The great big Odyssey MOSTLY NEGATIVE rating thread

[CharlieFoxtrot]

Lots of grind ahead to increase that rank to Overwhelmingly positive but it will be worth it!

So devs will have to suffer our level of engineer grinding for once but IRL lol

So blame the game because your comp is outdated?

What are you talking about. The Recommended specs call for a GTX 1060 and an i5-8600, yet my RTX 2070 Super, SSD, and i7-9700k rig gets massive drops and long load times. So either Frontier lied about the specs and/or they released a horribly unoptomized DLC, this hardly has anything to do with "outdated hardware"

 

[FurryFailure]

It's a DLC, and not an expansion, so you are not obligated to buy it.
And they did a graphical update, so the requirements have increased naturaly and there is no need to freak out over it. That's why they seperated Horizon and Odyssey.

So i was right, your comp is outdated, and you just lashing out.

Ignorance is bliss isn't it? despite such blatant issues, people prefer to blame simpler things and pretend it's fine.

 

[Einar Donarsson]

my card is just old. If i kept my comp up to date, i wouldn't have FPS problem ever.

Dude.... even Streamers and content creators with HIGH END Systems drop to 30-40 fps in settlements.... come on man. Stop defending this scumbag corporate move!

 

[StanleyDunkan]

 

[[VR] Bac Ho]

There was a thread “Reviews for Odyssey are kinda negative....” it was up to like 20 pages and had been up for a few days then it just magically vanished . I wonder if this thread will go the same way?.

 

[sssembler]

Just cause you don't like how they render things

One of the first things you learn when starting out with 3D graphics programming is culling - to have none, is amazing these days. Its not a case of not liking it - it is a case of being amazed that an actual studio fails to add such a basic feature into their rendering engine.

 

[Morbad]

I remember that tutorial mission very well, when you enter the room with fire, big fps drop happen. That what freaked me out at start to, made me think they didn' do any optimization between Alpha and Release.

Big FPS dips happen any time one is within ~20km of any settlement that has an interior.

The fire is a minor FPS dip on my system, because there are so many GPU cycles left unused by the depth buffer bottleneck.

Now that i played for few days, and i see i was just overreacting. You have 64-120+ FPS, there is nothing game breaking about it. Just cause you don't like how they render things, it's not really a problem for you.

It's pretty annoying for me. My 1080 Ti could do 4k 60+ FPS with past ultra settings in Horizons. This card is more than 50% faster and can barely match the performance at 1440p.

It's a huge issue for a lot of other people who did not expect to need a nearly impossible to get 1100 dollar video card to continue to play a game they've been playing for years when they already more than meet the system requirements.

You acknowledge you 1070 isn't performing well...but the recommended requirement for the game is a 1060.

Frontier doesn't like how they are rendering things, because it's blatantly broken. Crap that cannot possibly be seen or even reached from one's current vantage point shouldn't be rendered at all.

 

[StanleyDunkan]

 

[blubberdiblub]

The game does not perform poorly in absolute terms on my hardware, but it's so much slower than is should be that hardware that is well within the bounds of the specifications Frontier is listing cannot run the game well at any reasonable settings.

Fully agreed, their recommended specifications that don't hold up to what they promise
and that are displayed along with the purchasable content on the store pages is exactly what we take issue with.

To be clear, everything below recommended down to and including minimum specs is expected to perform subpar.

But recommended specs and upwards is expected to perform reasonably well. And Frontier even wrote somewhere that it means you can expect 60 FPS on average on recommended specs (note that the term "on average" allows for occasional brief frame rate drops, but it doesn't allow a rate of significantly less than 60 FPS over an extended interval such as 10 seconds, a minute or 5 minutes).

If they advertised it along with much higher recommended specs that can actually handle it at 60 FPS, there would be far less people complaining now.

 

[iNNovium]

Even then - Most positive reviews I've read out of the handful I did skim over were mostly negative but simply praised the game for its potential and all the small things said users did enjoy.

I've been finding the same thing, it's probably just a glitch I'm sure but many of the positive ratings have 0.0 hours of playtime.

 

[-olli-]

@StanleyDunkan
Well according to Frontier Developments this are the recommended specs to run Odyssey.

• RECOMMENDED:
  • OS: Windows 10 64bit
  • Processor: Intel i5-8600 / AMD Ryzen 5 2600
  • Memory: 12 GB RAM
  • Graphics: NVIDIA Geforce GTX 1060 (6 GB VRAM) / AMD RX 580 (8 GB VRAM)
  • DirectX: Version 11
  • Storage: 75 GB available space

If someone is facing framedrops in the 15 - 25 fps range then its legit to complain about it. Some people may go a step further and would call it false advertisement.

 

[FurryFailure]

I've been finding the same thing, it's probably just a glitch I'm sure but many of the positive ratings have 0.0 hours of playtime. FDev would never, EVER consider using an upvotes / likes / subscribers / ratings "PR" service to improve their steam rating would they? No way, that would be way too scummy... like I said, it's probably just a glitch, a reputable company such as FDev would never do such a thing and I wouldn't even believe it if I saw it with my own eyes.

View attachment 229142

Because it's a DLC, you don't play DLC, you play the game it belongs to, the Steam reviews are working as intended.

 

[knollengnom]

I've been finding the same thing, it's probably just a glitch I'm sure but many of the positive ratings have 0.0 hours of playtime. FDev would never, EVER consider using an upvotes / likes / subscribers / ratings "PR" service to improve their steam rating would they? No way, that would be way too scummy... like I said, it's probably just a glitch, a reputable company such as FDev would never do such a thing and I wouldn't even believe it if I saw it with my own eyes.

View attachment 229142
View attachment 229143
View attachment 229144
View attachment 229146
View attachment 229145

That last one was truly hilarious^^

 

[blubberdiblub]

I've been finding the same thing, it's probably just a glitch I'm sure but many of the positive ratings have 0.0 hours of playtime.

The problem is you can start the launcher by itself without starting Steam or simply not through Steam. In which case Steam won't count the time you play the game.

 

[StanleyDunkan]

 

[blubberdiblub]

As for Performance issue with 1070 and recommended 1060 - I don't know if you played Black Desert Online, it was poorly optimized on released, but with in 6 month they doubled the FPS in the cities. Optimization doesn't hapend over night, it doesn't happen in 3 days of release. It's a long process especially when you do something as massive as this DLC did.
Come on, have some faith. They already did more in this 2 hotfixes than C2077 did in weeks after release. They clearly want to fix this and they are putting a lot of effort in to it.

Of course, optimization does not happen magically, and I'm sure most of us are well aware of that fact.

I think most people here are just trying to explain to you is why it is justified that people complain about the bad performance that goes contrary to what is advertised.

If Frontier advertises their DLC performs at least this quickly at at least this recommended spec, then customers can expect that performance as soon as that product is sold. It's Frontier's responsibility to either make sure it actually does deliver that performance at release or they'll have to change their advertised recommended spec before release (along with all kinds of bad side effects that has, especially if they change that too late).

It's not the customer's fault. Therefore it's completely understandable and fine when someone complains about that aspect.

 

[Sgt Doom]

Because it's a DLC, you don't play DLC, you play the game it belongs to, the Steam reviews are working as intended.

Pretty much this; you can check this on the negative reviews as well, or indeed any DLC reviews for any game, and it'll show up as 0 hours played. One of the quirks of Steam

 

[Tikanderoga]

Lots of grind ahead to increase that rank to Overwhelmingly positive but it will be worth it!

That's what they keep saying about engineering too...

 

[Freddie Sparkles Jnr]

I've been finding the same thing, it's probably just a glitch I'm sure but many of the positive ratings have 0.0 hours of playtime.

View attachment 229142
View attachment 229143
View attachment 229144
View attachment 229146
View attachment 229145

I'm sure it is a glitch as all of the negative reviews I have read also log 0.0 hrs.

 

[RaymontP]

Another thing to add to the pile is that performances and other issues were pointed since the beginning of Alpha but game was shipped almost "As if".

I was really dubious when I heard that Alpha lasted for a month and game goes straight to release but I wanted to believe that it will be at least playable.
...Guess I was an idiot.