Soldato
- Joined
- 24 Sep 2013
- Posts
- 2,890
- Location
- Exmouth, Devon
Played FC6 recently with a 6900XT and honestly in most aspects it looks exactly like FC5 in the image quality department, Based on the visuals it shouldn't need more than 8GB, Nevermind 16GB.
Not anymore. The last patch fixed the texture/vram management/rendering issue, even works on the 3080 now (ubi changed the "official" requirements down to 12GB for the HD texture pack). At 4k, you will need to use FSR UQ though.
Couldn't agree anymore, I personally thought new dawns textures looked slightly better too, less "variety" in the game world though i.e. a lot more reused assets.
WUT!? But, but, but all the red boys and the resident 'AMD poor man's shrout' were telling us this is where the games were going. How could we expect that progression doesn't use up all that VRAM!?
Like I said at the time. If you cant afford one of the non existent cards from red or green, if you needed 16GB to play FC6 then they wont be selling many copies. Funny it looked awful on release then added the HD patch and forum members claiming the gfx were leaps and bounds beyond FC5.
Just another AAA game released as beta requiring people with £1k+ cards with 16GB on them to get the best beta experience. I knew it would get fixed. Release a game that would look worse than the last iteration, claim HD pack makes it way better than anything ypou've seen but you need 16GB ram? Usual resident AMD shrout dribble.