Does Monster Hunter Wilds still look and feel like dog water?
-
I played both betas/stress tests and the game just looks and feels like complete shit. Did it change at all since then?
I played on both PC and PS5. In my opinion the game looked really muddy and gross. Like MH rise looked better on switch. I know it's monster hunter, the gameplay was fun(ish), kind of easy. Very hand holdy though. I do not want to drop $60/70 on this game if it's exactly like it was in the beta's.
-
I have a 3060 12gb OC edition, Ryzen 7 5800x3D, 32gb ram at 4200, and installed on an m.2 SSD.
And I should expect much as the medium settings requirement is nvidia 2000 series... And DLSS also makes the game look like a shit sandwich even on quality.
Playing on ultra on r7 7700 and 6750 ( 12GB ) and its running 43-60fps. They also released a high res texture pack but its recommended to only use with min 16GB of vram ( free dlc ) which i havent tested yet.
So try the benchmark and see. I think the medium settings should be fine
-
No benchmarks. Just played on various settings
Beta wasnt optimised at all and frame gen was broken in them which was funny. Full game is better optimised but still has some hickups. Id suggest to run the benchmark, which is free and is a lot more updated than the betas ( and runs better )
-
It's a new game. Unfortunately I think we are now in an era where we can expect new games to run like shit on release, and be improved over the first year.
Wdym runs like shit. Been playing all day just fine...
... And on linux too...
-
Eh. I have a 3060 12 though
-
Depends on your hardware. I ran the benchmark tool for a laugh. I don't think I quite meet minimum spec, but not far off I think. If you're down that end, I'd avoid it.
https://i.imgur.com/JR1YNxE.jpeg
Lots of upscaling and frame generation options, which honestly make it look shite.
i am WELL abover recommended soec by a long shot. They should maybe reconsider those specs since not everyone wants to use fram gen and lower resolutiona in 2025.
-
Playing on ultra on r7 7700 and 6750 ( 12GB ) and its running 43-60fps. They also released a high res texture pack but its recommended to only use with min 16GB of vram ( free dlc ) which i havent tested yet.
So try the benchmark and see. I think the medium settings should be fine
I only have 12gb of vram. I would be fine if the game ran on high with DLSS OFF and native 1080p at 60-80fps. But it just doesn't, even though my PC should have 0 issues according to their spec requirements. I'll wait for patches and sales I think. Or maybe a demo is a ailable? I haven't looked.
-
Wdym runs like shit. Been playing all day just fine...
... And on linux too...
Specs? Settings? I can run the game fine as well if I upscale from 240p.
-
I only have 12gb of vram. I would be fine if the game ran on high with DLSS OFF and native 1080p at 60-80fps. But it just doesn't, even though my PC should have 0 issues according to their spec requirements. I'll wait for patches and sales I think. Or maybe a demo is a ailable? I haven't looked.
Is this from beta or benchmark tool? Big difference.
I have framegen off because eeuw and play on 1080p -
Specs? Settings? I can run the game fine as well if I upscale from 240p.
See comment above. R7 7700, rx 6750 xt, 1080p
-
Is this from beta or benchmark tool? Big difference.
I have framegen off because eeuw and play on 1080pi tried the benchmark today. medium settings, native res i get 50fps average.... im not playing this for a while lol. that's insane for what is recommended vs what i have for specs. medium should be at least 80fps on my computer.
-
i tried the benchmark today. medium settings, native res i get 50fps average.... im not playing this for a while lol. that's insane for what is recommended vs what i have for specs. medium should be at least 80fps on my computer.
Good to know, thanks for posting the results!
-
Specs? Settings? I can run the game fine as well if I upscale from 240p.
Yeah I tried the beta of wilds on steamdeck and I got 1 frame of game and nothing more haha, after rise being playable on switch and how amazed I was by world on pc it feels like a big miss this time. Hopefully it gets better quickly.
How about the game though? How does it feel compared to the last 2? Interesting mechanics?
-
I played both betas/stress tests and the game just looks and feels like complete shit. Did it change at all since then?
I played on both PC and PS5. In my opinion the game looked really muddy and gross. Like MH rise looked better on switch. I know it's monster hunter, the gameplay was fun(ish), kind of easy. Very hand holdy though. I do not want to drop $60/70 on this game if it's exactly like it was in the beta's.
From what I've heard this game is very CPU demanding title. To get a decent performance you have to be on platform with DDR5 and lots of CPU cores. Also game very much recommends RTX 4000 series or better with frame gen turned on. If you are trying to run the game on RTX 3000 series card, you should try turning on FSR frame gen. I suppose one can argue that game is not very well optimized and therefore it needs all that much hardware to run well and you're not entirely wrong there. I think devs were too ambitious with all the graphical bells and whistles and found themselves in this situation.
-
From what I've heard this game is very CPU demanding title. To get a decent performance you have to be on platform with DDR5 and lots of CPU cores. Also game very much recommends RTX 4000 series or better with frame gen turned on. If you are trying to run the game on RTX 3000 series card, you should try turning on FSR frame gen. I suppose one can argue that game is not very well optimized and therefore it needs all that much hardware to run well and you're not entirely wrong there. I think devs were too ambitious with all the graphical bells and whistles and found themselves in this situation.
i like to think my r7 5800x3D is till a good CPU, if i can run star citizen at 60-80fps at all times, monster hunter wilds should also be able to run the same way lol.
-
Eh. I have a 3060 12 though
I got the 3060, and returned it for the 3070. Upgraded from a 1070, a 10 year old card. But the 3060 performance wasn't there, and for $100 more I stayed in the xx70 lane. Needed the 3070 for 1440p monitors, the 3060 was good at 1080p but choked on 1440p. Was worth the upgrade for me, was my Christmas present to myself after 10 years of my old equipment.
-
I got the 3060, and returned it for the 3070. Upgraded from a 1070, a 10 year old card. But the 3060 performance wasn't there, and for $100 more I stayed in the xx70 lane. Needed the 3070 for 1440p monitors, the 3060 was good at 1080p but choked on 1440p. Was worth the upgrade for me, was my Christmas present to myself after 10 years of my old equipment.
im going to go amd next time. i dont see it as a time to upgrade though, i stull use 1080p monitors with 180hz. to mee that's better than 1440 at 60hz [similar prices]
-
This game is making me spend 2500 on a new rig and I'm conflicted about it. My 1080 has served me well o7
-
im going to go amd next time. i dont see it as a time to upgrade though, i stull use 1080p monitors with 180hz. to mee that's better than 1440 at 60hz [similar prices]
Yeah, it was a good deal on the monitors. Went from 22" to 27", redid my whole desk.
-
Yeah, it was a good deal on the monitors. Went from 22" to 27", redid my whole desk.
Yeah, I got 3 27s for 150 each on sale.
