One thing to note though if we want to huff some copium is that the Digital Foundry tests were done without a Day One patch.
So maybe we'll see some improvements on release day.

Bloober Team reportedly worked quickly to address similar issues in Silent Hill 2.

There will be ways to get around the 60fps cap on PC, there always is.

Had a feeling this would be rough at release.

Its a new team releasing a new Metal Gear Solid game.

That and their using Unreal engine 5 which if I remember right usually has issues at first.

Best to wait till they iron out the issues.

I'm sure the game will become better a few months later.

Poor performing releases should be made illegal, sick to death of seeing this shit time and time again. Sony are embarrassing for doing nothing, what a bunch of clowns. I also forgot scaling tech was always going to make developers lazy and cut corners a lot.

Name one contemporary game that has only needed one patch.

Are you saying that no contemporary game has ever seen "some improvements" from a Day 1 patch?
Because those are the words I used.

No, I was saying these games always need several. All this says is a developer cannot even get it right with an additional patch. Which suggests it probably should of stayed in development longer.

Hmm...

Yeah, 720p 30FPS is somewhat ridiculous for a current gen game like that. But sometimes I get puzzled when I hear some things about Unreal Engine.

I mean, I have an GPU that is only "decent" for current days (RTX 3050 6GB), and almost every Unreal Engine game I tried worked really fine. I have here Luto and Robocop Rogue City, two Unreal Engine 5 games, and both are running fine on my modest RIG, not even DLSS needed (1080p High Settings). Of course, graphics could be better. There's also Clair Obscur: Expedition 33, but I heard this one is very well optimized, and maybe an "exception" to the rule.

Back in previous ages, I had a graphic card that could run some Unreal Engine 4 games, but struggled to run ID Tech games. That's why ID Tech always get me with a "bad feeling", instead of Unreal.

I don't know, maybe it's just me. Maybe I haven't tried enough UE5 titles.

Honestly, Unreal Engine isn't the greatest engine when it comes to performance, but I also get the sense that publishers know it's going to be used as an excuse to let them off the hook, when the real issue is that developers are overutilized in an industry of low employment due to mass layoffs. 

I have been developing a pretty large (1900 sq.km) small-grain (so not Minecraft-like) voxel world (not really a game at this point) in UE5 and there are plenty of resources available to make a performant experience. Often improving performance is a matter of just writing proper game-code (in C++ or Blueprint, it doesn't matter.) 

My large world isn't close to being done and is still asset sparse, but getting it to be traversable on an RTX 4060 laptop (roughly 9th Generation console performance, if not slightly weaker) at 1600p 60fps wasn't hard to do. I have lumen and nanite at appropriate levels and was even considering moving to a non-lumen ray-tracing implementation. And again this is a voxel world using voxel plugin that has a lot of rivers and water with heavy use of semi-realistic fluid dynamics with Fluid Flux.

Who knows, maybe once I start adding a lot more assets this will bog down the performance. 

Of course my "world" is mostly CPU-bound at this point (and uses a lot of system ram), but I see no reason why a well-staffed team couldn't optimize games with UE5. It's really just an anti-worker industry giving us poor titles at this point, in my opinion and blaming the game engine is an easy out.