Radeon Software 16.8.2 supports No Man’s Sky and Paragon

No Man's Sky is finally out on PC, but its launch has been a little unsteady. Widespread reports of technical issues plague the ambitious title. Radeon owners having issues with the game might find some relief in the latest Radeon Software Crimson Edition release, numbered 16.8.2. Both Hello Game's new title and Epic's Paragon are listed as officially supported in the new release, although the release notes don't describe exactly what that support entails.

Hopefully these drivers will fix things up for the red-team gamers who can't even launch No Man's Sky. As for Radeon owners not interested in either of those games, there are some other fixes. Overwatch shouldn't crash while browsing the hero gallery anymore, and Freesync displays should stop flickering on the desktop. These drivers should also install correctly on Windows 10 Anniversary edition even if you have Secure Boot enabled. Grab the new drivers from AMD's download page.

Comments closed
    • modulusshift
    • 3 years ago

    Personally, I love No Man’s Sky so far. Yes, it’s shallow, and there’s only a limited number of things to do, but those things are incredibly interesting to me. There’s three races that give you a drip drip drip of info about a surprisingly complex past and word ciphered languages, there’s at least 2 and possibly a third quest line that could be considered “main story”… It’s not that much. You’re not going to spend hundreds of hours on this game, you’re just not. But I’m going to pour at least 60 into it, I can tell, and that meets my $/hr requirements, and it’s been pretty dang fun so far.

    But I really do wish they’d let us crash our ship. At least offer a less crash averse mode. There’s going to be at least one major update that sounds very enticing, and all updates will be free, no DLC. I’m excited to see how this all turns out. I’d rate the game a 7.9/10. Maybe an 8.1 while I’m playing it, or in hopes of future DLC. There’s been far better games this year, but it’s still decently above average given a couple years of context. (this year’s just been really great for games in general.)

    • ALiLPinkMonster
    • 3 years ago

    I was running it fine with 16.8.1, but that version was causing Overwatch to crash constantly. .2 solved that problem.

    As for the game, I’m happy with it. I’ve been excited for it since it was first announced and I’ve followed its development very closely. I like it for what it is, which is a survival game set in space focused on exploration. It doesn’t introduce anything new or crazy to the survival mechanics, but it puts it in a setting where you really feel like a lone traveler just trying to find some direction in the vastness of space. It’s not innovative gameplay wise, but in its scope and and sci-fi-fancy-tickling abilities, it has no equal right now.

    • Demetri
    • 3 years ago

    It fixed my Overwatch crash problems; surprised they didn’t catch this in QA considering how hot the game is at the moment.

    • Meadows
    • 3 years ago

    Does the new version support good games too?

    • tipoo
    • 3 years ago

    NMS needs some work, similar performance issues to Firewatch, fluttery framerates on even hardware that beats the requirements (and is certainly well above the consoles it runs smoothly on).

    On seeing it I went to look if it was on Unity like Firewatch, but it’s an in house engine (this studio was 15 people?!), but Sean Murray self described it as crappy like Unity lol

    [url<]http://kotaku.com/how-a-seemingly-impossible-game-is-possible-1592820595[/url<] ""This is our toolset," Murray says as we scroll through the trees. "We built our own engine. It's super crappy, but it's kind of like Unity or something like that. We've written it all around procedural generation. And that's kind of what we spent the first year, when it was just four of us, what we spent our time doing. And then the last month before the VGXs we built the trailer using that."" Gotta feel for a studio of 15 people that built their own engine and have to do all the QA work for a game though. They started as four people, probably never imagined it would get this hyped.

      • slowriot
      • 3 years ago

      I don’t feel one ounce for them. They had piles of money on their door step leading up to this game. They could have expanded their staff a long, long time ago. Instead they’ve piled that money up and delivered utter garbage and get to have people like you defending people “only 15 people.”

      No, they don’t get leniency for their bad game because they made even worse decisions before launch.

      EDIT: Sorry, but to be clear… I have seen this same excuse of small team size for a few games of this type now. It’s the constant defense for the game Rust. Which has sold millions of copies, so did the studios earlier game Garry’s Mod, and yet they still haven’t expanded their staff size and the game has been in early access for nearly 3 years now. They pile up the money, never expand the team, and then release garbage with this same “but there’s only a few of us” excuse. It’s so tiring.

        • brucethemoose
        • 3 years ago

        Minecraft is perhaps the ultimate example.

        It’s the post popular game on Earth, yet they never really expanded their tiny indie studio… Hell, development would be 100x better if they just open sourced the code, but no.

          • slowriot
          • 3 years ago

          Notch became a billionaire off of doing the bare minimum. Cool for him I guess.

            • tipoo
            • 3 years ago

            Notch: I hate Microsoft
            Microsoft: Do you like money?
            Notch: I’LL SELL YOU WHATEVER YOU WANT

        • tipoo
        • 3 years ago

        Hey, their staff is now 375% of the original count!

        They may be getting the money now, but on the flip side, what if it flopped after they more dramatically increased their staff and then they went under? Running a small company isn’t easy, it’s far easier to rag on them is all I’m saying.

          • slowriot
          • 3 years ago

          It’s one of the most hyped games in ages. They had secured a publishing deal with Sony for the PS4 long before launch. Let alone tens or maybe even hundreds of thousands of pre-orders (i.e. they could have asked for money from near anyone and got it). You’re suggesting a much greater risk existed than actually existed. I’m not saying they needed to expand to 100 staff. I am suggesting they could have brought on more (30 people?) or done something like contracting asset creation. The game is devoid of actual content….

      • travbrad
      • 3 years ago

      I agree it seems to be poorly optimized for PCs but I wouldn’t say the console version “runs smoothly” either, since it tops out at 30fps and drops below that on denser planets.

      The “system requirements” they state for PC are just completely unrealistic. People with fast PCs are getting decent performance from it, but those are people with overclocked i5/i7s and GTX 980 or faster, whereas the “system requirements” are an i3 and a GTX 480. This reminds me a lot of system requirements back in the 90s where that basically just meant the game would run, but you needed a PC 3x as fast for it to actually run well.

        • cygnus1
        • 3 years ago

        Part of the notes for the 3xperimental patch that’s been posted on Steam mentions changes improving performance for CPUs with 4 or fewer threads. My bet is this was explicitly optimized for the 8 cores on the current consoles hardware. Depending on what all the threads are doing, the crap CPUs in the consoles could actually manage to run better than a high end i7 because they simply can’t process 8 threads equally well.

          • RAGEPRO
          • 3 years ago

          Desktop i7s have 8 hardware threads. Even i5s should have no problem outpacing a bunch of small, low-clocked CPUs. I suppose it’s possible that i3s and lower could be troubled.

          Remember that not only is the IPC of Jaguar poor (as it’s a little bitty chip), but they also run low clocks: 1.6GHz in the PS4. I find the idea that four Haswell or later CPUs at >3GHz would have trouble matching them a little silly, even accounting for context switches . 🙂 Besides, games only get access to 6 CPUs on PS4, not 8.

            • cygnus1
            • 3 years ago

            Don’t tell me, go tell the game developers how the hardware should work…

    • chuckula
    • 3 years ago

    [quote<]Hopefully these drivers will fix things up for the red-team gamers who can't even launch No Man's Sky.[/quote<] From what I've heard, AMD might not be doing you a favor in making NMS launch.

      • shank15217
      • 3 years ago

      What do you mean?

        • chuckula
        • 3 years ago

        [url<]https://heatst.com/tech/no-mans-sky-is-unbearably-boring/[/url<]

          • Srsly_Bro
          • 3 years ago

          One of my friends bought the game. Now I can laugh at him for it.

          • Waco
          • 3 years ago

          The flying was one of the most disappointing aspects once I fixed my ship. Don’t give me a goddamn universe to explore and then give me a ship I can’t zoom through canyons in. LET ME MAKE A MISTAKE.

        • Concupiscence
        • 3 years ago

        The game’s developed a reputation for disappointing a lot of its players, even when things are ostensibly running correctly. I haven’t tried it – people with meaner kit than my Radeon 7970 being fed by an i5 6600K and 16 gigs of DDR4 have reported problems running it above 30 fps. $60 is a lot to pay on blind faith, even if the surface concept sounds like candy to my younger days of being stoned at 3 a.m. listening to electronica.

          • tipoo
          • 3 years ago

          “even if the surface concept sounds like candy to my younger days of being stoned at 3 a.m. listening to electronica.”

          Hah, exactly. It seems like something to lose yourself in for hours with your brain off, not a strong story, no rush, just pretty worlds and survival. But ain’t nobody got time for near infinite games when you’re working, so I’ve tried to focus on a few games with…Well, a point. Even that I’ve found hard. I don’t think I’ve completed a game except Firewatch in 2016, and that was only because that was 4-5 hours!

          I still want to support them as this seems like a cool concept, but not when the price is approaching 90 dollars out the door for a new game in Canada. When it goes on sale I’ll get it.

            • Concupiscence
            • 3 years ago

            Another problem is that they didn’t stick the landing on the mechanics: instead of working to survive, most reviewers and players are saying it feels like a grind. A free play mode where the mechanics were simplified could be a nice addition in a patch, assuming it sells enough copies to merit ongoing support once the initial luster wears off.

            • tipoo
            • 3 years ago

            I should think a studio of 15 salaries making the second best PS4 debut ever, probably already got much more than their investment back. Good to see they did well, I hope they do turn that back into good support for it

            [url<]http://www.gamespot.com/articles/top-10-uk-sales-chart-no-mans-sky-has-second-best-/1100-6442614/[/url<]

            • Concupiscence
            • 3 years ago

            Well. Golly. Good for them, let’s hope things improve.

            • slowriot
            • 3 years ago

            EXTREMELY hyped is the best I can described NMS.

            The game is utter garbage. That’s ignoring the performance issues. It actually runs alright on my system. It’s just a boring as hell game. It’s a very shallow survival game. No different than the dozens of examples we’ve seen in Early Access on Steam… except NMS has even less content. And managed to turn their procedurally generated universe into something that’s clearly cobbled together using a limited set of parts so the exploration is very dull too.

            I should have refunded it before I went over the 2 hour limit. But I was trying to give it a shot….

            • DoomGuy64
            • 3 years ago

            Anyone who’s spent time playing early access open world games should have immediately saw the warning signs. I think Total Biscuit even issued a warning because they didn’t give out review copies. Never believe the marketing. Never.

          • brucethemoose
          • 3 years ago

          They’re exaggerating, it runs well over 30FPS on my 7950/4670k.

          The game play, on the other hand, is not worth $60. It’s basically a scenery game with a boring item slot-gated crafting/gathering mechanic.

            • bill94el
            • 3 years ago

            It may run at over 30fps, but stutters are prominent to the point that benchmarks are not reliable or even possible.

            [url<]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K2Ta4Evq2BQ[/url<]

          • NovusBogus
          • 3 years ago

          I’m enjoying it so far, but it does need more things to do as well as better persistence. I’ll try to remember to throw my first impressions and needed areas of improvement up on the game forum later this week. The mass disappointment was inevitable: what happens when a vague open-worldy game in an under-served genre gets hyped up is lots of folks attempt to read between the lines and draw nonexistent conclusions based on their own even more vague notion of what would make most bestest game evar.

          The Star Citizen blowback will be an order of magnitude worse. Even if it’s an excellent game that blows the rest of the genre out of the water–which the released modules suggest is very likely–there’s just no way it’s going to live up to the quasi-messianic fan hype.

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This