GTA VI PC Speculation & Discussion

[Moncastler]

7 hours ago, Personano said:

Seeing a lot of GPU tech talk so I gotta ask:

 

With the cards currently available, which one would be ideal to purchase? One without an 8GB VRAM limit and great power. Any suggestions? I may need to upgrade in the time between now and GTA VI's release.

It's difficult to give a suggestion considering the current options, and of course it depends on your budget and resolution. Considering that many GPUs will soon have an issue with their limited VRAM, these days it's usually easier to recommend AMD cards, 6700 XT and above should do the job. On NVIDIA's side the only Ampere cards I would consider are 3080 (the 12GB variant would be better), 3080 Ti, 3090 and 3090 Ti, while for Ada don't even consider the various 4060s (which are glorified 4050s). Honestly anything that doesn't have at least 12GB of VRAM is hard to recommend, although some 10-11GB cards like the 6700, 3080 and 2080 Ti are probably acceptable.

For now I would say that 99.9% of games don't require more than 8GB of VRAM and the recent VRAM concerns come from a series of unoptimized games, but still it's quite clear that we're hitting the 8GB limit and having some headroom now will definitely help in the long term.

 

AMD cards tend to be cheaper compared to their NVIDIA counterparts but, at least from what I've seen, the overall experience is a bit more polished on NVIDIA. AMD users are also missing out on features like DLSS and if you also need to do productive workloads, NVIDIA is your best option.

Edited July 31, 2023 by Moncastler

[lil vader 2]

I am hoping that GTA 6 will release on all platforms on launch and be the first GTA to have a PC release alongside the console releases, but I am not holding my breath. I picked console as the practical choice, which would also be great for the current gen as at the moment in my opinion there are no games worth playing. I am hoping however that this is not the case.

[Personano]

7 hours ago, Moncastler said:

It's difficult to give a suggestion considering the current options, and of course it depends on your budget and resolution. Considering that many GPUs will soon have an issue with their limited VRAM, these days it's usually easier to recommend AMD cards, 6700 XT and above should do the job. On NVIDIA's side the only Ampere cards I would consider are 3080 (the 12GB variant would be better), 3080 Ti, 3090 and 3090 Ti, while for Ada don't even consider the various 4060s (which are glorified 4050s). Honestly anything that doesn't have at least 12GB of VRAM is hard to recommend, although some 10-11GB cards like the 6700, 3080 and 2080 Ti are probably acceptable.

Budget is somewhat large, maybe around £800-1000-ish but I could pay a little bit more if what I'm getting will last. And 1440p is my current resolution.

 

For reference, I'm on a 3070/Ryzen 5600X combo right now. Works like a charm in almost every scenario, however I'm aware that its 8GB VRAM limitation might come into play in the upcoming years. I've been thinking I could upgrade to a better 30 series card or something when this one starts to wear a bit thin or hold me back on performance. Probably won't happen for a while, but still.

[Moncastler]

1 hour ago, Personano said:

Budget is somewhat large, maybe around £800-1000-ish but I could pay a little bit more if what I'm getting will last. And 1440p is my current resolution.

 

For reference, I'm on a 3070/Ryzen 5600X combo right now. Works like a charm in almost every scenario, however I'm aware that its 8GB VRAM limitation might come into play in the upcoming years. I've been thinking I could upgrade to a better 30 series card or something when this one starts to wear a bit thin or hold me back on performance. Probably won't happen for a while, but still.

At that price point the choice is between the RX 7900 XTX and the RTX 4080 which, according to the TechPowerUp Database, are the 2nd and 3rd fastest GPUs on the market right know. They're good cards, but at 1440p your 5600X could start to become an issue if you want to push really high framerates.

Other Ampere cards IMO are not worth it, the 3090 Ti is slower than the 4080 and consumes much more power (+high transients on your PSU). The 3090 could be a good option, while the 3080 and 3080 Ti don't offer much VRAM for their prices. The RX 6950 XT can probably be found at around 600£, but again it's power hungry and it is much slower compared to the 4080 and the 7900 XTX.

 

Personally I would wait to upgrade, I'm not a fan of this generation of GPUs because of all the scummy things that AMD and NVIDIA have done. The RTX 4080 costs too much IMO for a 80 class GPU and, by looking at its specs, I wouldn't be surprised if this was supposed to be a 70 class GPU: memory bus and chip naming conventions match the RTX 3070! The 7900 XTX on the other hand costs more or less like the RTX 4080 but it lacks all the NVIDIA features that you may want to have (DLSS3, better RT performance, better productivity, ...), AMD had a chance to gain some market share but unfortunately they decided to overprice their cards as well. The RTX 3070 is still a competent card at 1440p and, if you turn down some settings, those 8GB shouldn't be an issue for the next 1-2 years... Meanwhile NVIDIA and AMD may release new (and hopefully better) GPUs and the 4090 could go down in price. And who knows, maybe Intel will surprise us all with their Battlemage GPUs

[Personano]

29 minutes ago, Moncastler said:

The RTX 3070 is still a competent card at 1440p and, if you turn down some settings, those 8GB shouldn't be an issue for the next 1-2 years... Meanwhile NVIDIA and AMD may release new (and hopefully better) GPUs and the 4090 could go down in price. And who knows, maybe Intel will surprise us all with their Battlemage GPUs

Mhm, this card still works great even on some of the more 'demanding' games I own. I certainly won't need to upgrade for a while, but on the other hand it helps to at least know what you wanna do in advance. Based on what you've said here and from the comparisons and benchmarks I've seen throughout the day, the 4080 seems to be my kinda thing. Expensive, yeah, but with phenomenal performance. And hey, maybe the price will have dropped by the time the upgrade is needed.

 

You mentioned the possibility of my CPU becoming a problem. Should I upgrade that also?

 

And I forgot to mention earlier but my monitor is a 1440p 165hz, so that's the framerate I aim for most of the time. Seems the 4080 can way, way outperform that on most games though.

[Moncastler]

38 minutes ago, Personano said:

You mentioned the possibility of my CPU becoming a problem. Should I upgrade that also?

 

And I forgot to mention earlier but my monitor is a 1440p 165hz, so that's the framerate I aim for most of the time. Seems the 4080 can way, way outperform that on most games though.

I would, yeah. The 4080 is a great 4K card and so at 1440p you'll easily reach 165 FPS on every single game you throw at it. While some game engines will let you reach that level of performance, I'm sure that in some cases (like Spiderman) you'll be limited by your CPU... And with a 4080 I'd imagine that you want to use RT, those real time effects add even more load on your CPU.

The 5600X isn't a bad CPU and it's still fairly recent, but with such a powerful GPU it would be a shame to give up 10-20% of performance. The cheapest upgrade you can do would be a 5800X3D, it runs on AM4 and so you won't have to change motherboard and memory. If you wan to move to AM5 7600(X), 7700(X) and 7800X3D are all great choices, while on Intel the 13600K should do the job

[Jason]

If you're on a 3070 and not someone in the position to throw down another grand in a year or so I would, if possible, wait for the 5000 series. Per rumours it sounds like it might slip into 2025 so it's not imminent but skipping a generation is usually best if you're someone with a budget, especially with the costs of cards these days. The 4000 series so far is really only worth if you're on a 2000 series or prior card or entering PC gaming and have no prior rig. That's excluding the 4090 of course, but the people who can afford that... can afford that, lol.

 

But yea, for nVidia the big jumps are typically the "odd" generation at the moment, 1000 series and 3000 series have been their best generations in recent times with the 5000 series expected to be the same. The 4000 series problem was that it just didn't offer the performance jump to be worth the costs, which nVidia did hike up cause of the boom from the lockdown and mining.

 

If you can afford it though, knock your self out.

 

I'm personally on a 5800x/3070 and was expecting to upgrade my GPU next year to a 5000 series card but if those GPU's aren't out next year I may instead upgrade my CPU instead.

[Personano]

1 hour ago, Jason said:

If you're on a 3070 and not someone in the position to throw down another grand in a year or so I would, if possible, wait for the 5000 series. Per rumours it sounds like it might slip into 2025 so it's not imminent but skipping a generation is usually best if you're someone with a budget, especially with the costs of cards these days.

Had no idea there even was a 5000 series coming. Thanks for letting me know! If the release date rumours happen to be true than that would line up perfectly with when I'll actually begin considering parts for an upgrade. 2024-2025ish. Most likely the latter.

[Jason]

1 minute ago, Personano said:

Had no idea there even was a 5000 series coming. Thanks for letting me know! If the release date rumours happen to be true than that would line up perfectly with when I'll actually begin considering parts for an upgrade. 2024-2025ish. Most likely the latter.

 

There's always a new generation coming , the trick is working out what time is right for you to upgrade without falling into the trap of always waiting for the next generation... only then to wait for the next generation... then the next generation... lol. But yea, it'll come, the rumour right now is sometime in 2025 which is a bit of a shame as I was hoping for 2024 but we'll see how it plays out.

 

Generally speaking though for GPU's every 4 years is typically a good time between upgrades, which usually means you skip a generation. If you're on the "odd" series of nVidia hardware then, so far, that's been a particularly good cycle to follow because it's the odd numbered generations of nVidia GPU's that have been the best price/performance. So basically if you're on a 3000 series, waiting for the 5000 series is a good idea. Unless of course you're someone on say a 3050 or 3060 or something and are wanting a 1440p/4k card, or you've got the money to go splash on a 4090. I wouldn't really touch a 4080 if you're on a 3070 and are happy with the performance you're getting though, I'd keep that money for the 5000 series. I'm on a 3070 and that's what I'm doing, anywho.

 

Also as Moncastle said above a really good and relatively cheap performance boost for people still on AM4 is the 5800X3D. It's not really worth it for anyone gaming at 4k but for 1080p/1440p it can offer up to a 20-30% frame rate boost depending on the game.

 

Personally as someone with a not too dissimilar build to yours, a 5800x and a 3070, if the 5000 series is next year I'll likely buy a new GPU. If it's not, I'll buy a new mobo/CPU and probably go with a 7800X3D/7900X3D or Intel equivelant.

[SpiderVice_Sucks]

RX 5700 / GTX 1070 Ti the minimum specs for Starfield, lol!
Even the recommended specs are RX 6800 XT / RTX 2080

I think they are wrong anyway, instead of RX 6800 XT they should put RX 6600 XT

What do you think about GTA VI's specs? They will be lower or higher than Starfield's?

[neoslice]

 

45 minutes ago, ionutx02 said:

What do you think about GTA VI's specs? They will be lower or higher than Starfield's?

Not comparable with the different engine and such. Let's take those from RDR2 (yes it's from 2019) and amp them up. Gonna say they'll be higher demanding than Starfield

 

[xHDxREMIXx]

.

Edited October 2, 2023 by xHDxREMIXx

[SharksFlyUp]

On 7/31/2023 at 6:28 PM, Moncastler said:

At that price point the choice is between the RX 7900 XTX and the RTX 4080 which, according to the TechPowerUp Database, are the 2nd and 3rd fastest GPUs on the market right know. They're good cards, but at 1440p your 5600X could start to become an issue if you want to push really high framerates.

Other Ampere cards IMO are not worth it, the 3090 Ti is slower than the 4080 and consumes much more power (+high transients on your PSU). The 3090 could be a good option, while the 3080 and 3080 Ti don't offer much VRAM for their prices. The RX 6950 XT can probably be found at around 600£, but again it's power hungry and it is much slower compared to the 4080 and the 7900 XTX.

 

Personally I would wait to upgrade, I'm not a fan of this generation of GPUs because of all the scummy things that AMD and NVIDIA have done. The RTX 4080 costs too much IMO for a 80 class GPU and, by looking at its specs, I wouldn't be surprised if this was supposed to be a 70 class GPU: memory bus and chip naming conventions match the RTX 3070! The 7900 XTX on the other hand costs more or less like the RTX 4080 but it lacks all the NVIDIA features that you may want to have (DLSS3, better RT performance, better productivity, ...), AMD had a chance to gain some market share but unfortunately they decided to overprice their cards as well. The RTX 3070 is still a competent card at 1440p and, if you turn down some settings, those 8GB shouldn't be an issue for the next 1-2 years... Meanwhile NVIDIA and AMD may release new (and hopefully better) GPUs and the 4090 could go down in price. And who knows, maybe Intel will surprise us all with their Battlemage GPUs

Totally agree with this, would only add that I'm pretty optimistic about Battlemage! Now that their drivers are mostly working, Intel's produced some pretty good cards for 1080p gaming, and good 1440p performance is the logical next step. 

[SharksFlyUp]

I'm fairly convinced that VI will release concurrently on PC and Console for two reasons. The first is technical - as Spider has mentioned the leaks showed messages like "your computer is running low on visual memory" that only appear in PC ports, and if they were only developing console versions before release they wouldn't have had any reason to include a message like that. While previous Rockstar games have generally observed a one year gap, this suggests development for both platforms has been happening in parallel for years.

 

The second is financial. If they want to outstrip V in sales (let alone to make their 8 Billion in FY25), they're gonna run into real difficulty only selling to ninth gen consoles in the next few years. When GTA V released in 2013, both the PS3 and X360 had been around for seven years and achieved massive uptake, and there were around 160M in circulation, in a rough 50/50 split. By contrast, as of June this year only 60 million PS5 and Xbox X/S consoles had been sold after 3 years, and projections suggest those numbers will still be considerably lower than what V could sell to for 2024 or 2025 release dates: maybe 80 or 85 million by the very end of FY25.

 

To sell only the same number of units to a base of potential players half the size of what V had would require VI to double the rate of uptake. In its first six months, V sold 33 million copies which meant a full 20% of X360/PS3 players went out and bought it. Just to match those unit sales, VI would have to double that and reach 40% of PS5 and X/S users. Uptake rates might well go up a bit, mostly because underage players will have a much easier time buying VI than they did V, but doubling them is a tall order, and again, that would just be to match what they'd done 11 or 12 years earlier.

 

In reality, Rockstar and Take Two are going to want to comfortably surpass the records they set with V, both in terms of unit sales and revenue, and the best way to do that will be to sell not only to the 80-85M ninth gen users that can support them but to the tens of millions of PC gamers who will also have hardware to support VI. Indeed, I think reason 2 is probably the cause of reason 1: Rockstar was surely able to see back in 2019-21 that they wouldn't be releasing at the end of the ninth gen, and that ninth gen sales were on a relatively soft trajectory anyway (due, among other things, to the semiconductor shortage), and logically, they probably decided to develop console and PC ports in parallel rather than in sequence.

[Len Lfc]

47 minutes ago, SharksFlyUp said:

I'm fairly convinced that VI will release concurrently on PC and Console

There’s a ZERO percent chance that happens. Rockstar won’t release on PC day one, when it’s more easily pirated, they can take time to make the PC version better, and also make the most money from console sales before a PC release a year or so later. 
 

Whatever reasons you can argue they could release on PC day 1, are ultimately irrelevant because it’s Rockstar Games. 

[DenisVTR]

Announcement  will definitely be this fall. It can't be any other way. And this is not about all sorts of rumors or anything else.
There are simply things that happen in conjunction with other things; they are one whole.
In general, I believe in my purchase of a new PC that has always been used for their games. Once upon a time I bought it specifically for the new GTA, and sometimes it turned out quite by accident. This is the universe and it cannot be deceived.
My PC and Rockstar are closely connected
PS: Yes, this may sound like schizophrenia, but I don’t believe in coincidences, even when I thought I would break this vicious circle, nothing happened. So I trust my information much more than any of the insiders, and even more than a hint from Rockstar.
The only thing is that it may be sooner November than this week.

[SoldierBoy]

1 minute ago, DenisVTR said:

Announcement  will definitely be this fall. It can't be any other way. And this is not about all sorts of rumors or anything else.
There are simply things that happen in conjunction with other things; they are one whole.
In general, I believe in my purchase of a new PC that has always been used for their games. Once upon a time I bought it specifically for the new GTA, and sometimes it turned out quite by accident. This is the universe and it cannot be deceived.
My PC and Rockstar are closely connected
PS: Yes, this may sound like schizophrenia, but I don’t believe in coincidences, even when I thought I would break this vicious circle, nothing happened. So I trust my information much more than any of the insiders, and even more than a hint from Rockstar.
The only thing is that it may be sooner November than this week.

Yes, this does in fact sound like schizophrenia but i find it admirable that you choose to speak your mind after all.

[DenisVTR]

15 minutes ago, SoldierBoy said:

Yes, this does in fact sound like schizophrenia but i find it admirable that you choose to speak your mind after all.

My first PC came out or so gta san on PC. But I didn’t even think about it then, it was the first PC and all the games that were there were important to me)
I specifically bought the second and third ones for gta 4 and gta 5, and specifically L.A. Noire showed me that it's time to buy a new computer
And the fourth one had to break this vicious circle, since I was just going to buy a new PC for any other games except Rockstar, they didn’t have games then for which I would buy a PC. And what do you think happened, on the same day they announced RDR2 on PC, which I did not expect on this platform at all.
But I put together a pretty bad build, which made me realize that this year I’d better build a completely new PC, it would be easier.
I already bought a new PC, but it happened spontaneously. I had to buy it in the fall, I don’t know exactly when, but now I would buy it in November, this is the month I had the opportunity. Or a week ago so yeah. I'll stick to my theory, I'm curious how they'll work this time
If it weren't for RDR2, I wouldn't be writing all this at all.

[boomboom5950]

49 minutes ago, Len Lfc said:

There’s a ZERO percent chance that happens. Rockstar won’t release on PC day one, when it’s more easily pirated, they can take time to make the PC version better, and also make the most money from console sales before a PC release a year or so later. 
 

Whatever reasons you can argue they could release on PC day 1, are ultimately irrelevant because it’s Rockstar Games. 

it sucks to hear but this is the truth. dont hold your breath for gta 6 on pc for at least a year, likely even longer. a new rockstar title is enough to get me to literally buy a console, play it and when it releases on pc sell the console 

[Spider-Vice]

Sure it may not be day one, but I don't think piracy is an argument in 2023 anymore, hasn't been for a long time lol.

[Jason]

I'm not going to make any bold predictions but a few points;

 

Piracy is a non-issue on PC in 2023. There's multiple DRM solutions that have proven to be capable, plus multiple massive DRM-free games that have been a huge success. Piracy is a non-issue and that point should never be raised ever again in this thread.

 

"Double dipping". It's a tricky one, there would definitely be extra sales if they released it on console and then PC a year later, there's a bunch of PC folk with consoles who would not be able to wait. That being said I don't think the overlap of people with a PC and a console is a big as people think and I think the real golden goose of the double dip for GTA V has been new console generations, not the PC release. It's an argument for no PC day 1 for sure, but not one that is as strong as it used to be.

 

Needing the extra time to polish the PC version is something I think R* have probably genuinely needed to some degree in the past but RAGE is a very mature engine these days, it is well established on PC and R* aren't lacking for resources to help polish the PC version so it's ready for day 1, and I mean we do have literal leaked footage showing development on PC hardware that isn't a console devkit.

 

Now, as for PC market its self something people need to realise is that PC has the biggest install base out of all the major platforms (except mobile, ofc). While PS5 is still often the best selling platform for a multi platform game it is becoming more common that PC sales tops it - PC comfortably beats Xbox in most if not all cases. That's a really large install base to leave hanging, especially if you want a mega launch. With PC day 1 GTA VI will likely set entertainment records (not just games) that won't be beat for decades.

 

The potential spanner in the works for me when it comes to this argument is GTAO2. R* have put them selves into a really awkward position with GTAO and RDO due to the way they've handled PC, especially RDO and it's delayed PC launch. If R* want to do things like seasonal content, be it battle passes or events, then a delayed PC launch can result in the PC community missing out on content and rewards, or them otherwise having to do catch up events which has downsides of their own.

 

You also have cross platform and cross progression to take into account. I expect at least cross progression, but cross platform multiplayer should be a thing as well. Bringing the PC community into GTAO2 a year after the console launch will be a really awkward time for PC players, given many of them the feeling of having to play catch up vs being part of the experience that console players had.

 

Also, R* made a pretty massive signal of intent towards the PC community with the acquisition of Cfx. Again, as with all of this, it's hard to really say with full confidence that it'll come to PC day 1 but after years of treating PC players like a second class citizen the acquisition of Cfx and the support they're now giving that team is pretty much an official endorsement of the modding community on PC. Perhaps, just perhaps, they're now going to treat PC like a major platform for them as a studio.

 

Personally while I'm not getting my hopes up for PC day 1, cause as always I expect nothing, I'd be a little surprised if they don't do it at this point. In any case, the old argument about double dipping and sh*t being used to adamantly say that PC won't come day 1 is no where near as strong as it was for RDR2.

[Tez2]

1 hour ago, Len Lfc said:

Whatever reasons you can argue they could release on PC day 1, are ultimately irrelevant because it’s Rockstar Games. 

It's really all down to technical reasons. If they could release it day 1, they definitely will.

 

Internally, the PC version is more buggy than the console versions. Rockstar wouldn't want to end up with a "Star Wars Jedi Survivor" or "the Last of Us Part 1" PC situation for the most anticipated game.

 

Best to expect the usual. A delayed PC release.

Edited October 24, 2023 by Tez2

[Whosain]

Damn for all that hype %74 of yall aren’t playing day one  

[Jason]

15 minutes ago, Tez2 said:

Rockstar wouldn't want to end up with a "Star Wars Jedi Survivor" or "the Last of Us Part 1" PC situation for the most anticipated game.

 

SWJS was a trainwreck on console as well. Lot of studios have been struggling with the tech on all platforms, UE4 problems have been well documented in particular which is what SWJS runs on. On the flipside we have studios pushing tech that's just not ready, like we saw with Immortals of Aveum which on console can drop to like 540p or something mad. FSR2 on console has been a blessing a curse for stuff like that, with devs using it to push for fidelity at the cost of image quality, as using upscaling tech at sub 1080p is... not great.

 

It circles back to what I said about RAGE being a mature engine - the best performing games we're seeing now are the ones from studios with in-house engines. Cyberpunk's 2.0/PL launch, Larian w/ BG3 (albeit with some late game issues) and of course the best example right now Insomniac's Spider-Man 2, which is about the most impressive game on console hardware right now, whatwith it having RT enabled on every performance setting. Teams that have established, bespoke engines are the ones doing the most impressive stuff right now. 

[SM Grunge]

23 minutes ago, Tez2 said:

It's really all down to technical reasons. If they could release it day 1, they definitely will.

 

Internally, the PC version is more buggy than the console versions. Rockstar wouldn't want to end up with a "Star Wars Jedi Survivor" or "the Last of Us Part 1" PC situation for the most anticipated game.

 

Best to expect the usual. A delayed PC release.

Besides, if they release the game for PC at the same time as consoles, then not as many people will buy the version from consoles. I have seen a lot of PC gamers say that they will buy a console only to play the game instead of waiting and then buy the PC version when it releases. That way they sell the game twice

[Jason]

5 minutes ago, SM Grunge said:

Besides, if they release the game for PC at the same time as consoles, then not as many people will buy the version from consoles. I have seen a lot of PC gamers say that they will buy a console only to play the game instead of waiting and then buy the PC version when it releases. That way they sell the game twice

 

I don't think the amount of people in that situation is as big as people think.

 

Also on the other hand all those PC players in day 1 means you have all those PC players day 1 to sell your GTAO2 mtx to.

 

Them making more money by delaying the PC release is HIGHLY debatable for VI / GTAO2. The situation is nothing like GTA V or even RDR2.

[DenisVTR]

The release on PC will take place simultaneously or will be slightly delayed by a maximum of half a year.

Edited October 24, 2023 by DenisVTR

[Moncastler]

Funnily enough I think the Rockstar Games Launcher could be one of the main reasons we may get VI on day one. On RGL Rockstar takes all the money from each sale, on consoles I'm sure they have special deals with both Microsoft and Sony but they're not getting a 100% cut, especially for physical sales. Piracy is basically not a problem anymore, not only there are more advanced DRMs but there are also less cracking groups... But even if VI gets cracked, those that decide to go on the high seas would still not be able to play GTAO2

 

The situation was different during the 7th Generation, PS3, Xbox 360 and PC all had their unique ecosystem with lots of exclusives, owning only 1 platform meant that you were missing out on so many games. Until the end of the 8th Generation I had a PC and a PS console, some games were still coming out earlier on console (like RDR2) and I also really enjoy some of Sony's exclusives. But now things are different, Microsoft exclusives come day one on PC and even Sony is slowly bringing their stuff to PC, honestly I don't feel the need of owning a console anymore and I'd imagine there are many PC gamers that feel in the exact same way.

 

I'm not sure if VI will come out day one on PC, but I think there are valid reasons to believe in this possibility. In the case it won't happen, I will be one of those that buys a Gen9 console just for VI (likely Series S, cheapest option), I already had the RDR2 ending spoiled so I don't want to have the same experience for a game that I've been waiting for 10 years.

[FannoF]

26 minutes ago, Moncastler said:

I already had the RDR2 ending spoiled

Yeah I’m doing everything in my power to not be dependent on a YT playthrough this time. I wonder how big the difference in quality:performance will be between PC and console though. 

[Len Lfc]

9 hours ago, Tez2 said:

It's really all down to technical reasons. If they could release it day 1, they definitely will.

If it were any other studio, I'd 100% agree. But all I can say is I've heard that no matter what there will never be a day and date PC release of their games. At least not until all of the original leaders have retired.