Fallout 4’s wasteland is about to look better than ever on the PC

If you're still hooked on Fallout 4 and roaming around the Commonwealth's post-apocalyptic scenario (or thinking of taking the first hit), there's good news for you: the wasteland will soon be a lot prettier. Bethesda has announced a couple free updates for Fallout 4, and the biggest one offers a graphics upgrade to the PC version of the game.

The official High-Resolution Texture Pack for Fallout 4 is coming next week, and it packs a whopping 58GB (yes, fifty-eight gigabytes) of textures to improve the game's looks. Bethesda didn't go into detail about exactly what portions of Fallout 4's scenarios received the most touch-ups, but given the update's massive size, we're placing our bets on "everything."

The update will be free, but being able to effectively play the game with it appplied might prove a little costly. Better sit down for this one. Bethesda is recommending that gamers have a Core i7-5820K CPU or better, a GeForce GTX 1080 8GB graphics card, and more than 8GB of RAM. While that last requirement is tame enough, the first two definitely aren't. At any rate, we expect the game to look positively stunning after the update. Heck, I might even get back into it myself.

Comments closed
    • TwoEars
    • 3 years ago

    Fallout 4 is bound by single thread performance… 5820k is not a fast single thread cpu…. Bethesda are idots…. not that I didn’t know that.

    • Krogoth
    • 3 years ago

    The gameplay still kinda stinks though. You are just polishing a pig but it is still a pig at the end.

      • DancinJack
      • 3 years ago

      A really, really fat pig that is slow and boring.

      • K-L-Waster
      • 3 years ago

      Subjective much?

        • Voldenuit
        • 3 years ago

        It’s grindy, fetchy and they butchered S.P.E.C.I.A.L. Dialogue system is a joke and the game is too linear for a Fallout.

        So, yes.

          • K-L-Waster
          • 3 years ago

          Dialog isn’t so bad if you get the mod that shows you what you are actually going to say – but yes, the vanilla dialog system is redicklackle.

            • Krogoth
            • 3 years ago

            [url<]https://youtu.be/Hf0M1E0yxAU[/url<] This is what made FO1 and FO2 such gems. The writers went the extra mile with low intelligence characters.

            • lilbuddhaman
            • 3 years ago

            The dialogue gives almost no choice, the vast majority of dialogue choices are:
            Sarcastic, Yes
            Serious, Yes
            Reluctant, Yes
            or No (which creates a loop that eventually requires you to say yes)

    • One Sick Puppy
    • 3 years ago

    Skyrim would have benefited alot more from more voice actors than the texture update. I’m sure the graphics were the least of F4’s needs.

    • JosiahBradley
    • 3 years ago

    What is the minimum required VRAM here? I can run the game just fine now but I only have 4GB per card. They can’t possible mean I need 8GB at all times to load a scene? Did they forget to use compressed textures….

      • I.S.T.
      • 3 years ago

      I wouldn’t be surprised if these were 16K by 16K textures OR HIGHER.

      So, hell, might not be playable at 60 FPS and high res for years. We’ll have to see how 1080s fair.

        • JosiahBradley
        • 3 years ago

        The game shipped with 1K and 2K textures, I can’t see them investing in the art for free by giving away 64x the resolution now. The first mods I installed were 2K bump maps and 4K textures. The game is fun either way but the textures were pretty bad.

          • I.S.T.
          • 3 years ago

          Might be 8Kx8K then. 58 gigs is frigging insane just for textures.

          • NTMBK
          • 3 years ago

          Just because they used 2K textures in game doesn’t mean that they were necessarily authored at 2K.

      • brucethemoose
      • 3 years ago

      BGS is notorious for using unoptimized textures. I know of 2 programs designed to optimize Skyrim’s textures alone, and STEP (who’s policy is to stay as close to vanilla as possible without degrading anything) even includes pre-optimized vanilla textures.

      • TheRazorsEdge
      • 3 years ago

      I hope you already know this, but I’m going to say it just in case: You can’t just add up the VRAM from cards in SLI/Crossfire.

      Since each card will need to have all of the textures to render a frame, you will likely need 8 GB per card to run well.

      The geometry data should remain the same size pre- and post- update, and the framebuffer will remain the same as well—provided all other graphics settings remain the same. So the VRAM requirement is entirely driven by the size of the textures.

    • brucethemoose
    • 3 years ago

    5820K?

    Ahahahhahahhaahhah… Oh, that’s funny. Bethesda’s Gamebryo games (including Fallout 4) are threaded like they’re from 1999… Skyrim may look like a notable exception in the task manager, but that’s all just shadows being calculated [i<]on the CPU[/i<]. Recommending a binned 7600k from SiliconLottery and low latency RAM is what they should've done.

      • BurntMyBacon
      • 3 years ago

      They calculate shadows on the CPU? I’m starting to wonder if those “shadow calculation threads” you mentioned might be the problem. They have to overlay on something (textures) and that something is now a much higher resolution than before.

      On another note, who calculates shadows on the CPU. Maybe I’m crazy, but I thought that was more of a GPU task. I could understand calculating shadow maps and letting the GPU handle the actual shadow calculations. Then again, this isn’t my area of expertise. Someone with more knowledge on the subject, please enlighten me as to how this works and why this is a good idea.

        • brucethemoose
        • 3 years ago

        Only in Skyrim, AFAIK.

        It makes me nauseous just thinking about it… Yes, you’re right, it SHOULD be something done on the GPU (just like it was done in Oblivion).

        My theory is that they hit a GPU wall on the 360/PS4 and offloaded shadows to the spare, unused CPU cores. And because it’s as lazy as console ports get, the PC version got the same treatment.

      • lilbuddhaman
      • 3 years ago

      [quote<]Bethesda's Gamebryo games (including Fallout 4) are threaded like they're from 1999...[/quote<] Because it is

    • tviceman
    • 3 years ago

    Strange that a texture pack increases the recommended CPU….

    • Convert
    • 3 years ago

    I don’t have a problem with this at all. It’s free and up to you if you want to update the textures. If not, keep playing the same game and keep your space.

    • Waco
    • 3 years ago

    They’re really trying to push VRAM limits aren’t they?

    • Sargent Duck
    • 3 years ago

    My Radeon 7870 is now crying, for at this point, I think it’s finally safe to put it out to pasture.

      • Concupiscence
      • 3 years ago

      Or just keep playing without the comically huge textures. There’s no penalty for doing so.

      • JustAnEngineer
      • 3 years ago

      You’ve waited this long. Wait a few more months for Vega.

    • K-L-Waster
    • 3 years ago

    Better looking graphics is always nice, but as a long time Skyrim / Fallout player I would be much happier if they would contribute some assistance to getting the script extenders upgraded to the 64 bit engine so we can get the more advanced mods cut over to SSE and FO4.

    (And yes, I know they had nothing to do with the script extenders originally — just saying that helping the community with the conversion would have a much greater impact than increasing the texture resolution and poly count.)

      • DancinJack
      • 3 years ago

      Or just a better engine in the first place?

        • K-L-Waster
        • 3 years ago

        I don’t think the engine is as bad as people make it out to be. Most of the other engines out there are not for sandbox games. The big challenge engine-wise is also the core appeal of Beth games: the fact you can go anywhere at any time and can load up whatever mods you want. The “better” engines don’t generally support either of those things.

          • DancinJack
          • 3 years ago

          That doesn’t mean that Bethesda can’t make an updated version of Creation. There are current engines that WOULD work, but I don’t necessarily blame them for sticking with Creation. It severely needs updating though. I don’t think we can deny that.

            • strangerguy
            • 3 years ago

            FO4’s loading times drives me insane: 1+ mins between changing exterior and interior cells with vsync on. On a 1TB SSD. Turn vsync off and the loading times are much faster, but the game will go haywire and run way too fast. This doesn’t happen in FO:NV at all.

            Beth, are you sure you developing games for 2015 and beyond, or are you still stuck in the clocking quirks of the MS-DOS era?

            PS: Oh yeah, and uncompressed audio in the age of 4GHz quadcore CPUs. That’s just hilariously lazy. Intel giveth, game devs taketh.

          • lilbuddhaman
          • 3 years ago

          The scripting system is still broken and trash, the physics system is still a buggy mess (and the source of many “funny” videos on YT), and good. f’ing. god. there. are. the. same. damn. bugs. from. EVERY. LAST. TITLE. STILL. THERE. that are still easily fixed by modders week one.

          There was more money put into marketing than the game itself, no doubt.

            • alphadogg
            • 3 years ago

            Don’t forget the ample money being poured into the Legal Expenses line item.

    • DPete27
    • 3 years ago

    58GB [u<][b<]just[/b<][/u<] for the textures!?!! This has gone far past ridiculous.

      • chuckula
      • 3 years ago

      It’s not as bad as it sounds.

      55 GB of that is just the uncompressed audio.

        • Chrispy_
        • 3 years ago

        Oh man, Respawn are never going to live that down, are they…

        😀

      • Growler
      • 3 years ago

      Every individual blade of grass in the Commonwealth has its own custom texture.

      Post apocalyptic grass has [i<]never[/i<] looked so good.

        • DancinJack
        • 3 years ago

        All joking aside, there are some mods that make the grass/foliage look badass.

      • spugm1r3
      • 3 years ago

      You see ridiculous, I see glorious.

        • derFunkenstein
        • 3 years ago

        Yeah, I caught myself wondering if maybe that’s not *enough* to have touched every texture somehow.

        • ImSpartacus
        • 3 years ago

        Yeah, there are no holds barred. Bethesda knows that this needs to be balls to the ways to get traction with the community.

          • Voldenuit
          • 3 years ago

          I’d rather they paid more attention to good art design, like their daughter studio Arkane did with Dishonored, and looks to be doing with Prey.

      • morphine
      • 3 years ago

      For a game with a world the size of Fallout 4’s, 58GB isn’t that ridiculous. There’s just a ton of ground to cover… quite literally. I remember installing 4-6GB of texture mods on Oblivion, and that was 10+ years ago.

      Besides, in the era of 6TB HDDs and affordable 1TB SSDs… And as a further point of reference, Doom takes up around 50GB of space, almost all of it for graphics… and for good reason as it looks fantastic.

        • DancinJack
        • 3 years ago

        I feel it’s a bit much in the fact that it is 58 ADDITIONAL geebees on top of the original game. I think we’re talking ~28GB+58GB now. That’s pushing the limits of ridiculous. I don’t even think the original ~28GB includes any DLC. (I could be wrong on that front though)

        • K-L-Waster
        • 3 years ago

        For every model you need a diffuse map and a normal map — you may also need a specular map depending on the material. Plus to get the quality you want you need to go light on the compression.

        Adds up quickly.

        • DPete27
        • 3 years ago

        I’m playing Doom right now on max settings with my RX480. I’d say the graphics are meh. Par with the course, but not awe-inspiring. It’s certainly easier to make an on-rails game like Doom look pretty than something open world like Witcher3/FO4/ROTR where the whole world needs to be explorable. Doom just covers distant landscape with Mars dust, and the inside stuff is just hallways (copy-paste, copy-paste).

        I just reminisce about games of the not-so-distant past that were 12GB or less and had great graphics. Then Titanfall came out and install sized ballooned out of control.

        I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. It would be nice if game installs gave some installation options. Don’t want the uncompressed audio, uncheck that box, don’t want multiplayer maps, uncheck that box, etc etc. If users decide they want those things later, give them a convenient way to get it when they want it. With the rumor of net neutrality being overturned, it’s probably something we need to explore.

          • RAGEPRO
          • 3 years ago

          [quote<]I'm playing Doom right now on max settings with my RX480. I'd say the graphics are meh. [/quote<]You just made my head explode. That game looks frigging incredible. I haven't seen anything that really comes close. That said, I thought RAGE looked amazing too and everyone else seemed meh on it. I am super, super sensitive to repeating textures so perhaps MegaTexture™ makes a bigger impact on IQ for me than for people who don't notice or care about repeating and re-used textures.

      • Vaughn
      • 3 years ago

      Why are you still using a 80GB HDD?

      or on 1.5M DSL connection this is the directions things are going.

      Embrace the future 😛

      • TheRazorsEdge
      • 3 years ago

      I have a 1TB SSD. If I can choose between better graphics and free space, I’ll choose the graphics every time.

      I would expect a huge volume of graphics assets on any open-world game. It comes with the territory.

      • EndlessWaves
      • 3 years ago

      58GB is the average size of a single Blu-ray UHD movie.

    • ImSpartacus
    • 3 years ago

    They also had an “8GB 490” option on the recommended gpu section and it’s now removed.

    [url<]https://www.reddit.com/r/Fallout/comments/5r1bg5/fallout_4_free_updates_high_resolution_texture/[/url<] I thought it was a typo for "480" as sometimes you see these requirements post the "best" option from each camp (e.g. When you get cpu requirements of an i5 Haswell and an 8350 as if they were somehow equivalent, lol). But since it was just removed rather than changed to 480, it looks like it wasn't a typo...

      • chuckula
      • 3 years ago

      RYZEN I MEAN VEGA CONFIRMED!

        • DPete27
        • 3 years ago

        Did I miss something somewhere? Why are you saying this in every news post comment section?

          • chuckula
          • 3 years ago

          I’m trying to give AMD some attention here.
          I’m sick of hearing all the hype about Skylake-X this and Cannonlake being demoed that all over the place. It’s high time that AMD got some love!

            • Redocbew
            • 3 years ago

            Did someone steal your keyboard again?

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This