this post was submitted on 26 Apr 2025
145 points (96.8% liked)
Games
38117 readers
1186 users here now
Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.
Weekly Threads:
Rules:
-
Submissions have to be related to games
-
No bigotry or harassment, be civil
-
No excessive self-promotion
-
Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts
-
Mark Spoilers and NSFW
-
No linking to piracy
More information about the community rules can be found here and here.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Idk I think the only one of those on that list that I’ve played that ran well enough that I’d consider it ok was tekken and I’m assuming that’s more because it’s a fighting game.
So what you’re saying is that Tekken being a fighting game just magically made a “bad engine” run well?
Fighting games would run well on a fucking smart fridge. They're by far the least performance hungry game genre. There is no live loading of assets, the Background scenery is 100% static and there are usually just two characters on the screen on any given moment. It would take actual effort to fuck up the performance of something so simple
Right. So it’s not the engine, but what you do with it.
No I’m saying that it being a fighting game meant that it’s much easier to optimize because you have such a fixed camera angle and few characters on screen.
So it’s because the developers paid attention to optimization and polish to ensure the game ran well on the largest number of devices.
My point exactly. It’s not the engine, it’s what you do with it and how you do it.
It’s because there’s a lot more optimization you can do on a fighting game vs a big open world, it just doesn’t have to render that much comparatively.
Exactly. It’s not the engine, it’s what you do with the engine.