PCgamer retested RDR2 after the first wave of patches

[dirtyferret]

Looks like they fixed the CPU stuttering issue

Red Dead Redemption 2 settings guide, system requirements, port analysis, performance tweaks, benchmarks, and more

Red Dead Redemption 2 is a massive game, with tons of settings, plenty of bugs, and an appetite for high-end hardware.

www.pcgamer.com

Let me also talk briefly about the PC port of RDR2, which shows clear signs of having been designed for console hardware. There are many indications that RDR2 has code that makes assumptions about your PC's hardware, and those assumptions can be wildly inappropriate at times. Two shining examples of this are the CPU stuttering problems at launch and the minimum fps results on high-end GPUs.
The horrible initial performance on 4-core/4-thread and 6-core/6-thread CPUs was really weird, considering the official minimum spec CPU is an i5-2500K. Thankfully that was fixed, but why would an i5-8400 do so much worse than an i7-8700K, with seconds long pauses at times? The PS4 and Xbox One both have 8-core AMD Jaguar processors, and it looks as though the PC code spawned too many threads on CPUs with fewer than eight threads. Or at least it allocates processing time very poorly, which is why the original workaround was to limit RDR2 to 98 percent of CPU time.
The other clear indication of "console portitus" is the minimum fps results at 1080p low and medium. Pretty much regardless of your graphics card, you can't get minimum fps much above 100. Well, maybe with an RTX 2080 Ti and Core i9-9900KS, but that's a bit much to expect from PC gamers. It's not that you need to hit 100-144 fps to enjoy Red Dead, but it would be nice if it were at least a viable option.
Considering RDR2 launched over a year ago on console, the state of the PC launch was shocking. Especially in light of the fact that GTA5 continues to sell like hotcakes on Steam. It's not like Rockstar doesn't have the funds to do a proper port, or even the expertise.
But hey, at least Red Dead Redemption 2 made it out on PC right in time for Black Friday, which I'm sure had absolutely nothing at all to do with it releasing in a rough state. Six weeks later, things are much better, and hopefully they'll continue to improve. Certainly, there will be plenty of limited time modes and challenges to keep us coming back to the Old West for years to come.

 

[Assimilator]

If only lazy greedy f**ktards at Rockstar had actually tested it before releasing it on PC.

 

[rtwjunkie]

If only lazy greedy f**ktards at Rockstar had actually tested it before releasing it on PC.

Well, when they have 8 years minimum to milk it like they have done with GTA5, they figure they have plenty of time to fix whatver comes up.

 

[newtekie1]

If only lazy greedy f**ktards at Rockstar had actually tested it before releasing it on PC.

HA. They barely had enough time to get it ported in time for the release deadline. Testing it and fixing bugs comes later.

 

[dirtyferret]

Testing it and fixing bugs comes later.

Why test when you can get gamers to do it for you and they are willing to pay you $60 each for the opportunity?

 

[64K]

HA. They barely had enough time to get it ported in time for the release deadline. Testing it and fixing bugs comes later.

So you think it's ok to release a game and then fix it later after almost every paying customer has already played it and moved on to something else? I don't think that's ok.

Here's the way Rockstar operates. Release the game on console and make the PC gamers wait. In some cases create doubt that there ever will be a PC port. They do this in hopes of getting gamers to double-dip for those that have a console and gaming PC. Gamers are impatient and Rockstar knows this. They count on it. They hope to sell a copy on console and later when they release it for PC to get the same customer to buy it again for PC for the superior version of the game.

They had 1 year between the console release and the PC release to port it, test it, patch it and polish it and they couldn't manage that? They show contempt for PC gamers.

 

[newtekie1]

So you think it's ok to release a game and then fix it later after almost every paying customer has already played it and moved on to something else?

I never said I was OK with it, I was just saying that is what happened. They game was so bad at launch because they didn't have enough time to port it before the deadline to meet Epic's exclusivity agreement. The porting team probably about a few weeks to do the port and that's it.

 

[dirtyferret]

The porting team probably about a few weeks to do the port and that's it.

It was handled by Rockstar Toronto and it's not their first rodeo in porting a Rockstar game to PC (they handled Max Payne and GTA) so they had a clear understanding in what a conservative development timeline should look like. That said I'm sure Rockstar Studios did give Rockstar Toronto a short time line and understaffed them for the project. @64K is correct in Rockstar's attitude toward the PC gamers.

 

[Assimilator]

Why test when you can get gamers to do it for you and they are willing to pay you $60 each for the opportunity?

Which is why I refuse to buy any of Rockstar's games, regardless of how good they are or how cheap they get.

 

[Vya Domus]

Which is why I refuse to buy any of Rockstar's games, regardless of how good they are or how cheap they get.

Agreed, most other companies have the benefit of doubt for being incompetent but not Rockstar, they are the only ones that do anything to squeeze the last cent out of every game they sell in the most blatant way possible.

I bet the PC port was literally engineered to sit right at the edge of being acceptable in order to save as much time and money on it as possible.

 

[newtekie1]

It was handled by Rockstar Toronto and it's not their first rodeo in porting a Rockstar game to PC (they handled Max Payne and GTA) so they had a clear understanding in what a conservative development timeline should look like. That said I'm sure Rockstar Studios did give Rockstar Toronto a short time line and understaffed them for the project. @64K is correct in Rockstar's attitude toward the PC gamers.

I don't think Rockstar planned to port it this soon, but they were approached by Epic and Google to get it done and they were working to port it to two different platforms at the same time.

 

[phanbuey]

Kind of wish I knew what the OC was on that 8700k...

edit: 8700k @4.9 just saw it...

 

[rtwjunkie]

I never said I was OK with it, I was just saying that is what happened. They game was so bad at launch because they didn't have enough time to port it before the deadline to meet Epic's exclusivity agreement. The porting team probably about a few weeks to do the port and that's it.

How was it exclusive? It was released on Epic and on Rockstar’s own launcher at the same time, and a week later also on Steam. Exclusive is exclusive, not releasing on two stores and then a third right afterward.

 

[Calmmo]

From those graphs it looks almost like it performs exclusively based on single core clock, not thread count.

 

[dirtyferret]

From those graphs it looks almost like it performs exclusively based on single core clock, not thread count.

looking at the i3-8100, i5-8400, and i7-8700k you can seen more cores and threads make a difference

Now Jedi Fallen order is your typically core clock not thread game

 

[Vayra86]

So you think it's ok to release a game and then fix it later after almost every paying customer has already played it and moved on to something else? I don't think that's ok.

Here's the way Rockstar operates. Release the game on console and make the PC gamers wait. In some cases create doubt that there ever will be a PC port. They do this in hopes of getting gamers to double-dip for those that have a console and gaming PC. Gamers are impatient and Rockstar knows this. They count on it. They hope to sell a copy on console and later when they release it for PC to get the same customer to buy it again for PC for the superior version of the game.

They had 1 year between the console release and the PC release to port it, test it, patch it and polish it and they couldn't manage that? They show contempt for PC gamers.

Absolutely true. So what is the real lesson here.

Have some god damn patience for once and don't pre order, don't buy on release.

If we want this to change, thát is the only way to do it. You force it. That is our power as customers. And here's the kicker, there is a good chance we would also kill the silly post release season maps and DLC in one go. Because if we buy a year later, all of it is out as a discounted pack.

I've been rolling like that for past few years and its a real blessing I'll tell you. Its cheaper, no hassle, and its the complete experience right away. You have to start thinking like a shareholder and a company that needs to pay dividends - they need that year-end result, so they will need to get a good release out within one year.

 

[64K]

Absolutely true. So what is the real lesson here.

Have some god damn patience for once and don't pre order, don't buy on release.

If we want this to change, thát is the only way to do it. You force it. That is our power as customers. And here's the kicker, there is a good chance we would also kill the silly post release season maps and DLC in one go. Because if we buy a year later, all of it is out as a discounted pack.

I've been rolling like that for past few years and its a real blessing I'll tell you. Its cheaper, no hassle, and its the complete experience right away. You have to start thinking like a shareholder and a company that needs to pay dividends - they need that year-end result, so they will need to get a good release out within one year.

I do my part. I wait until the game has been patched and polished and since I have to wait anyway then I also wait a little longer for it to be on a really good sale before buying. I'm in a very small minority though. I don't pretend to make a difference in the way Publishers do things.

I can't tell you how many times I have seen gamers post that they planned to buy a game like RDR2 on console and buy it again on PC. It's like they don't mind paying for the game twice. Gamers buy on pre-order too. Get burned. Turn right around and pre-order the next game from that Publisher.

 

[dirtyferret]

I buy most of my games 1-2 years after launch. I think the last game I purchased relative to release date was Dragon Age III and that was during a Winter Sales Event a few months after launch.

 

[moproblems99]

Absolutely true. So what is the real lesson here.

Have some god damn patience for once and don't pre order, don't buy on release.

If we want this to change, thát is the only way to do it. You force it. That is our power as customers. And here's the kicker, there is a good chance we would also kill the silly post release season maps and DLC in one go. Because if we buy a year later, all of it is out as a discounted pack.

I've been rolling like that for past few years and its a real blessing I'll tell you. Its cheaper, no hassle, and its the complete experience right away. You have to start thinking like a shareholder and a company that needs to pay dividends - they need that year-end result, so they will need to get a good release out within one year.

I waited and got it for $48. $40 was my desired point of entry but I got drunk and well bought rdr2, fallen order, and shadowkeep. Oops.

 

[phanbuey]

I waited and got it for $48. $40 was my desired point of entry but I got drunk and well bought rdr2, fallen order, and shadowkeep. Oops.

I did something similar -- I've only played it a bit, still have to finish The OuterWorlds and Rage2. I should stop buying games until I am ready to play them lol.

 

[moproblems99]

I did something similar -- I've only played it a bit, still have to finish The OuterWorlds and Rage2. I should stop buying games until I am ready to play them lol.

I actually put everything else down and have been playing this exclusively.

 

[newtekie1]

How was it exclusive? It was released on Epic and on Rockstar’s own launcher at the same time, and a week later also on Steam. Exclusive is exclusive, not releasing on two stores and then a third right afterward.

It was exclusive because Epic paid them to keep it off Steam. They "excluded" Steam from the launch, hence it was an exclusive in my eyes.

 

[Vayra86]

It was exclusive because Epic paid them to keep it off Steam. They "excluded" Steam from the launch, hence it was an exclusive in my eyes.

A *very* creative definition of exclusive, that. Even just on EGS is not 'exclusive'. Its not a walled garden, just a sales point. Beyond that you will use Rockstar's launcher regardless.