framegen, wich like u said gave terrible ghosting and unstable frametimes (hovering between 20/30 ms constantly). but with framegen the game felt a lot smoother then without (and somehow textures were less bad,wtf), so thats how i played. Sure it was playable, but it didnt feel good at all! So stuttery. So ive played with a mix of medium+low settings, as low as i could go that made a difference. Changing fsr/dlss quality/performance didnt make any difference at all for fps It only changed my gpu usage. So it is hard cpu botttlenecked. Thats just optimasation/engine issue. And the visuals dont warrant that at all imo. The monsters and characters look rly rly great, but the environments are mostly empty and undetailed with horrible textures. Its so much worse then DD2 or world (at release). May be the most dissapointed ive been regarding performance+visuals ever. Of course its beta. I do have faith in MH/capcom regarding gameplay. Regarding pc performance i dont. This performance i got seems rly close to the requirements they said. They may optimise it a little bit, and then add denuvo. And their track record is bad. So i expect performance to not change that much. Your point of expecting to upgrade your pc every 3 years.. in all the years ive been watching you i never disagreed with u more. Which can happen and its fine to have different opinions, but.. come on man.... I am the same age as you. Always after i build a new pc, i upgraded my gpu after 5 years, then 5 years later build a new pc. And i always got a midtier gpu (value). This always worked great for me. On a few games at the end of the cycle i did need to turn settings down, but games were always perfectly playable. Unthil Wiilds.. Anyway, 5 years instead of 3,years huuuge difference. So i have a 3060 ti atm... Its almost like u were saying: "It is about time to upgrade now, so you have wrong expectations and no right to complain bout Mh wilds beta performance.". I realize that is not exactly what u were saying, but its not that far off. Its also the way u said it. I was suprised and a bit infuriated by this. Maybe i misunderstood, or otherwise i let it go. You gave me so much joy over the years!!! Its all good. As of now, the beta changed my hype for MH wilds from 100 to 80. Mostly coz of performance+visuals, but also coz of leveldesign/no tracking/no commitment on attacks etc. Enough whining now.. it was just bothering me a bit. It will work out somehow. I am still hyped for weapons, monsters and the game., and all of Ruri content! So many hours of fun ahead!

[@rurikhan]

You actually agreed with what I said. I said “I’m either upgrading every 3 years, or I’m turning down settings” (might not be the exact quote as I’m on my phone rn). You said it yourself, closer to the end of the cycle you’re turning down settings, so our estimates are not that far off, 3-4 years, my brain might also be giving me recency bias as with content creation the cycle is a little tighter as I need more leeway for rendering videos as fast as possible while also editing thumbnails without chugging.

[@BadEnd98]

I think 40-45+ is acceptable as the game will look better now. I remember I have similar and worse performance than yours with RTX 3060 laptop. But after I turned off the fps counter and focus on the hunt I completely forgot about how it run and the game felt smooth, especially monster fluid movements make it so immersive into the fight.

[@Socratezism]

I should have added this.. It didn't felt smooth. It felt stuttery. At times it didn't register inputs. At times it skipped parts of monster animations, so I couldn't see and just got hit. So I guess the game was just skipping frames. That just f-ing sux. Then kinda hearing: performance was fine, time to upgrade also sux. So it was more about that context, then the 3/5 years difference. That difference of perspective/usage is fair. The beta should be better playable then this on my system. I am fine with turning down a few settings. Not with a stuttery frame skipping mess with horrendous textures.( Be real, look at the rocks, and ground looks empty) I don't have issues and way better performance +visuals when i play wukong, new da, gow:r etc.

[@WesleyKHM]

I have worse specs than you. Just drop it to 1080p and 30 FPS and Med/High no FSR/frame gen. Looks great and runs stable. I played World and Rise at launch. Runs better than they did when they launched on PS4/Switch.

[@BadEnd98]

​@@Socratezism Oh stutters is surely way worse than low fps. But I've seen even people with a 4090 get pretty bad stutters too.

[@piedpiper1185]

I'm a software developer myself. On any software being made, optimization is always the last thing to get done. Any developer/engineer worth their salt will tell you that it doesn't matter how well something runs if it doesn't do the job you created it for in the first place. So any development is always 'Does it work?' first then 'How can we make it work better?' second.

[@gavinw1184]

@@piedpiper1185 yeah, there are lots of reasons to have faith in capcom for this one. MH is their money maker game, and I think the beta confirmed that. I really don’t think anyone can judge the game properly until full release or maybe a proper demo.

[@pedroffline]

problem with companies this days they're leaving optimization for AFTER release. We can't keep accepting this.

[@ssduo5574]

@@pedroffline THIS!

[@Robert-cx3ns]

@@pedroffline monster hunter been consistent since day 1. Don't lump them with those companies.

[@pedroffline]

@@Robert-cx3ns well, both performance and quality mode on ps5 beta had terrible performance

[@Jimko2804]

As a professional QA Engineer I have to say that the situation is as you describe around 19 minutes into your video. As for wilds performance I had a descent experience on my gaming laptop (Nvidia 4060/16 gb ddr5 4800mhz/ryzen 7 7735 hs/ Kingston fury ssd m2 nvme) witch is by no means a perfect setup. I was getting around 45 average fps on high settings without frame generation. About 55 fps on medium settings again no fg. I used Nvidia dlss upscaling in all cases.

[@Boamere]

After DD2 we shouldn’t trust capcom with this engine in a multiplayer open world game. No doubt it will perform slightly better on release but it won’t be anywhere near what should be expected for a game like this. I have never seen a game change much from beta to full release

[@calebnelson58]

Ruri weren’t you the dude that said people need to stop complaining and get new a graphics card after 3 years?!

[@rurikhan]

I said people with budget GPUs should adjust their expectations to the hardware they bought. I’ve bought plenty of budget GPUs back in my day and simply didn’t run games at max settings or expect flawless performance.

[@BoogieWoogieCat]

@@rurikhan Mate, people using the recommended specs had a terrible experience with the game. The game was cpu bound at camp, with the best cpu on the market, paired with a 4090. It turned the 4090 into a 1440p card AT BASE CAMP, if you didn't use FG. No one is talking about budget pcs running at max settings, but you. People tried to run the game at the recommended settings, with the recommended hardware and they didn't get the experience that was promised by Capcom. There's literally tons of video evidence from people benchmarking it and they are absolutely irrefutable. The system requirements are already set in stone and Capcom won't do any miracles here. They're 100% relying on Frame Generation to run this game, hence the damn prompt when you boot the game up. And that is a problem. No amount of optimization will change that. Stop insulting our intelligence, because the only thing you succeeded at doing here, is showing how much of a shill you are.

[@rurikhan]

You’ve already made up your minds, and that’s your prerogative, but when you close yourself off like that, there’s nothing left to say. If you genuinely believe I’m lying, that’s fine, but I said what I said, I stand by it, and I’ll eat crow if I’m wrong. But at the end of the day, I told people not to pre-order and to wait for reviews and performance analysis, if that’s not reasonable advice I don’t know what is, should we boycott the game then? Is that the route?

[@Benri05]

Been hyped for this game even way before the reveal trailer in 2023, this beta just pulled my expectations so low. I don't have any problem upgrading but I've been burnt one too many times where the release wasn't that much different from the earlier showing.

[@hellokatyfac3]

@@rurikhan That is good advice - and I HOPE you end up being right. For quite a few, tweaking settings makes things work well enough to be enjoyable for a beta, but if World > Iceborne was any indication, the added Denuvo is going to absolutely TANK any playability that users have scrounged up with this.

[@taliadx]

My PC is currently just below minimum listed spec for the game, running a GTX 1660, and a Ryzen 5 2600. The Beta *looked* bad, but it *played* comfortably. It was 30fps, bumped higher with framegen, but it was playable. I could counter, I could dodge, I could react to what was happening on screen easily enough. I know my setup is old now, and I know that upgrading it would make it look and run smoother, but if it was the only way I could experience the game, then it would be serviceable. A lot of people get way too hyperbolic with "literally unplayable". "Literally unplayable" should mean "the game does not function", not "the game isn't as smooth or pretty as I'd like". (edit: a letter and a comma)

[@tuliomesquita1294]

Excelent video man! I run a similar spec to your RTX 2060 pc, with the same video card but worse processor (i3 from 10 years ago? idk anymore) and memory, and ohhh boy what an experience. I got N64 monsters, terrains, invisible water, Atari NPCs and a lot of non-existent blurred effects.. but as i kept fighting the Ray Dau, he eventually comes to his full form and it was glorious. Frame rate low, but i got 2 conclusions: 1- i most definetly need to upgrade my PC; 2- i will buy this game day one.

[@lukiaa93]

Generally things were fine with the nvidia 3080, i12 for me running at 1440px uncapped, hitting around 90-70s frames. Mainly the visual clarity with the start of Rey Dau dipped a little, never seemed to have issue with the hub. Rey Dau himself seemed to be prone to a lot of collision and enviorment issues - like the dunes being a bit awkward with him. I wasn't taking this beta as a visual test but more of a infrastructure for cross play as this is relatively new for them. I had a great time with the beta, but people shouldn't be too worried, optimisation is usually one of the last things, if not the last thing. Just because it make sense from a testing sense. My friends seemed to have processer issues as we found within the specs. Either way i cannot wait for this game, really hyped from playing the beta. nice vid

[@quipsilvervr]

Honestly, I'm glad they are seeing these issues during the Beta. That means the Beta was a good decision, and now they have some insight (from the more informed folks that ran tests etc) what needs tweaked etc.

[@1R3TR0]

My rig and experience - 3080 10g, i5 7800k 32g ram. Rez 1440p. All high settings, motion blur off. I had 1 issue right at the first camp, where you decide on your weapon, i had a BSOD (ended up being a kernel misread. After that, I had solid 60 fps (capped) with lows of 55. I had a great time.

[@Dyonivan]

I had four friends with of experiences: Friend 1 - 12700k with a 7900 XTX couldn't even launch the game passed the opening credits. As soon as she hit the main menu, the game would crash every time. Friend 2 - 14700k with 4080 Super. Game would crash at rewards screen about 50% of the time. Game ran at solid 90 fps at 1080p high. Friend 3 - 7800x3D with 2070 Super. Game had frequent dips below 60 fps at 1080p medium. No crashes. Me - 12600k with 3080. Game ran just fine at 1440p high with no noticeable frame drops below 60 or graphical artifacts.

[@user-sz6wo3in7k]

i feel like the variance people have seen, with how incoherent it is, is probably just unoptimized beta nonsense, since no card manufacturers have been able to put out any drivers for it yet and they havent been able to test the game on this many builds before this beta. It definitely needs to run better, but honestly as long as most people with a 3060 or equivalent card can run the game on medium in the 60s at a stable level, I think that should be good, hopefully though, when you scale up to stronger hardware we will be able to see noticeable increases, as there has been some weird stuff with that, but again, I think that's beta nonsense

[@SoeZ-]

Really weird the friend 1 & 2, my game with a 4070 + i5 13600k if we dont count the terrible optimization of the game the game itself didnt crash in 20h of beta. Dont lie u dont have friends...

[@Digiornio]

Lmao all intel, that's why. My friends are all amd cpus and we didn't crash. Game still ran rough though. I'm sure they'll fix that before launch.

[@RIP_ZYZZ1738]

@@SoeZ-Worst projection I think I’ve ever seen on the internet

[@justalex4214]

​@@Digiornio this. 7900x and didn't crash once in 15h, my friend with whom I played with (5800x) had one crash in 20hrs at the very end on sunday and that was likely due to his amd graphics card which have notoriously unstable drivers.

[@nr.v4009]

I like your optimism. If there is one Dev team i believe in it s the MH Team. I still have a lot of doubts but we ll see

[@BangHJL]

Nah, this will be the same performance that we're gonna get with the final product. People need to understand these 3 things: 1. Capcom just isn't good at making PC ports. Even they've stated this themselves. 2. RE Engine was made for RE7, a slow-paced game with tight corridor where the devs could easily hide assets and loading time. Not open-world games. DD2 proved that. 3. It's a beta. Not a pre-alpha or alpha. The only things that will change are gameplay balancing & bugfixes. Optimization doesn't get done in just 4 months before a game releases ESPECIALLY when that game has already been in development for 5-6 years. And we're talking about a Japanese company here where they're more often than not do things the traditional way. A good example here is Dark Souls 2. That game is infamously known for its troubled development. FromSoftware restarted the entire production of the game half way through when they realized the game couldn't run on the then current gen consoles. The reason why we're seeing this kinda performance is because Capcom thinks that this is acceptable. And don't even bring up the "TGS build." That is PS5 and we're talking about PC here where hardware scalability is a thing. Please stop coping. This will be another big AAA disastrous launch that the devs are going to promise to fix months after it's been out. Just you know, I'm not hoping for this. MH is my favorite series. But let's be realistic here. Capcom isn't competent enough with their PC ports and this game is way beyond anything that they've ever done.

[@Vertilgung]

good comment i agree, the cope is really out there. the most pathetic thing is that what has been shown with the network test "beta" was not even looking better than World on PC, the characters have more resolution the world looks like a blurry mess.

[@TerminusTartaros]

I have a 3060Ti and ran the game on 1440p max settings and had almost no problem. And the only grafical problem I was having was some strange rainbow colors at the feet of the monster where they touch the ground. Performance wise it was fine. And I agree, it was just a demo and we have 4 month to the final release. I am not worried. I would be if this was an early access one week before launch.

[@juanz888]

Dragons Dogma 2 still have perfomance problems.... and is already out for a long time

[@faresabdelkefi397]

Thank you!!!! People are delusional saying that they will fix it. 😢 Mhw iceborne is still unoptimized mess. The average pc specs gotten better (7years later) that's why people don't complain anymore.

[@FunkyyCat_]

ah yes a different game made by a different team

[@quenterrellbriscoe7339]

Well Dragons Dogma 2 & and Monster Hunter has two different teams. And the Monster Hunter team is notorious for actually listening to their community. Why do you think the made the beta in the first place…..it was to get feed back

[@quenterrellbriscoe7339]

@@FunkyyCat_ That’s what I’m saying

[@faresabdelkefi397]

World is still unoptimized. For a 7 year old game. Dips below 4k 60 on 4070 super. (high resolution texture pack)

[@paulmaudibatreidis]

I recently got a new laptop with a 4070 vram 8gb, 16gb ram at 5600, R7 7840hs and had a pretty warm experience I don't necessarily think my portable brick is bad at cooling in particular? But it was warm, but playable. My main concern and what Im hoping to see is that they will take all the data from the beta and make a better recommended settings for lower end folks, my friend group generally hover around the 2060s or 3060s did try out the beta as well and they're not folks that generally goes hard on trial and erroring the graphics settings to achieve playability. They simply pop into the beta saw doritos and boiling temp and told me to piss off and wait for the full release, it was surprising to me when you showcased the 2060 experience 20 minutes into the video and how smooth it was compared to my folks. Im hopeful! also they had no issues with network or dcing, we're just hoping they make the recommended settings brain dead for casual folks.

[@Grandleon]

It's a laptop, it doesn't have the benefit of a tower case airflow. It's normal to noticeably heat up when playing games. However you only have to worry about heat if a device is poorly configured and resulting in downthrottling.

[@drizzle7032]

It’s the CPU that’s the biggest problem. I realized I have a pretty low CPU with a 3060 GPU and the game is literally unplayable so I realize it’s the CPU.

[@gregoireallasio7148]

What CPU do you have if i may ask ? I also have a 3060 (with 12BG + 16 GIGA of ram) along witha ryzen 5 4650 , and it was very rocky if not unstable at low / low - medium settings , was it the same for you ?

[@drizzle7032]

@ I have a 1600 but the game needs at least a 5600 to play once you get that you should be playing smoothly

[@gregoireallasio7148]

@@drizzle7032 damn, i though it would be confortable enough.. luckly i was able to save money this whole year, i will change the cpu into a ryzen 9 and maybe change the rams and motherboard while i m at it, hopefully that will be enough to run at a steady medium

[@drizzle7032]

@ I just ordered an AMD ryzen 7 5800 x 8 core

[@SH1NK1R01]

@@drizzle7032I have a 5600x it’s still not enough. I’m upgrading to 5900x at the end of the year for this reason. I was also using a 3060ti. The game straight up would hit max utilization on cpu and wouldn’t hold 60 no matter the settings.

[@James-cr8mt]

For me, the beta was INCREDIBLY core heavy. On a 12700k, it was pinned at around 70-80% throughout most of my playthrough and in camp it was almost maxed out. My 3080 is really starting to show its age, which is unbelievable to me considering how powerful it was at launch.

[@NaCl3P0]

Look Ruri, if I have to use fake frames to get 60FPS then Capcom should get fake money.

[@rurikhan]

Where did I say this?

[@NaCl3P0]

@@rurikhanDid I say you did Ruri? Why are you so defensive? Capcom puts out the system requirements clearly stating to hit 60 with a 4060 it needs frame generation at 1080 resolution. Tell me I’m lying. They have to fake frames at what was a standard resolution last gen and have the galls to charge $70 USD for it? It’s almost as if they know it’ll be fucked on release that they put out those stipulations to hit 60 so they can say they told you from the start

[@Vertilgung]

@@NaCl3P0 its his holy capcom, hes lifelyhood depends on the success if games from this publisher/dev. how else is he going to make vids anyone wants to watch if he does not get exclusive access or endorsments in the future. second one is sqeenix, but i guess those ones did not dish out for YAWNTRAIL months of free subs so he can make content to the great WUK LAMAT conquering everyone with SMILE

[@GeeMannn]

@@NaCl3P0 holy based

[@Pliskin1023]

Hi, greatings from Spain, first of all, my experience on the BETA on my i5 12400 + RX7800XT is a mix bag. I enjoy the Beta, the game run well but have issues, like de Frame Generation ghosting (Capcom promise this wil be fixed on launch) and a performance not at smooth as posible. It's a BETA, so expect a better launch, I hope

[@ZephyrusAsmodeus]

I don't see how this is such an issue. Betas are really delayed game builds. By the time we got our hands on the beta, there have been undoubtedly numerous interations and improvements. Monster Hunter games are almost always plug and play at or just after release. They're usually really solid with graphics and performance. Obviously, it's possible it might be rough when it comes out. They did flub performance with Dragons Boredom 2, but I'm not all that worried about Wilds.

[@akkitakara]

Yeah I'm not worried at all either. People who cry about the DD2 example don't get that the issues with its performance had to do with NPC simulation being very poorly implemented, not that it was an open world game on RE engine. So long as they are keeping the actual open world systems like LOD biasing tuned and well optimized, the game should run very well.

[@ritof-rice]

I have a 3090 with a Ryzen 9 5950X and 128GB of ram, for some reason even with those the game frame rate struggled in certain areas, the camp with the other players was one of them, when the storm would hit, and some odd moments in monster fights, I ended up capping it at 60 fps but still had drops to about 45 and even lower sometimes, had a crash even at one point. I assume the final game will have all this fixed, and I'm just glad we got a beta test to find these issues early

[@Trolzzor]

I played on series X and the framerate was unplayable at times fighting rey dau in resolution mode, while performance mode looked really ugly. It needs a lot of work. The FPS should be a stable 30 fps at least. I think that the game looks great, but not so good it would explain running at 20FPS at times. Don't get me wrong, I want this game to be good so damn bad and thought the gameplay was great. I am rooting for Capcom to work on optimisation in the coming days!

[@johndarc444]

i have a 3060 and a AMD Ryzen 7 5700G from when i was able to finally get a pc in 2022 and i haven't had too many performance issues and a lot of the lag spikes cleared up before the beta ended, mind you i do play ultra settings on 1080p, and on other monitors i get better game quality/speed, i think it will perform great!

[@xlMantislx]

“Unplayable” I don’t think that word means what you think it means.

[@benng2953]

I dunno, feels like this need to be spelt out apparently. The way I see it there are two groups: Group 1: 20 FPS: Unplayable. 30FPS: Playable. Group 2: 30FPS: Unplayable, 59FPS: Unplayable, 60FPS: Playable. It's almost like people are misunderstanding between expectations vs eyeball perceivability. And the fact that game consoles still run largely at 30FPS and I guess no one in Group 2 owns a game console because they would just have an unplayable experience most of the time.

[@darkrai3110]

I am so thankful for this video, and especially for the effort you put into research for it!

[@pauloariente]

Excellent comments, Ruri. Everything was on point!

[@Ayivir]

I'm running a Ryzen 5 3600, 16GB ram, RTX 2060, and my performance was similar, except for when models would start going n64 mode and then the fps would plummet if i didn't restart and pushed it further. I personally wouldn't call having to restart my game every 30-40 mins or so "playable". I hope it gets fixed because i really enjoyed the demo, issues apart.

[@Thelastpraetor]

My own little feedback. I didn't look too deeply into what the framerate was of the game, my experience was this on a Ryzen 7 7700 NVIDIA RTX GeForce 4060ti 16GB Ram DDR5 1TB SSD. The graphics were slightly on the lower end, where things like the Sandship sails were pixelated, but overall, gameplay was smooth, and I had no issues with fighting each of the monsters in the locale, even while the locale changed weather, I didn't experience any major overheating. It felt almost as smooth as I currently play World

[@sazuteks3104]

I also got the doritto monsters. It was a shock, but my pc is what it is. The next surprise was that the blacksmith lady was mostly fine. She was looking a bit rough, but the details were there. The only human, surrounded by doritto monsters. I wish she would have shared her secret with the rest of them.

[@ragzard]

I played with my MOBILE 3050 6gbs, 13th gen i5, 32G or ram and NVMe SSD. Shaders compilation took less than 10min. Played on low with textures medium, anisotropic high and couple other minor tweaks and was getting more than 40fps, no noticeable dips in the 1% low. Super playable.

[@Fortexcross]

This is my experience as well. Laptop 3060 6gb VRAM and a NVMe SSD with 64gb of RAM and it RAN fine. I had no issues with combat and fighting monsters. It just LOOKED like a ps3 game. Gonna wait till a few weeks after to release to see if I should buy. Hopefully they'll have improved things or have an unofficial patch out to help out people without higher-end cards.

[@ragzard]

@@Fortexcross I won't have money to upgrade for a decent GPU at my desktop, that have a 2060 at the moment. But I will be playing the game quite happily on lower settings with it until the upgrade money comes.

[@kinetickyber]

I have a Radeon 5700XT GPU and a Ryzen 3700x CPU. I was able to reach stable 45 fps at 1440P medium-high settings. I would have easily been able to optimize it further if I had cared to. I had limited time when I was able to test the Beta and cared more about trying out combat and making sure it could "run" on my system at all. I know with a few tweaks here and there I could have achieved stable 60 at 1440p easily. My system was fully up to date on all drivers and I never had any major bugs or fps drops that took me out of the combat. I think PC performance was better than I expected on my rig especially for a beta. I cant wait to try out the real game.

[@Sinorras]

let's keep in mind that the full version will have to deal with denuvo

[@rurikhan]

True. I am very scared of the impact that will have.

[@xSolarPhantomx]

@@rurikhan if its done right it shouldnt do too much, but in most cases developers dont implement it correctly due to time crunch or not caring because its going to be removed later, so it causes more performance issues than it normally would.

[@Gamegurlz94]

Yup planning to build a 4070/4080 ti build just for wilds

[@Tacos_Sauce_Zea]

how did you manage to get it to run on a 2060 and an i7 5930k ?! I could barely get it to 20fps 1080p on either low or medium on a 3070 and ryzen 9 3600xt.... what is this trickery edit : 3900xt silly me

[@gpcarnage4881]

What size monitor are you playing on?

[@Tacos_Sauce_Zea]

@@gpcarnage4881 4k, I've tried all different resolutions with or without DLSS/upscaling, windowed or fullscreen. I at most gain 3-5fps, it doesnt seem that relevant sadly :/

[@gpcarnage4881]

@@Tacos_Sauce_Zea What size is the monitor? 4k is the resolution.

[@Tacos_Sauce_Zea]

@@gpcarnage4881 good question actually. it's pretty big, I'd say probably between 22 and 27 inches

[@gpcarnage4881]

@Tacos_Sauce_Zea A monitor size of 24" to 27" is fairly average. Now that I have read your post more, I think I know the problem. Ryzen doesn't make a Ryzen 9 3600xt processor. So I am assuming you mean a Ryzen 5 3600x, which is the lowest level processor they are recommending to play the game at. Your CPU is heavily bottlenecking your GPU. Even if you are going down to 1440p or even 1080p, as long as the game is in full-screen, you are still technically upscaling. My friend ran into the same issues when using his 3070 because he is mainly a console gamer, and he hooked his pc up to a massive old 60-inch TV. Even though the TV is old and only does 1080p his GPU still has to upscale that resolution to the TV which immediately ate up all his vram and he also wasn't able to use frame gen because his TVs refresh rate isn't enough to support it. In your situation, you would need to upgrade your CPU before launch because right now, your 3070 is just a paper weight when it comes to this game. Your PC (like my friends) has probably been functional on most of the games you play, but this game is next gen and is going to take a lot more processing power. The good thing about AMD is that they provide great socket support, so getting a good AM4 CPU shouldn't cost more than a couple hundred bucks.

[@rainbowkrampus]

Another thing I see people getting wrong is the time frame. People have been saying that there's no way they can clean up performance with ~4 months til launch. Leaving aside that this isn't really the case, they'll have had about half a year to clean up performance by the time launch comes around. The demo is a build from about 2 months ago. Meaning they've already been working on performance. Which they've said as much given that they've stated that their current build runs better than the beta. Optimization is a process which was underway before the beta even came out. How much focus it had and what kind of ramp up timeline they'll have is entirely up to them and unknown to us. But people working themselves up into a panic attack over this and saying ridiculous things about how "There's no way they can make it run good in time!" are being completely irrational and letting some weird anxiety take over their decision making.

[@Arkyuu]

Really love the emphasis on the last part. I for one was not expecting it to run smoothly since it's a beta test and a lot people confuse beta with a full on demo. Heck even ChatGPT knows the difference between the two if you ask it. The beta even made me decide to pre-order the game after it ended. Thanks for uploading this, Ruri

[@Dyonivan]

Especially since they outright said this beta was to test their servers, not the stability of the game. I never had a single disconnect, and neither did any of my friends. So it was a successful beta

[@Abedeuss]

ChatGPT doesn't speak Corporate. In Corporate terms, 3 months before release or so, it's basically a demo version... unless for some reason they released an old beta version that is obsolete in which case why?

[@CorelUser]

@@Abedeuss the game is 4 months away and it was indeed an old version

[@黄衣の王-k7d]

@@Abedeuss it's the " unless old beta " 6 months to be exact

[@Arkyuu]

@@Abedeuss "in which case why" uhh to not reveal so much to the players? to test the servers which does not need an optimized game, just have people populate the server regardless of how bad the game looks. Did you even finish the video, my dude?

[@minguigui9741]

I didn’t expect the best look/performance when the download was 16GB. I played the beta knowing there was probably some stuff missing/not working and had a great time

[@OnionknightMH]

I've read on twitter that apparently the beta build was using ray tracing which had no setting to turn off, hence the fps issues. Apparently the latest showcase at TGS does NOT have this on and performance was much better compared to the beta/gamescom build. So I believe the game will run much better at launch.

[@minichief307]

You read it on twitter? Like from a dev of the game or just a random dude because I read on twitter that the moon landing was a hoax so 🤷‍♂️

[@itsSmiv]

is your source seriously "i read it on twitter"? You just read some random tweet and decided to believe it?

[@OnionknightMH]

@@minichief307 Haha that made me chuckle, but I read it from Kage_MH a known person in the community.

[@minichief307]

@@OnionknightMH then I'll take it with a salt mine of salt.

[@minichief307]

@@OnionknightMH I hope you are right, though, because I had a blast with the beta it just didn't run as well as I would like, but even if you are wrong, I'll probably still get it day 1 😂

[@alathreon8315]

Just so you know, you can submit your feedback to capcom until friday.

[@bad3ip2k10]

No matter how anyone spins this situation, there is one thing guaranteed to happen: If they don't fix it by release, this game is going to be 100% review bombed. Performance is king people.

[@racoonpie17]

I have a toaster from 2017. Played perfectly fine on low medium graphics. But what mattered what's the game was amazing by itself as graphs are cherry on top.

[@quantumdot7393]

I don't know why you have such faith in them considering performance and optimization was a hot issue with monster hunter world release, also the statement about the beta being a different game from the final product is absurd.

[@rurikhan]

You’ve already made up your mind, so there’s realistically nothing I can say. You shouldn’t buy the game if that’s how you feel.

[@Vertilgung]

@@rurikhan nice argument there, because he is correct. We know you lifelyhood also depends on this games success, stop kiding around.

[@hunterwilliams2833]

The network code was one of the main weak points for pc mhword so the fact that they released a beta to specifically stress test it is a really good sign. I intentionally tested tabing out of the beta and I only got kick from a lobby once on day one. A pretty big improvement from world in my experience.

[@MrTernation]

Its all about expectations. I set mine high. Got Super dissapointed to a point to unwishlist (not in my heart) the game and give feedback with the survey. 4070 Super+ 7 7700 -> 60 -100 fps during hunts and 50-60 Lobby - High Preset - DLSS Q Playable? Yes, but the graphics i got was like PS5 performance mode, idk if its an error with shaders assets or the LOD/assets themselves but everything was Blurry/Foggy the fireflies and the light was soo Bloomy. Many rocks and ground mud was medium LOD. Nothing was sharp i could see dots/pixels shifting on my hunter. I'm not that optimistic, we have DD2 that proved that optimising with this engine is hard, speciallly CPU bounded task, even if they improve in the best scenario +30-50% Denuvo taxes heavily CPU which is the limiting factor here. Network-wise flawless for a beta. I'm pretty sure they lost many preorder/wishlist after this Playtest, and I agree with Benchmark (Lobby, weather transitions, turf wars).

[@drewroller32]

I believe that the main reason they released this beta at this time was so they could gather hardware and performance info from players, so then the QA process is much quicker and much more effective. This may be copium, but we still have many months until the game. It's not like it's coming out tomorrow.

[@UnstoppableSmooze]

Maybe I'm old fashioned, but i think a console should not have, "framerate" and "resolution" modes. games released on consoles need to always look and play well. That's the entire reason to own a console. It's one piece of hardware to design around and devs need to understand what their software can and can't do realistically

[@Ocean5ix]

Define "run well". The standard for consoles has mostly been 30fps although the PS2 could run a lot of it's games in 60. I don't see a reason to force 30 fps down people's throats if they can just give the player the option to prioritize what they want. Actually, there's no reason they don't just allow console players to completely customize the graphics. For example, Final Fantasy 7 Rebirth runs great on performance but looks blurry as hell, but in graphics mode it runs at 30fps and looks incredible. Why can't I choose to sacrifice shadow quality (and other things) to maintain the resolution and play it at 50-60fps? In other words, I disagree with you. I actually believe in the opposite, give full customization to the players and get rid of the mid-generation upgrades like the PS5 Pro.

[@blazingruin2975]

I myself would like to live in a time where we don't have to pick between two options. There is no "middle" mode, and it is that middle mode that I think consoles need to really flesh out and nail.

[@UnstoppableSmooze]

@@Ocean5ix in a perfect world the $700 console you bought should run games at, I'll be generous, 60fps on 1080p without stutter while maintaining graphical fidelity. This issue really comes from devs trying to exceed what the current hardware is capable of. Small addition I didn't think the industry's current over reliance on frame generation is healthy for the overall quality of products being made. It almost feels like they aren't incentivised to bother optimizing when I see them using it to reach 60fps on medium settings

[@timtimber5271]

There are plenty of people that are willing to sacrifice graphical fidelity for performance gains, even if the game ran fine before. It’s quite literally one of the biggest reasons to switch to PC because you get more options for how you want the game to run

[@Ocean5ix]

@@UnstoppableSmooze I don't disagree with you here, devs are pushing technology that is more demanding to run but doesn't look that much better, especially when it comes to MHWilds. And I agree with what you said about frame generation. Now, I don't think giving the option to the players is a bad thing. People prioritize different things. These 2 modes we now have on consoles assume the consumer is willing to sacrifice resolution but what if prefer to sacrifice something else? That's my problem with it, they either force you to play with everything maxed out at 30 or everything looking terrible at 60. As an owner of a PS5 and a mid end gaming lap top (that at this point is more like low end with a Ryzen 7 and GTX 1650Ti) I can tweak the games to my liking, to the point where they run better than a Graphics mode and prettier than a performance mode. I think this is unnacceptable, my laptop is nowhere near close to the power of a PS5. Only thing I can think of is that they don't want players tweaking games on console to justify selling a Pro version later. I would bet money that 7 Rebirth can run at the very least at 50fps looking a lot sharper than it does on it's Performance mode setting. But if we had the power to do that, how would they sell the PS5 Pro advertising 7 Rebirth as "Pro enhanced"?

[@ShufflofigusCam]

I got a 1070k cpu and a 3080ti gpu. At max settings 1440p I was getting the 40-60fps (purposely capped at 60 for stability), like you mentioned during the Rey Dau hunt. But the load on the cpu was massive. 85% cpu usage to the gpus 15%.... I expect they will fix load balancing but the RE engine being so cpu hungry (like Dragons Dogma 2) is a flaw of the engine itself. I'm not worried, this is Monster Hunter after all, but I'm also expecting a heavier cpu load than I'd like at launch. This should rightfully concern some people with lower end cpu's.

[@YurttheSilentChief1]

Aside from all the performance stuff, I found that the grasslands variant of the map very rarely showed up for me, probably because of the amped up Rey Dau spawns which change the weather system entirely. Even aside from Rey Dau spawns, I saw that the yellow, dry grasslands were favored more than the BETTER looking lush green variant. On another note, I really didn't like how the game looks during thunderstorm in the desert. I think it leaves a negative view on the visual fidelity of the game when most people seeing the game for the first time are subjected to a dull gray color filter during this weather.

[@serenity3157]

Same. Not really a fan of grey color weather.

[@jaydonbrown617]

Wonder how different the weather can be then since sandstorms aren't exactly colorful 🤔

[@Sinphanius]

The Monster Hunter Team has been pretty good about optimization in their games in my experience. By the end of World before Iceborne I was getting solidly 200+ FPS with everything maxed out and the HD Texture Pack installed. Iceborne ran consistently at ~120 for me. Ultimately, here's what you do; A) If the Demo Runs Well, you can assume the base game will run as Well if not better, barring some unforeseen hiccups like how Base World had that Lightning FPS bug in the Recess or Teostra's Powder causing havoc. You can probably safely Pre-Order if you are so inclined, but you probably don't need to worry either way. B) If the Demo Does Not Run Well for you, then don't Pre-Order. When the day comes, buy it, install it, try it, speedrun through character creation, and if you're gonna get bad performance you'll probably notice it in that first opening sequence where you first ride the Seikret with all the Balaharas, because that sequence is probably gonna be a pretty good Benchmark tool in and of itself. There's a lot of moving entities, you're in a wide open area, there's a ton of Sand and Dust Particles, it's practically tailor made to show off if the game isn't going to run well. Hell just have Rei-Dau show up and start blasting Lightning and that sequence could be their Benchmark Tool all by itself. This honestly isn't like DD2 where the big Performance Problem shows up when you're in a city that you only get to after ~3+ Hours of gameplay or more. If that sequence runs terribly and you can't get it to both look good and run well, then the rest of the game probably will too, and so just stop there, you should have only been in game for like ~10 minutes tops, close the game and Refund it. If it runs well, maybe re-start so you can spend the requisite 938460934856093864906 hours in Character Creation, and then have a good time, the rest of the game will probably be fine, and if there are any outliers like the Recess Lightning or Teostra Powder there will probably be mods for them in the first couple days of the game's release, like there were for the Lightning and Powder.

[@meisterwu8922]

Never preorder, regardless of situation.