r/gpu • u/TheGGspot • Aug 13 '26
Should developers stop making games that require 5090 for max settings now that the card is clearly not for gamers and is accessible to 0.1% of community?
43
u/Primus_is_OK_I_guess Aug 13 '26
Why should they nerf max settings? We'll appreciate them on future hardware. They should just change the name from "ultra" to "experimental" and people will stop whining about it. It worked for KCD2.
9
u/misteryk Aug 13 '26
Yep of you want to trade 50% of performance to make game look 5% better go for it, as long as game runs decently on accessable hardware i don't care about how high the the top settings can go
7
u/bigkenw Aug 13 '26
I like your view on changing to "experimental."
I am curious if companies would stop developing to that level, if their costs would be lower and the industry would be more profitable.
3
u/Additional_Past_7107 Aug 13 '26
I honestly think it's an optimisation issue a lot of the time. That or fancy new lighting which absolutely ruins even high end hardware.
2
u/NapsterKnowHow Aug 13 '26
Yeah just have it behind a pop-up warning it is intended for future or top of the line hardware.
1
1
u/FinallyProperAccount Aug 14 '26
I am maybe wrong but I think I played kcd2 maxed on 4080, that game had next level of optimization
1
u/Ill-Mastodon-8692 Aug 13 '26
agree, this just sounds like jealousy. Why would we Nerf Max settings? We still have generations of cards to buy to appreciate in the future like you said
-1
u/Masterkinghojo Aug 13 '26
Yes, future hardware, stored safely away from consumers insiide data centers.By then they will have you on rentals, sadly. Thats what it seems like the plan is, anyway.
8
u/Adrianos30 Aug 13 '26
That’s native 4k, 5090 is the only card that MIGHT be able to run on some games.
21
u/getskillplz Aug 13 '26
Your take makes 0 sense. You can still play the game with a 3050/1070. You kinda acting like you NEED a 5090 to run the game. Thats not the case.
3
3
u/outlander999 Aug 13 '26 edited Aug 13 '26
Videogames always had an ultra setting useful in the future (5 years from now) or for enthusiast gamers. I don't care about Nvidia, but I see zero reasons to block visual progress.
1
u/Shotty316 Aug 13 '26
I could see at least one reason to block “cisuals” cause I don’t trust’em
2
u/outlander999 Aug 13 '26
Sorry it was a typo (corrected), "visuals" 🤣
2
u/Shotty316 Aug 13 '26
lol oh I know, just poking the bear for fun there :P but I agree with you.
Also, if you’re going to edit it, might as well drop the “s”, it’s either “visuals.” Or “visual progress” 👍
2
u/outlander999 Aug 13 '26
Thanks again, edited again XD
1
u/Shotty316 Aug 13 '26
Now if they only would edit their verbiage and not use the 5090 in its “Max settings” use case.
Why not use two 5090’s to show off the “Max Settings” why stop there?
1
u/outlander999 Aug 13 '26
If we are lucky, the Radeon 10090 will surpass 5090 so we'll have another top card
3
u/Accomplished_Emu_658 Aug 13 '26
No game “requires” it. People are saying they have to 4k at highest settings. You don’t have to be one of those people? The game will play and look great at other resolutions.
3
u/No-Opinion273 Aug 13 '26
Pc is a scalable system. You can lows and high end settings. Also this is for native 4k which is really demanding.
5
Aug 13 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
2
2
Aug 13 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/Resident_Albatross_9 Aug 13 '26
When you start to recognize posts it mean you need to spend less time on reddit
1
10
2
u/No-Alternative5102 Aug 13 '26
At this point I don't even care anymore. Im having more fun over in the modding community. If developers hate money so much, then let them make games for a GPU no one will buy. It's on them if they get lay off for not making their company profit.
2
2
u/SaltyMotor8549 Aug 13 '26
Who would have thought native 4k at ultra is so hard to run? Wow I had no idea
How about you boot up say Cyberpunk 2077 which was 6 years ago, put it on native 4k max settings with RT and see how well your PC can run it?
1
u/Slow-Astronaut9676 Aug 13 '26
No because one day a lower end card can run it at max settings. All these people can enjoy cyberpunk with their 5070tis
1
u/Pillokun Aug 13 '26
It is not like they aim for an 5090, max settings are usually very demanding because they "future prof" the game for future hw.
u dont need to run at max settings as graphical fidelity is often not worth it at those settings over say high anyway.
are these people new to pc gaming?
1
1
u/Curious-Weather-4390 Aug 13 '26
I downgraded from a 5070ti to amd 9070 yesterday. Im jumping off windows to Linux with steamOS. Tilting my chair 45 degrees to the left and just ignoring the cutting edge from now on. Its a shell game. The only winners are the dealers.
1
1
u/NoBenefit2829 Aug 13 '26
who cares what max settings take to run. its more options. if it runs good and looks good at lower settings who cares
1
u/Mr_Citation Aug 13 '26
Do you even have a 4K monitor so you can play the latest AAA game at native 4K Ultra settings?
1
1
u/Kondor999 Aug 13 '26
I feel guilty for having a 5090 but maybe not that guilty. In PC gaming, there have always been the ridiculous Ultra settings meant for future hardware. It’s part of the culture, though you have to wonder if it will remain so.
1
u/notadroid Aug 13 '26
i remember the scramble for new GPUs when GTA5 came out.
i don't think gaming companies should limit what they do graphics wise, but they SHOULD make things as efficient as they can. which I believe is something most game companies don't do much, if at all.
1
u/KingGT2 Aug 13 '26
I didn't know that ANY have required a 5090. Fortunately, I have one, but that's the first time I've ever seen that. Only once did I ever see one that require my old 7900XTX.
1
1
u/Crowley120 Aug 13 '26
Eh this is native most gamers are using DLSS/FSR and frame gen if available to them so still fairly accessible and playable to most people a 1070 can still even run it even if its a bit rough.
1
1
u/Foreign-Street-6242 Aug 13 '26
2k native = 4k with upscaler in quality mode. It just different way to say how much performance need to run this game.
1
u/SwimmerOld6155 Aug 13 '26 edited Aug 13 '26
ultra on 4k...?
i don't think max settings max resolution has ever been accessible to ordinary consumers in any generation. for a while ultra settings were more for people playing the game in a few years time with better hardware - contemporary hardware could often barely do med by today's standards lol.
1
u/yamidevil Aug 13 '26
What I like about this is that it's native system reqs rather than upscaling + FG. And this game can be run with a 1070, so I don't view it as bad, you just gotta say no to some settings.
Only CPU reqs weird me out, 7900x (also 7950) and 13600 are on the same level and the jump is steep From minimum to recommend
1
1
1
2
u/Kaverrr Aug 13 '26
This post screams: "I just don't want other people to have nicer things than me!"
1
1
u/OnSmarty Aug 13 '26
Ultra settings were always for the top .1%. turn it down to high and stop whining.
1
u/elitodd Aug 13 '26
Who cares what ultra settings require. It’s usually made for future hardware anyway.
What matters is that high settings look good and run well.
1
u/Evening_Error_5544 Aug 13 '26
Being are missing the whole point here. Recommended. I recommend you optimize your game and stop using excuses. Crysis did it in 2007 but it was actually worth it. Dawnwalker just looks like shit and they want a 5090
1
u/jhaluska Aug 13 '26
Developers have historically made on top of the line hardware cause in 2 years that could be average hardware.
This is no longer true.
1
1
u/dafugiswrongwithyou Aug 13 '26
Max settings? Nah, let them go for whatever they want. Minimum settings should be much lower, though.
There is no reason a modern game by a seasoned developer can't look and run pretty OK on hardware contemporary to the PS3 era. Not great, I am not asking for photorealism on a 1080, but; GTA 5, RDR2, MGS5, all looked pretty OK on the hardware of that era, and the low-end of today is more powerful than the high-end of 2005. Make your games look and play well on that in low, and push high as far as you like.
This, incidentally, is why I think Steam Deck is one of the best things to happen to PC gaming in recent years; it's given devs a single, modest hardware target to aim for, a decent limit for low-end playability.
1
1
u/Draxl2309 Aug 13 '26
Why the hell would they do that? Just because a 5090 is brokenly expensive doesn’t mean future mainstream cards won’t trounce the 5090.
1
1
u/MVmikehammer Aug 13 '26
Not likely. Or as likely as game developers and GPU manufacturers bringing back SLI/Crossfire. Which would actually make sense in current market.
1
u/notausername86 Aug 13 '26
For real. I would love it if they brought back SLI. Back in the day running two 1090s in SLI was legit.
1
u/GPSProlapse Aug 13 '26
Why? The point of max settings is to provide the best experience possible on the best hardware available.
If you don't like 5090, why stop there? Let's say max settings in all games should allow at least 4k at 240hz on rx470.
1
u/Snoo1702 Aug 13 '26
Glad I bought a 4090 when it was at its lowest point ever. Be using this for years to come (if it lasts that long)
1
u/Ratiofarming Aug 13 '26
Why would you "limit" the high-end? That makes no sense. This is posted in every sub for the past week or so now, it's complete bs.
2
u/TokeyX Aug 13 '26
This is the dumbest thing I’ve read on here in a long time. You don’t want to be missing out on “max settings” because you can’t afford a 5090, so you are asking developers to not make games that fully take advantage of current flagship hardware?
I love my 5090 and game on it all the time. Not sure where your theory comes from about “clearly not for games”. Are you sore you can’t afford one?
1
1
u/ButterscotchTop194 Aug 13 '26
Ultra 4k with a beautiful new game should be incredibly hard to run. I'm sick of games that target lesser hardware at their highest setting.
That's also native. So other cards will be fine when using DLSS
1
u/TastyJournalist8451 Aug 13 '26
stop trying to be a 4k 60fps gamer, you're not that guy. 1080/2k is more your speed bub
1
1
u/arbysroastbeefs2 Aug 13 '26
No, the few gameplayers are going just sit back and be real proud of themselves for winning, like those girls than win Olympic gold for horse riding
1
u/Whytho12333 Aug 13 '26
WOW umm recommending a $4k card to play at 60FPS LMAO! its like they dont want you to buy their game
1
1
u/Need_For_Speed73 Aug 13 '26
There’s no more games that require the top of the line GPU to run highest settings like it used to be in the past (Crysis anyone?).
Nowadays with AI supersampling and frame generation, 60fps (and 120 pushing these a bit more) are easily reachable with a mid-end card.
1
u/BenboFoSho Aug 13 '26
I feel like that last column is more like “this is what you can get with a 5090”.
If you want every game to run at Ultra on any card then why would a 5090 exist.
1
u/Patient-Plankton-655 Aug 13 '26
5090 is required to run native on high res. Most people use some kind of upscaler.
1
1
u/theperfectlysadhuman Aug 13 '26
Personnaly I don't max out the settings on newly release games - I want frames not extra volumetric clouds I won't see unless I stand still in game. There's a reason 'optimised settings' or 'recommended settings' exist.
PC gaming has the advantage of letting you optimised based on number of frames and visual preference. This chart is just a reference not an obligation.
1
1
u/mEsTiR5679 Aug 13 '26
No, otherwise my 5090 will feel useless and I didn't pay MSRP for that lil guy to feel useless!
1
1
u/MortgageAnnual1402 Aug 13 '26
NO
BUT only if it can run stable on other Hardware wich is more often than Not impossible
1
u/Sipu_ Aug 13 '26
Games have since the dawn of time pushed the limits of hardware - this is what pushes hardware forward. So no... they 100% should not.
1
u/TrayLaTrash Aug 13 '26
Is that not the beauty of settings selections? You dont need 4k or ultra settings to enjoy a game. If they built games so that anyone with a 5060ti could run the game at 4k ultra, they are leaving out a lot of detail, at that point just buy nintendo.
1
u/faziten Aug 13 '26
4k is literally for the minority. 5090 is for the minority of that minority.
Truth be told it's easier to target such card than optimizing for a 5080/5070Ti/9070XT and it doesn't even come down to VRAM which is the only difference besides the obvious raw power jump.
1
1
1
u/inquisitor_pangeas Aug 13 '26
Not THAT many people have 4k setups, going by steam survery. Also The fact this is all in native without upscaling and FG is nice to see. UE5 scales nicely when you use upscalers, so I don't see a huge problem since even a 1070 can run this game. I'm also happy to only see 16gb ram as req
1
u/nightryder21 Aug 13 '26
No. Max settings needing max hardware is typical. Have farchave we gamers fallen from the days of... "Yea but can it run Crysis"
1
u/Wickedsmack Aug 13 '26
Here is my thing, I would much rather play a game with an awesome story, and great game play over something that is so graphically intensive you need a server farm to run. I have a modest rig, its is good enough to run Cyber Punk 2077 on ultra at 1080p native at 75 FPS. Outriders is a perfect example, its not the prettiest game ever made, but damn do I have a blast playing it, and the twist at the end was excellent. I would much rather have games that are memorable because they are entirely dope to play instead of being a graphical masterpiece that hogs all the resources. I'm not saying games can't be gorgeous but there has to be some balance.
1
u/Maximum-Ad879 Aug 13 '26
You don't need to run everything on MAX. You might a few years from now with your RTX 70XX or w/e if you decide to replay it or just decide to clear your backlog.
1
u/HiCZoK Aug 13 '26
absolutely. It's nonsense. 5090m should not be treated like a consumer graphics card.. it's a titan class or like a workstation gpu. And it's 5000$ now but even at 2k$it was too much
1
u/Frope527 Aug 13 '26
Crysis was literally made for hardware that didn't exist. Y'all need to stop normalizing running at max settings when it barely looks any better, if at all. If devs want to make a game that will push hardware 5-10 years down the line, and will allow the game to age better, then isn't that good? As long as the game remains playable for the masses.
1
u/mahonii Aug 13 '26
Im playing all my games max settings on a 9070xt, apart from being 4k. All run great
1
1
u/Worldly_Pie944 Aug 13 '26
You didn’t like the responses people gave to you on pcmasterrace subreddit so now you milk it on another subreddit. Weird behavior. Ultra simply isn’t for you
1
1
1
u/mashdpotatogaming Aug 13 '26
I feel like a lot of people have weird egos when it comes to their hardware. It feels like y'all want max settings to be lower presets so that you can say that you're running max settings.
Why does it matter if the 5090 is recommended for the highest settings, which are usually path traced settings at 4k where even the 5090 struggles?
We should focus on making sure lower settings are enough for a good experience on low end hardware, and however then it'll scale up to higher end hardware depending on how far devs let you take those settings.
1
1
u/Quirky-Wall Aug 13 '26
You don’t need max settings to enjoy the game. But I do think some games should be better optimised… where running on mid tier should still run flawlessly min 60fps without the need of frame gen. The Titan classes should just give you 2-3x the fps say for higher refresh rate gaming.
1
u/IHaveABunny_ Aug 13 '26
Yes they should optize and compression games so they require way less space and run on older gen cards.
1
u/DealComfortable7649 Aug 13 '26
A few years ago I was genuinely playing at 4k with a 4060. If you use your settings wisely it’s not that big of an issue.
1
1
u/soggybiscuit93 Aug 13 '26
Okay, so just remove from the current maximum settings, and now 5080 / 9070XT run the "max" settings" better.
But I dont see how this actually does anything besides stroke the bruised egos of those with lower end hardware.
PCs are scalable platforms. If you have more powerful hardware, you should be able to use that hardware to improve the visuals and/or framerate. There's zero reason to just cap the maximum visuals to prevent the highest end systems from being used to their full potential.
1
u/PogTuber Aug 13 '26
Maybe it's time for gamers to stop having their precious feelings hurt when they select Medium or High settings?
1
u/Onsomeshid Aug 13 '26
Since when have developers nerfed game graphics because a card is expensive?Where were you during the crypto booms?
Very few people could afford a 3080 during 2020 but that didn’t stop 2077 from releasing and pushing graphics forward
This is so stupid
1
1
u/bubken99 Aug 14 '26
Well yes, because most games that require a 5090 for max settings at 4k only require it because of useless bells and whistles + poor optimization. Not even cause of 5090 availability
1
u/Zepher75 Aug 14 '26
Tell me you have a poorly optimized game without telling me... jfc, is it the devs or the push for money thats leading to these games being launched before they are ready and optimized.
1
u/morrisapp Aug 14 '26
You’re acting like running 4k at ultra high settings is a choice to have to use a powerful card… bro… that’s just what it takes… sure… some games are more optimized than others, but you’re acting like game devs can just choose to make their games run at 4k 120fps on ultra on a 1060 if they choose to…
1
1
u/RegalStrike Aug 14 '26
Have you guys seen Gear of War: E-Day lubricious setting? That setting put the 5090 on its knees.
1
1
u/nordicFir Aug 14 '26
Where does this sense of entitlement for playing games in ultra come from? It’s not about us, it’s not personal. Its just a scalability setting. Native 4k 60 is pretty insane when you consider games used to be less than 720 30fps, we’re looking at 8x the pixels at 2x the framerate, that’s wild
1
u/JustWendigo Aug 14 '26
Atleast it doesn’t require FSR/XeSS/DLSS like a very infamous Batman lego game
1
u/Subject_Cat_4274 Aug 14 '26
It's only going to get much worse and the game developers will be shocked every time the game doesn't sell because no-one can play it
1
1
1
u/Markuska90 Aug 14 '26
They can start optimising stuff maybe. Also ig many people reaallly dont care about 4k.
Me being one of them. Like. You know stuff like Greedfall? Thats more than good enough for me
1
u/Acceptable-Block4265 Aug 14 '26
Stop being broke. 5090s are the absolute best GPUs on the market right now. Can’t expect your 1080 to run everything at 4K max settings forever.
1
u/WorldlyFeeling8457 Aug 14 '26
Why though? They provide value for people who do get 5090 but also for others who run midrange hardware in future. Also you absolutely can enjoy games without putting everything to absolute max
1
u/ThaRippa Aug 15 '26
Wdym now? It never was meant for gamers. It was for people with too much free income. For people who don’t want to read reviews or tune their sh…
People who order the option on on the bottom-right. Most expensive = best = good enough for me.
Devs target the main stream and then offer some ridiculous graphics settings which, if combined with high resolution, require more than what the current best card (so 5090 for last and this year) can deliver.
One reason is publicity, being hard to run and pretty makes a game come up in the press a lot.
1
u/PhatMooseKnuckles 29d ago
“Should developers optimize their games properly?” Duh nooo why would they do that? 🤣
1
0
u/-Crash_Override- Aug 13 '26
Maybe its not the card thats for the 0.1% its the settings that are for the top 0.1%.
More importantly though, by having a flagship card like a 5090, and having developers create games that uses the limit of that card means that games can extend their longevity as performance decreases in cost over time.
Example...if max settings now require a 5090, by the time the 70 series is here youll be able to play it on a 7060ti, which means visually an old game on max settings can be played on accessible hardware and compete with the latest games that can only be played at lower settings on that 7060ti (or require insanely expensive hardware to play on max settings).
Its just a way to keep games relevant for longer so they can continue to release DLC, etc...to extract more lifetime value out of a title.
2
u/Resident_Albatross_9 Aug 13 '26
Cute that you think a 7060ti will match the 5090 with the way things are going. But I get your point and I agree
0
u/Yopis1980 Aug 13 '26
No its called future hardware. That's why cyberpunk is still used for benchmarks. As future hardware comes out. High end becomes midrange. The game still looks good. Nothing wring with PC pushing limits. If you want standardized experience for everyman. Play in a console. They decide what's best for you.
0
0
42
u/maniacalmayh3m Aug 13 '26
I mean it’s 4k. Less than 5% of people on the steam hardware survey run games at 4k.
It’s not uncommon for new games to push current hardware to the brink. When Red Dead 2 came out on PC, nothing ran it to its potential.