[drbig]

> It's no wonder UE5 games have the reputation of being poorly optimized

Care to exemplify?

I find UE games to be not only the most optimized, but also capable of running everywhere. Take X-COM, which I can play on my 14 year old linux laptop with i915 excuse-for-a-gfx-card, whereas Unity stuff doesn't work here, and on my Windows gaming rig always makes everything red-hot without even approaching the quality and fidelity of UE games.

To me UE is like SolidWorks, whereas Unity is like FreeCAD... Which I guess is actually very close to what the differences are :-)

Or is this "reputation of being poorly optimized" only specific to UE version 5 (as compared to older versions of UE, perhaps)?

[mort96]

The reputation of being poorly optimized only applies to version 5, UE was rather respected before the wave of terribly performing UE 5 AAA games came out and tanked UE's reputation.

It also has a terrible reputation because a bunch of the visual effects have a hard dependency on temporal anti-aliasing, which is a form of AA which typically results in a blurry-looking picture with ghosting as soon as anything is moving.

[daemin]

Funnily enough a lot of those "poor performing" UE games were actually UE4 still, not UE5.

[VoidWarranty]

Let's be real. UE5 is a marketing term for a .x version of UE4 that broke a bunch of the rendering pipeline such that they needed am excuse to force devs to deal with the changes.

[Cloudef]

The reputation is specific to UE5. UE3 used to have such reputation as well. UE5 introduced new systems that are not compatible with traditional systems and these systems especially if used poorly tank the performance. Its not uncommon for UE5 games to run poorly even on the most expensive nvidia GPU and AI upscaling is requirement.

[drbig]

Thanks for the replies! Will note the UE5 specificity.