all 95 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 222 points 7 months ago (33 children)

Damn, that's kinda a holy grail of game storefronts

  • source
  • hideshow 33 child comments
  • [–] [S] 107 points 7 months ago (32 children)

    Yeah, and it makes a ton of sense for Steam Deck/Machine/Frame

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 32 child comments
  • [–] 36 points 7 months ago* (30 children)

    I remember seeing someone play a Steam Deck in an airport awhile ago and the 3D game had a HORRIBLE frame rate.

    To the person playing to their credit they didn't seem bothered but I couldn't look away for a couple of seconds it was so shockingly bad. It made me think that a lot of people may have not really had the importance of framerate explained to them and what the relevant numbers are (film is 25, 30 is generally minimum for games and 60 is best).

    Almost by definition we aren't going to know those people but that is because if you are here you are probably a nerd, so this is good for all those blindspots. No one deserves a poor framerate if they don't have to, unless you are Mitch McConnell.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 30 child comments
  • [–] 26 points 7 months ago* (3 children)

    A neat trick you can do with heavier games on ... at least an OLED Deck (not sure if this is doable on the LCD version)...

    You target 45 fps, min, lock the max frame rate at something like 45-50, then, use VRR set at a 1:2 ratio, so you get 45 fps at 90hz.

    In many games, this generally, at least imo, ends you up with a smoother and potentially graphically higher quality than just targeting 60 fps / 60 hz.

    You can also use Optiscaler / DeckyFrameGen to basically hack different/better ability to do upscaling and framegen into a fair number of games that otherwise don't normally support it.

    For instance, the OptiScaler people recently, successfully managed to get FSR 4 working on RX 6000 and 7000 cards, which also works on a Deck.

    They essentially reverse engineered the previously leaked FSR4 driver to work on INT 8.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 7 months ago (2 children)

    I didn't think Deck supported VRR? If you have VRR you just cap your frame rate at 37 FPS or whatever and the screen syncs to that and refreshes at 37 Hz. What you're describing sounds like old school vsync.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 7 months ago

    It doesn’t have VRR but it does have a configurable refresh rate. So e.g. if a game runs at a stable 40 fps you can run the display at 40 Hz too (or 80 Hz for the OLED model) and then you don’t get the uneven frame spacing you’d get from vsync with 40 fps on a 60 Hz display. With VRR the screen would also adjust to whatever frame rate the game produces even if it’s not stable, and the Deck doesn’t do that. But being able to get 40 fps with uniform frame timing instead of the 30 fps you’d have to use if the display was locked to 60 Hz (LCD model) or 90 Hz (OLED model) is a huge difference.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

    setsubyou got it more correct, my terminology is a bit off.

    Yeah, you can lock the refresh rate at basically 15hz intervals (i think, last time i checked?), which is not true VRR, but, if you take the time to configure profiles and graphics settings per game, get stable and consistent frame rates, and then match the configurable refresh rate to that...

    ... this is sorta close to the ... idea/performance of what true VRR is going for, it just doesn't all work 'automagically'.

    I have an OLED, not an LCD, so yeah it looks like the LCD tops out at 60hz.

    So with an LCD, you could aim for basically 'always a bit above 30 fps' and then 60hz, for that 1:2 ratio, and with an OLED, aim for 'always a bit above 45 fps', and then 90hz, for the same 1:2 ratio.

    Its not the same, of course, as actually having 60 or 90 fps, but, as long as your fps never dips below the screen refresh rate, it looks/feels smoother than doing a 30fps or 45fps traditional vsync.

    But of course, you'll probably only need to do this for... significantly graphically heavy games... tons of less graphically intense / better optimized games will not need this level of tinkering min maxxing.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 8 points 7 months ago (2 children)

    I grew up playing RuneScape at 15 frames per second on the crappy school computers, so I'm used to it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 7 months ago (1 child)

    Lowest I can go is 20fps, anything below is too nauseating. I learned to cope because I modded Skyrim to the point of no return, and I could only get max 20fps with a decent rig and a ton of optimising. Hair physics and 4k trees definitely worth it 👍

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 7 months ago

    I'm happy you can appreciate frames that low. My fiance makes fun of me cuz I stress about anything below 60 lol granted my current PC doesn't have these issues. Plus I used to game on laptops so I'm perfectly content with lower graphics for smooth frame rate.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 7 months ago

    shit, was that me? that sounds like me. cyberpunk runs pretty bad on the deck, bg3 is pretty choppy… but older games like DS1 and DS2 seem to run pretty smooth for me, but I’ve always been bad at noticing quality.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 7 months ago (4 children)

    in my case, i would play on potato graphics to get good fps, 60 is the minimum, 30 is an exception. i can FEEL it in my play if its below 100. like not only see it but it feels progressively bad the lower it is

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 7 months ago (3 children)

    Serious question: does the difference between 60 and 100 even matter if your monitor is capped to 60Hz?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 7 months ago*

    sort of. but not to the extent that 60-100 gives. if you have a monitor capped at 60 and an fps at high, it does feel better, and it’s much more stable, and every refresh is all but guaranteed to have the most up to date frame.

    if you are stuck at 60, check your monitor, and its cable. you can have a 120 refresh on the monitor, but if the hdmi cable is only rated for 60 the computer will only allow 60. had me doubting my self until i found it

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] -10 points 7 months ago* (13 children)

    Any game with motion needs 60fps at a bare minimum, with a consistent frametime. Although 90+ is preferable for an actual pleasant experience. 30fps is just abysmal for anything that isn't FTL, Balatro or the like.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 7 months ago (5 children)

    Idk man, I've enjoyed many a game at 30 fps. 60 is my general target but acting like it's a minimum to have a fun time is ridiculous.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 7 months ago* (4 children)

    Its an opinion, I am used to a smooth experience, I play some fast paced games at 60 on my Steam Deck, its passable, but I'd obviously rather be having it run silky smooth on my PC.

    If you have never really played games at higher than 30/60, then it's impossible to understand.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago (1 child)

    My display is 144hz and I've played quite a few games at that framerate. When you're talking about smoothness, what you're actually talking about is frame time. A consistent FPS at 30 is smooth, if there's not inconsistent frametime and stutters.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 0 points 7 months ago*

    Well framerate is defined by frametime. Though the average displayed framerate differs if the frametimes are not consistent.

    What I am talking about with "smoothness" here is higher framerate, I am used to 120fps on most games, I normally lock my fps to that. You may not notice it going up, but you notice it a lot when going back down to 60.

    Everyone has different standards and preferences, I'd rather not play any fast shooter at 60fps.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -1 points 7 months ago (1 child)

    If it’s an opinion, write it like it’s an opinion. You’re clearly not an idiot. Just say what you mean.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 7 months ago*

    Yea it was a bit of a preach, I'll admit.

    I just think people should want higher standards, hardware is so powerful now, there's no excuse for every game not to be targeting 120fps.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 7 months ago (2 children)

    I fly helicopters and airplanes in battlefield type games on multiplayer servers on my steam deck framelocked at 40 fps and do fine, I play shooters all the time at that framerate. I think if you get used to a higher framerate your brain just must lose the capability to fill in the blanks or something, it really doesnt bother me too much.

    My brain sees it like distortion in a quadcopter fpv goggle feed or something lol. The issue is really rapidly changing framerate, the acceleration and deceleration is disorienting.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 7 months ago* (1 child)

    Its definitely something you get used to, I really dont enjoy low framerate anymore. If I forced myself to play it for hours and hours, maybe I would eventually be able to put up with it again. I can stomach 60 in most games. But ever since I've had access to high framerates, 30 and 60 just dont cut it for fast moving games.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 7 months ago (1 child)

    I dont like that many are downvoting you for having higher standards for frame rate. It is fine that people enjoy games at lower frame rates with the hardware they have but I don't think it makes sense to berate those that are striving for higher standards.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 63 points 7 months ago

    Steam just can’t stop winning. The competition is so far behind they never even appeared in the rear view mirror to begin with

  • source
  • [–] 55 points 7 months ago

    And Valve keeps on winning the storefront war, without doing much besides quality of life features.

  • source
  • [–] 44 points 7 months ago

    I like that this will put a spotlight on crappy engines and devs

  • source
  • [–] 30 points 7 months ago* (3 children)

    That's a great idea. I wonder if it will make developers consider optimizing their games more.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 7 months ago*

    Depends if Valve also require disclosure if "frame-generation" was used in the benchmark.

    Very easy to claim a game runs at 4K 60fps when it's actually 720p 30fps with blurry up-scaled frames in-between.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 80 points 7 months ago (9 children)

    So fucking tired of these chatgpt emoji every fucking where.

  • source
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 7 months ago (1 child)

    Do they exclude nvidia’s bullshit fake”AI generated” frames?

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 11 points 7 months ago

    lmao very curious to see what steam thinks of my unnatural unholy abomination of a setup

  • source
  • [–] 8 points 7 months ago (3 children)

    okay, that takes care of fps, but what about spf?

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 7 months ago (2 children)

    This is something gamers wish to have since inception of PC Gaming. And it was always told this cannot be done. That's why we rely on game specs and tests. I mean we still rely on, but a storefront putting estimated FPS is something they would fear to do. And here we have VALVE (once again) doing the impossible. Very curious to see how this will workout in reality.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 7 months ago* (1 child)

    It's literally been a thing for decades. Not only have games themselves had automatic configuration based on the machine its installed to, sites like "Can You Run It" have been around for a very long time.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 7 months ago

    No, this has never done before. Games configuring itself is something completely different and irrelevant to our discussion topic. It has nothing to do with gathering information from players and trying to estimate a FPS before buying the game. "Can You Run It" also does not estimate a FPS for your hardware, based on opt-in information from analyzing the FPS you are playing the game. And especially making it an official thing for a store is also spicey, because usually those stores selling the games themselves could potentially be sued for false marketing if it does not work well enough.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 7 points 7 months ago

    I would still take with a big grain of salt tbh.

  • source
  • [–] 11 points 7 months ago (1 child)

    What settings would they use for those FPS numbers? Most importantly, does it count Nvidia's generated frames in that number?

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 5 points 7 months ago*

    This is one of those things that after a few years, is going to become a heavyweight feature that every other storefront should have been working to have but for some reason haven't started yet like Steam Input or WINE/Proton/Linux integration. I imagine in the near future retro-handhelds mostly abandoning Android for Linux and basing their specs and marketing around some analytics done on Steam games and the crowd-sourced game performance data. PS4 is in its 13th year. Blink and next thing you know you'll be seeing cheap mini handhelds advertising playing vintage PS4 era video games on your bought from AliExpress PSP sized retro gaming handheld. It'll be advertised like 98% of games released before 2020 have been found to run well on hardware as powerful as this gaming device (*according to Steam user data)

  • source
  • [–] 4 points 7 months ago

    Curious about how they'd approach this.

    In practice, even with the same system specs and game settings, if you run through a game in a slightly different manner than someone else, it might paint a different performance picture for you than it does for them. The more a game allows free roaming, the more variation there will be in results. I doubt they'll ask everyone to run a benchmark for each game (and to further that, not every game has a benchmark capabilities built in to begin with).

    At least they have the benefit of potentially having huge data sets on their hands, so things would probably even out.

  • source
  • [–] 4 points 7 months ago

    Can't wait for steam to be confused as fuck when it sees my hardware It is gonna use the bringus studio chinese pen statistics for my pc

  • source
  • [–] 6 points 7 months ago

    Purely theoretically, it is possible to implement this... But there are a lot of factors that contribute to changes.

    It's harder than they think.

  • source
  • [–] 3 points 7 months ago* (1 child)

    does steam currently have a way to tell you if a game's minimum system requirements (or recommended sys requirements) are too high for your pc? to me that would seem like a better way to handle this overall, tho this is really cool too

    (side note, but why do so many games show the min specs as specific hardware instead of actual specs?? "minimum cpu: intel i5-3040whatever" thanks but if you have an amd processor this means nothing. at least if you have an intel cpu you can apply the old technique of Bigger Means Better (which is not always true but most of the time it is))

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 7 months ago

    The way they're doing it actually seems way better in my opinion.

    Steam's userbase is big enough, there's likely always an exact system out there that's shared fps for the game you want and with that info you can know (with some margin for error) how it'll run for you.

    Game minimum requirements aren't always accurate in my experience and I'm guessing they list actual components rather than specs of said component because two chips with the same cores/ghz can perform quite differently nowadays, so they leave it to the consumer to validate (might not be easy or possible to calculate this type of thing programatically im not sure).

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 7 months ago (1 child)

    How will this be achieved? I'd be curious to see if a really rudimentary estimation is used based on GPU benchmarks internally (like an estimation kernel trained of Valve's internal benchmarking of machines against the steam machine, for example.)

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 7 months ago

    Yeah I got a survey asking if I would share these info anymously

  • source
  • [–] 8 points 7 months ago (1 child)

    Yes, I got a prompt on Steam Deck asking if they could collect anonymised FPS data from my games !

    I said no, but there will be enough people who say yes to collect that data reliably.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 7 months ago (4 children)

    Can it figure out my downclocked card? I can't run mine at default settings or it crashes. :'(

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 7 months ago (2 children)

    If I understand correctly it will allow players to input their hardware and fps for games. So unlikely, and even for not modified hardware it will be just an estimation based on what users say.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 7 months ago (1 child)

    Why do you think it is based on manual input? It would make a lot more sense if the Steam software detected the framerate automatically while you are playing.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago

    It would be nice if its both (drop down with default to the best guess of your hardware).

    No longer would you have to believe nvidia or amd, you can lookup real numbers from existing players. They will need to account for fsr and dlss so fake frames are taken into account but it could be a nice tool for planning hardware updates.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 7 months ago*

    This is gonna make so many users rage 🤣

    "Now, DikHamz67, before you leave your fifth negative review for the month, I want you to look here and understand that no one else is experiencing these "sloppy optimisation" problems caused by "lazy devs".

    Your rig is shit.

    Go look up some sprite titles."

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago

    Idk how accurate this will be. Fps isn't stable in games.

    It fluctuates pretty dramatically.

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago

    Does 1 mean okay, and 0 mean not okay?

    I'm so confused.

    /j

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago (2 children)

    Would you be able to share more info about the WiFi settings?

    We are using the U7-pro-max, the SSID WiFuis set to 5Ghz and 6Ghz. Power to max, and bandwidth to 160. WPA3 only. Seems to play fine, but there is an 10ms added delay with the wired AP compared to dongle.

    We had huge problems setting up two frames in one room. Some feedback for others to check:

    1. The dongle needs usb 3.0(+) for bandwidth. Usb 2 seem to give some weird stutters.
    2. Dongle location is important, just like the Vive trackers. Try and use a (proper) extension cable to get a bit away from your case and closet to line of sight.
    3. Current steamVr works BS on windows and Linux when it's not the beta. I recommend the beta version currently, also for 'Space Calibrator'

    For us it seems multilink streaming with 2 frames and 6 vive trackers is no working 'good enough'. When one boots the other has a small stutter, but that's it. Looking at wifi bands I don't think you can have more than 3 frames in one room, but I don't have the experience for that atm.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 7 months ago (1 child)

    It's a neat idea, but I suspect there are just so many variables it will be as accurate as taking your temperature by sticking your finger up your arse and guessing...

    Most savvy PC gamers will have a pretty good idea how well a given game will run on their rig already. If the game is old it'll run well (providing it doesn't crash due to oddities in really old games), and as long as it's more powerful than a PS5 there should be at least some combination of settings that will let you run any new title.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] [S] 12 points 7 months ago

    I suspect Valve's primary goal is giving realistic fps estimates for Steam Deck/Machine/Frame. With those having fixed hardware, it should be a decent way to know if its even possible to run a game at an acceptable frame rate on those devices.

    It's usefulness to other hardware will vary, we'll have to wait and see how helpful it actually is.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] -9 points 7 months ago (6 children)

    feel like this is ultimately bad because it just means they'll make it harder to refund

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 14 points 7 months ago* (2 children)

    Should we remove hardware requirements or reviews, because then you could argue you weren't informed about the game not being your type? Are game demos bad?

    Informing the customer being bad sounds backwards. This could only backfire if the fps prediction is wrong, and I still think for most people this would a positive, I wanted a feature like this.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago (1 child)

    i'm saying they could easily use it as an excuse to eliminate customer service and refunds because game stores and game companies are generally shitty and anti consumer.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 7 months ago

    Again, reviews? Game demos? Those are already excuses if they wanted to (and could in the first place, since refunds are probably required by law, as the other reply). This fps prediction IS customer service.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 8 points 7 months ago*

    i mean. i like steam a lot, but the return window was not adopted because steam thought it was fair, but mainly because they were being forced to by an australian law suit. so i don’t think this is an immediate fear

  • source
  • parent
  • 6 comments in c/steam@lemmy.ml view that post