Rift Apart requirements revealed, SSD not required, Cerny exposed as a fraud and liar

Just kidding. Only for low settings 720p/30fps.

It will also support DirectStorage 1.2 with GPU decompression. Have RTAO, as well as RT shadows for sun and moon.

Recommended not required.😂

I don't think my PC can handle this game. A 4090 with WD SN850X NVMe PCIE4 may not be good enough.

I may have to stick to my PS5 version because of dat SSD powah! The alien tech simply can not be matched. Not even Xbox's power of the cloud can compete.

Super special PS5 SSD is the only way this game is technically possible, I know because the good users on System wars told me so, I don't understand the area 51 tech inside the machines myself but it's something along the lines of the PS5 SSD is able to turboboost the graphics, like NOs for your console.

This will be interesting. I'd love to see the results from using a 7200RPM HDD at max settings in a beastly PC. It will technically work but are the loading times going to be bearable or will it be a rubbish experience?

Then what jump will there be, if any, going from a sata SSD to an NVME SSD. Then from a basic 2GB/s SSD to a 7GB/s SSD. Will the speed of the ssd also mean an extra burden on the GPU for texture decompression?

I wonder if Nixxes also adjusted the behaviour so that, once the player has control, the game will flood any excess RAM in the PC with more data as a big cache. What if you are playing on a more ram constricted system?

Nice to see GPU accelerated decompression. Though it seems to be optional as, i think, the 470, 5700 and 960 don't support it. What will that mean for the decompression load on the CPU for systems with GPUs that don't support it.

My prediction is that, in a system with only a HDD, it wont affect anything when the player has control (performance will be dictated by the usual suspects....your bluetooth chip being the most important :P j/k) but the loading times between levels (the 3 second portal jumps on the PS5) are going to be painful, especially at high settings. It's still a basic implementation of faster storage as part of a games overall memory management. Just basic brute force during loading screens. It will be interesting to see SSD usage during gameplay but i suspect it will basically be close to 0% most of the time like any other game.

On a side note: This will also give Valve, Codeweavers and the open source community something solid to play with now in terms of getting similar functionality implemented on Linux and the Steam Deck which is good. Actually that will be another interesting scenario. Maybe it wont really matter either since you will be playing on low on the deck. But would the steam deck and ROG Ally benefit from direct storage like functionality or do they lack the umph to make it an issue.

On another side note: 3 years in and one of the most interesting technical advancement that we are getting on the new consoles and PC is...er...Tertiary storage usage. Theme of the gen really. No one really wants to use the new toys it seems.

Insomniac is a known developer that lies through their teeth.

Honestly, I don't think our PCs can match up to even the level of power that the Cell processor has, it's so advanced it turns many PCs into rubble.

So required for 1080p/60 and up? This doesn’t mean much until we see it running. Will there be loading screen for mechanical drives? Performance dips? These charts are always so vague…

usually, its stuttering when it comes to access times and asset streaming

I'm reading that as recommended but not required for the minimum specs but I could be wrong.

Liar? Maybe. Fraud? No.

How do PS5 games perform as well as, and sometimes better, than a more capable peer like the Series X? Something in the sauce making that happen.

I think they may be talking about min specs, in which case, technically, an SSD might be needed after all.

Specs don't lie,its all about devs getting the best out of the Ps5 and not out of the X.

Why?,Tools?,lazy devs?.I remember developers crying out for more powerful consoles,they cant even get the best out of the best.

Just one look at that chart sums up perfectly why I prefer console gaming to PC, , whenever I watch PC gamers streaming they seem to spend half their time in the menus tweaking the settings.

Its been almost 3 years, and i am still waiting for Sony to deliver the SSD goodness that was promised. Remember being annoyed back then cuz they were 100% focused on a god damn storage device instead of some revolutionary cpu or gpu, but three years later, its even more annoying because nobody gives them shit for lying. DF is too pussy to expose his lies, but i wish they weren't, cuz that would be the only way to begin a convo about Cerny's bullshit all over the social media.

Good thing I never really care about this whole SSD being the Godsend to PS5 nor did I ever look deep down into Rift Apart's SSD stuff. That being said, I'm looking forward to playing Rift Apart on my PC😎

The Giant corporates like AMD and Nvidia made PC gaming luxery and impossible for anyone who is not super rich.

on other hands consoles are also too expensives now. almost as equal to Gaming PC.

What revolutionary CPU or GPU could you make exactly lol?

I am curious as to what you think of the game. I found it ok when I finished it at launch.

Just be grateful the game works, if it works.

After TLOU Part 1 on PC, I'll assume the jury is still out on that.

@Juub1990: OK. But cows and Sony went out saying that this game was not possible on anything but PS5. Clearly, that is not the case.

You don't need an SSD in potato mode.

But seriously, an HDD is totally fine if the assets your streaming is low enough quality OR you have enough RAM to store things and don't need to keep accessing I/O storage. The "PS5" performance equivalent pretty much requires an SSD.

75 gb for a linear 5 hour game? Jeezus

I mean shit, the cell did deliver games that trash anything on the 360. You ain't seeing any KZ2-KZ3, UC2, GoW3, etc on the 360. I just want to see some custom stuff made for the system so i can damage control poor performance of my ps5 with the "let developer learn the toolz before criticizing the system".

@Juub1990: oofff the power of the ssd. Cows are rekkd, keep up the good work. Lmao 🤣 🤣

Oh man I know MS is the one that's cool to hate on to earn extra internet points but damn I just can't stop laughing at how frequently Sony fanboys keep owning themselves.

Sony managed to deliver those games in spite of the Cell, not thanks to it. Don't conflate devs talent for hardware. This gap continued well into the PS4 era where Sony still produced one looker after the other despite having a very similar architecture to the Xbox One.

The best looking game on the X1 is probably Ryse and it's a launch title and why is this? Because it's Crytek who were some of the best in the business at producing great visuals.

The Cell was a piece of trash.

Might grab on a hard sale. Gotta test my Gen4 SSD.

It should be noted that HDD nowadays are slowly dying out as most games nowadays are all gonna be just SSD only besides NVME drive that is. Even though Rift Apart does say HDD but it is still recommending SSD in the end. Not trying say Sony is right about SSD being their savior but SSD in general are now becoming the main norm for both current-gen consoles & PC moving forward. I can't even remember the last time I actually used any HDD as I've been slowly upgrading my PC to NVMEs 2TB only. (Only have 1 SSD 500 just for windows 11)

I don't believe that. They had a shitty gpu and ram, and were still able to deliver games that are far ahead of what was available on the 360.

@hardwenzen: And if you had given them a 360, they would have produced similar results. Most multiplats ran better on the 360. The Cell was a problem, not an asset.

The 360 was more advanced than the PS3 and was easier to work with too. Developers&Sony had to figure out a way to use the Cell processor's SPE cores to augment the "RSX",because the PS3 gpu alone would have been thrashed by the 360 with every turn. Sony originally designed the PS3 just with the Cell to do cpu & gpu tasks but quickly found out it was lacking. So Sony turned to Nvidia for a trimmed down G70 core aka Geforce 7800.

The Xbox 360 typically did better than PS3 in multiplat titles. The PS3 had an extra complexity in the coding for the Cell processor, having to juggle cpu work and gpu work along all the SPE cores in the Cell since it only had a single "normal" cpu core, while the 360 had a triple core cpu able to handle upto 6 threads. Also PS3 had to fight its two separate 256mb memory buffers one for system and other for vram. While the 360 had unified 512mb memory pool which allowed more flexible allocation. Then onto the main GPU of the PS3, it was a cut down Geforce 7800 gpu with fixed pixel/vertex shader processor count. While the xbox 360 had an unified shader architecture that allowed developers to use any combination of the shader processors to achieve the performance needed for what they wanted to focus on vs limited fixed amount of pixel/vertex shader processors.

While 1st party or dedicated/experienced developers were able to squeeze all they could out of the PS3 it was a nightware for everyone else which lead to worse looking and or under performing multiplatform games.

I'd be willing to believe that, but the difference between something like KZ3 and the best the 360 had to offer, which is between Halo 4 and Gears 3, is just too big. But then again, Sony's talent gave us TLOU2 on a dogshit system less powerful than a phone from 2017, so i guess that's possible.

Lets say that the Cell wasn't actually helping, i still want some custom tech in my new systems. Unless they put the absolute best off the shelf specs, which is obviously impossible, you kinda know what to expect from your system, and that's boring.

Yep, and that's down to talent. Killzone 2 looks better than freakin' Halo Infinite, so it's clearly not a hardware problem.

the Cell did help by augmenting the RSX but the quality of doing so was totally on the developers able to work with it. Custom tech can be hit or miss with actually being beneficial or a hindrance. Adding unwanted complexity and can affect future compatibility with newer consoles.

I have been using SSD for games since I saw the huge benefit it had on BF3. This was the video that sold me on SSDs...

What a difference! I haven't installed a game on a HDD in so many years. In fact, I don't even have internal HDDs hooked up anymore because they are so noisy. I just use external HDDs for media and backups. I have them hooked up to a USB 3.0 Hub that has an on/off switch for each port so I don't have to plug and unplug them every time. :)

Doesn't look like I'd have an issue running it looking at the specs, and SSD is pretty standard for PC rigs anymore. Still, I'll wait for a steep, steep sale. It's a 10 hour game, and it's like game #15 in the series. It's no exactly reinventing the gameplay wheel at this point.

@pcgamerlaszlo: It's a very good game. I was kinda fatigued on the series, but Rift Apart has some nice pacing, variety and is extremely polished. I enjoyed it from start to finish.

@BassMan: Never knew that you were an undercover cow tbh.

@BassMan: I'm sure it is, and I'm sure I'll pick it up eventually. But I played it to the time travel one and... I'm good for a while on it.. Plus I'd never pay full price for a game that long. It'll be on sale.. They always go on sale...

I always have access to all the games. I am not a console fanboy. First party, third party... they are all just games to me and I only care about quality.

That's cool n all, but you have a preference, and that's Sony. I agree with you btw.

Yeah, sales are good and there will probably be some cheap keys early on too.

I do think Sony has the best first party games overall, followed by Microsoft and then Nintendo. I know Nintendo being last is controversial for the fanboys after a lifetime of Ninty love, but I just see them milking the same games over and over. Very few Nintendo games do anything for me anymore. Zelda games are the only Nintendo games I hold in high regard these days.

B-b-b-but how will we render all the triangles without an SSD?!

Agreed. No matter how shallow Nintendo games are, millennials consider them masterpieces because it says Nintendo on the box.

@hardwenzen: Calling Nintendo games shallow while championing Sony is the epitome of irony.

@davillain: Sata SSDs and NVME drives are very affordable nowadays. Cheap laptops and prebuilt PCs have been sold with SSD storage by default for the past couple of years. You can get a 1TB Sata SSD for $35 and a PCIE 3.0 2GB/s for around the same price too. Gen 4 SSDs compatible with the PS5 are often on sale for $50-$60 for 1TB.

At this point there is no reason to not have an SSD since even if you have the fastest CPU, GPU, and RAM they'll get held back badly in software that requires the storage device to feed them data or write it during task. A HDD at this point is only good for storing backup data since HDDs have a longer lifespan and it's much easier to recover data from a broken HDD than a SSD hence why a lot of server farms still use them.

Sony pushes the industry. Nintendo releases "save princess for the 92nd time". Nintendo is a mess, but then again, its mainly a company that is creating products for kids, so its perfectly understandable that everything is so simple and shallow.