[tutfbhuf]

I remember being a kid and wanting to play Far Cry in high quality when it came out. I did not have the money to buy the best graphics card to play it smoothly on high settings. So, I could either play it in low quality with something like 60 FPS or in high quality with something like 15 FPS. Of course, 15 FPS is not enough to play the game properly, but to capture all the beautiful details, I just went with the highest settings and very slowly explored the beach, astounded by all the details. Good memories.

[alkonaut]

Same. And 20 years later I'm an aging man but do the exact same thing in Cyberpunk 2077. Despite spending a small fortune on a graphics card, it's still either smooth framerate or the gorgeous path traced environments, because I haven't splurged on the 3090/4080 yet. Nothing has changed.

[maroonblazer]

Out of genuine curiosity, what GPU are you running? Friends have recommended Cyberpunk 2077, but I'm only running a 3080. Wondering how many compromises I'll need to make.

[alkonaut]

I have an (equally aging) 2070 Super. It runs the game just fine at 1440p and perhaps not maxed out. Your 3080 will of course run it even better. No need to upgrade unless you want 60fps path traced or 4K.

Can highly recommend the game.

[pluc]

That was Splinter Cell for me, 2 years before Far Cry. Always saw Far Cry as more... toonish whereas SC was all about realism

[taskforcegemini]

light/shadows in Splinter Cell were not very realistic though

[pluc]

nah but physics were. I remember a level in a hospital with one of those privacy curtains between two beds that you could walk through and that thing would move so beautifully