dont compare crsis 1 or other SINGLE player games with WT. In a MMO you cant have single player quality of graphics or game will be unplayable
Why exactly?
Free to move around map in crysis and WT both.
Game was much better before they made it a mess with an update, do you understand?
1 Like
Those, who never played with maximum settings, won’t understand.
They shouldn’t be compared because they are fundamentally incomparable. Crysis is a singleplayer game, with the focus on you as a player vs very simplistic AI in a pretty small location.
War Thunder is a multiplayer game that has to take into account not only your vehicle, but 31 others, their bullets, rockets, missiles, radar, chaff, flares, hundreds of (simplistic also) ground AI units, air AI units and sync these all up whilst ensuring that people in different countries can see roughly the same things on their own monitors with a mixture of different hardware configurations, operating systems and network conditions.
No, war thunder isn’t the best looking game on the market, but I’d argue it looks incredible for its age and how much is being handled in the background. If you want to make comparisons to other games, you’d need to find another game that attempts to achieve the same goals.
The only other title off the top of my head that has to deal with the same amount of assets (player and simulated) is DCS, and that game runs incredibly poorly (I still love it though).
2 Likes
TESO is MMO and looks amazing.
No, it’s not.
It runs 40-80 fps at very high settings @ 1440p without DLSS on my system and it looks AMAZING
War Thunder with maximum settings looks outdated for 10 years, even if it runs at 100 fps.
And it will be cool anyway IF IT WORKED!
But it’s bugged as hell!
1 Like
More concerned about the fact that you’re flying at 90m and still have to watch out for trees.
1 Like
Lets agree to disagree :)
look at the last update presentation by dev on official WT channel:
And what I see TWO MONTHS later?
1 Like
I’m not sure what you’re trying to imply here, these are two PC’s with different settings with screenshots taken at different times of day?
Like I said, lets agree to disagree. I think War Thunder looks pretty good for it’s age, and you don’t think so. That’s fine.
2 Likes
Look at deck texture
It looked like this when the game worked in a short period, ONE DAY:
Sorry, but I really don’t understand нow you didn’t notice blurry texture of the aircraft carrier…
By the way, half of objects, vehicles looks blurred this in game for me.
Yep. When it works…
1 Like
who cares if it 100fps the human body can only process around 60fps
1 Like
I do agree with you if you were to look at it with no prior knowledge you would say it looks pretty good
Gaijin should do work on low rez areas like the 190 and others but not in the middle of NO WHERE! on an air map ffs
-_-
1 Like
↑ This is how textures should look when the game works as it should.
This is how game also looked for me, even on my old 1060! High res, and detailed!
Here are some two years old screenshots:
Spoiler
But now game is broken for months! I showed the screenshot from the dev’s update stream above.
Devs encountered this bug themselves LIVE and didn’t fix it yet!
Terrain textures load in very low resolution, other players camos doesn’t load properly, many things are a total blurry mess! It’s connected with VRAM leak, even 3090 or 4070 with a lot of VRAM or another hi-tier GPU owners experience this problem according to this forum and gaijin issues site!
Can I ask you to remake this screenshot in DX12 with max settings and at least 1440p resolution?
1 Like
The industry standard for trees in flight games are lower quality than what War Thunder has, SIGNIFICANTLY lower.
@Loofah
Max settings gives you advantage over ULQ players.
@jspene
Infantry games prioritize map fidelity [not necessarily polygon count] cause you’re infantry.
War Thunder’s air maps are… air.
Ground maps have fidelity where the vehicles battle.
@Flash24rus
War Thunder does not look outdated.
Some textures could use a refresh [not increase in size], but that’s about it.
DCS is among the most unoptimized pieces of software on the market right now. 160GB with 70GB of mandatory liveries.
All for the fidelity that War Thunder has in maps, and diminishing returns for the aircraft cause you’re forced to download 4k textures on DCS aircraft when all you want is minimum viable fidelity.
Nothing blurry about this carrier deck, and all I do is play on the standard client. No UHD, and on a 4k monitor. [JPG compression hides details]
That is DX12 BTW.
Moral of the story, do not ask for mandatory 4k fidelity textures.
War Thunder’s already a competitive game in storage requirements, I do not want increased size just cause people want their tank or plane to have higher triangle counts with mandatory 4k textures everywhere.
“Get more storage.” No, I shouldn’t need 10 terabytes just because people are aiming for 200GB games.
Possibly optional, possibly paid; just not mandatory.
All I and arguably most people need is legible text in cockpits, and good lighting.
I want mud. I also want better snow and dust.
2 Likes
Not much less:
Game director of War Thunder doesn’t agree with you:
As I said earlier, I played with UHD client on a 1060 GPU and everything was OKAY. Then I got better GPU and played at 3K successfully at 100 fps.
Then after some update game broke. And after last two updates it became unplayeable with freezes and texture falls to ULQ.
Again, I’m not alone with this problem!
2 Likes
Are you riding a laptop?
Because it’s not a problem to add another $50 SSD to desktop.
I have about 4 TB of diskspace, 2TB on fast drives and this is totally enough for games.
Btw, 4K textures in warthunder are AI-upscaled HD-textures. That’s why you can’t even read letters on aircraft camos and weapons.
1 Like
