Naughty Dog Drops The Last of Us PC Hotfix After Disastrous Launch

It's a shame as I was looking forward to giving it a go on PC, I'll keep an eye on its progress and see where ot goes, for now I've got the excellent RE4 anyway

Is this the strategy Sony is afraid Microsoft will employ with future COD releases??? 🤣🤣🤣

It seems to depend on the hardware, if I understand correctly, most of the "affectees" meet the low or medium required specs.
Played myself for about 2h before the first patch arrived yesterday, didn't encounter any crashes or freezes.
The only low point to it was the high CPU usage and the 20 minutes duration both encountered during the shaders buildup at the first start of the game. But after that, 4k@60fps with everything to the max, and no DLSS or FSR2 -> smooth gameplay all the way.

However my rig is on the high end side, and that could account for the decreased number of problems... especially the higher quantity of RAM and vRAM (CPU Ryzen 3800x CPU stock speeds, RAM 32GB DDR4@3600MHz, 3x1TB M.2 nvme SSD PCIE 3.0, GPU MSI RTX 3090 Suprim X that of course has 24GB GDDR6x, of which the OS + game occupied ~17GB).

Alas, since this is a PC port, it must accommodate all manner of rigs, so it's abundantly clear that Iron Galaxy has done it again... With yet another one of Naughty Dog's IP's no less (and one of the most important IP's Sony owns) after doing about the same thing with Uncharted PC port.
I hear that Naughty Dog will do it's own PC ports from now on.
So I hope the TLoU Part 2 for PC will fare much better.

Article doesn't mention that Iron Galaxy is responsible for the PC port. Yes, it ultimately will fall on ND but they outsourced the port. Should have gone to Nixxes

@Shinnok789 Nah, multiple reports of crashing and fps drops regardless of hardware. Especially if you have less than 10/12gb of vram which is a problem because NVIDIA loves selling you the least amount of VRAM possible even tough everyone is telling them that it's not enough.

@lacerz sure buddy

@Nyne11Tyme wrong, this is a naughty dog baby, they did got a little help form them but it was handled by naughty dog's people.

@Shinnok789 the pc port was mainly handled by naughty dog with a little help here and there from them, but is a naughty dog's project.

@kyleforrester87 I don't see the need for drama, the value was merely included to prove a point, how much of it was used during the game. Also, maybe not every PS reader is also a PC hardware savvy, yes?

@kyleforrester87 Noted : )

@GrimReaper Yeah. It absolute ridiculous Nvidia aren't putting more VRAM into their cards. My 3080ti is only a 12Gb card... Most games will easily eat up 12Gb of VRAM now, and it only going to get worse. But enough people aren't complaining because they are either like "12Gb is fine for 1080P/1440P", and the fact most PC focused games aren't VRAM intensive or actually graphically demanding.

The memes coming from the terrible port are killing me.

@AverageGamer

Honestly I find it kind of ridiculous that games are eating up 12 gigs of VRAM.

Like is there any optimization anymore?

But yes nVidia needs to start adding more VRAM to all of their cards. It’s pretty ridiculous that AMD cards often have four to six more gigs of VRAM than their equivalent nVidia cards in the mid range market yet are usually cheaper.

@Shinnok789 aren't they the guys who did the Arkham Knight PC port? That's still a mess but at least can be brute forced now.

Looking at your specs I might be alright with this game, I have the same RAM but with a gen 4 NVME, a 4070ti and a Ryzen 5800X3D

@OrtadragoonX I think you raise a big Point here.

In the last let's say 4 years or so we have not seen a giant graphical Fidelity leap or some sort of innovation or expansion in game design that would require such a giant leap in recommended requirements or even just medium low requirements.

It really does feel like it's either a combination or one of two aspects: either less optimization is happening because there's more overhead in the PC space as far as Hardware available to make up for it which is resulting in less qc, or it's just coordinated.... I know this is the drum I beat all the time but you know it's hard not to see that there might be some coordination with the two major graphics card companies and developers that need to justify the high priced and iterative releases every year of their graphics card Suite. Especially when games go on marketing and tech demo partnerships with those very companies.

Thus we have games in the last two years that literally run fine on Ps5 and even ps4, yet require nearly double or triple the hardware specs when ported to PC for modest visual improvements beyond rate tracing if available, and potentially better framerates....... If you have the latest and greatest graphics cards and cpus.

Regardless it seems like the pc space is in a bit of shambles in terms of quality Polished releases as of late. So much so that it's a rare breathe of fresh air when we get word that one runs well at launch. It's a shame because it seems like it's those shooting for the min and recc spec ranges stated by developers that are getting shafted and only those with some of the highest end cards, cpus, and ram levels of the last two gpu cycles are safe from the worst of it.

@OrtadragoonX It hard to pin down if it an optimization issue. We do see the same thing every console generation with the PC side has a massive jump in requirements before finally settling down mid generation.

Just look at the start of the PS4/Xbox one generation... Those consoles was being compared to 750/750ti GPUs. Yet guess which one simple outlasted the other due to VRAM requirements, and the move to DX12 and Vulkan.

Consoles are also designed with very large memory pools, and guess who makes the GPUs for those system, AMD. So, they general do end up giving their cards an advantage over Nvidia in the VRAM department because they know firsthand how these games will be developed. This why they pushed so hard for proper DX12 and vulkan support. Now you have a "weaker" card like the 580 outlasting the 1060.

EDIT: console games also tend to run better on AMD card vs Nvidia

@lacerz Maybe that's why they're so afraid of it, because it's a strategy they're already utilizing.

Pity Sony didn't recently acquire a company that specifically specializes in porting games to Windows.

Interesting that the same issues didn't seem to crop up with their recent port of some of the Uncharted games to Windows, though.

Iron Galaxy did the port the logo comes up as you start the game after 35 mins of shader compilation. Iron galaxy the same developer who did arkham knight pc port

@Shinnok789 that's not right. My son bought it, refund after 1:55 to beat 2 hour window. It's was so bad it was funny, we laughed, a lot. He's running a 4090 and Ryzen 5900, DDR 5 128G. His machine is a beast built for scientific modelling. This beats CDPR for worst release of of the decade. It is shockingly bad. Sure it will be fixed over time but it really is the worst AAA release I've ever seen.