[SOLVED] Far Cry 5 graphics bug on water surfaces ?

Fastfishy2

Honorable
Apr 20, 2020
128
7
10,585
Asus Strix B550-A motherboard
RTX 4070 12GB
R7 5800X3D
32GB DDR4-3200
Game is running on a Samsung 970 EVO Plus NVME SSD.

Installed latest drivers, lowered graphics settings, made no difference. Haven't seen it anywhere else except on water surfaces in FC5, and all my 3Dmark runs looked normal (Speedway, Time Spy, Fire strike) so I doubt it's the GPU itself. Nothing is even close to overheating, either.

I just don't know what's causing this, what it is, or how to fix it. It's quite distracting sometimes.

(Look to where the rifle is pointing at the water)

View: https://imgur.com/gallery/ik4QgpB
 
Solution
Does it happen on your hardware too?
Yeah, I've seen it before and I initially wondered what it was too, until I realised that it was just black flies moving in random directions. They seem to pop in and out of existence like neutrinos.
I get what you're saying about flies effect but it seems REALLY badly done, and I know it's a ubisoft game but this seems like a new low even for them.
Yeah, it was really badly done but in Ubisoft's defence, if you were coding a giant open-world game like FC5, just how much attention would you pay to them? They're something that players usually won't see and they have zero impact on the game itself. I personally wouldn't be too worried about how realistic they were if I were coding...
Ok... I see what's happening here. Those aren't artifacts, they're supposed to be black flies. They weren't very well implemented and yes they are distracting but it's not your card, it's the game. Far Cry 5 is my favourite Far Cry title (I've played 3, 4, 5, 6, Blood Dragon, Lost on Mars and New Dawn) and I've played through it at least six times.

You're all good! 😉
 
Ok... I see what's happening here. Those aren't artifacts, they're supposed to be black flies. They weren't very well implemented and yes they are distracting but it's not your card, it's the game. Far Cry 5 is my favourite Far Cry title (I've played 3, 4, 5, 6, Blood Dragon, Lost on Mars and New Dawn) and I've played through it at least six times.

You're all good! 😉
Does it happen on your hardware too?


I get what you're saying about flies effect but it seems REALLY badly done, and I know it's a ubisoft game but this seems like a new low even for them.
Also here's a clip from a different location with graphics reduced to minimum. View: https://imgur.com/gallery/WUSmSjU
 
Does it happen on your hardware too?
Yeah, I've seen it before and I initially wondered what it was too, until I realised that it was just black flies moving in random directions. They seem to pop in and out of existence like neutrinos.
I get what you're saying about flies effect but it seems REALLY badly done, and I know it's a ubisoft game but this seems like a new low even for them.
Yeah, it was really badly done but in Ubisoft's defence, if you were coding a giant open-world game like FC5, just how much attention would you pay to them? They're something that players usually won't see and they have zero impact on the game itself. I personally wouldn't be too worried about how realistic they were if I were coding them. They'd be pretty close to (if not at) the bottom of the priority list.
 
Solution
Every FarCry game needs the Mod Launcher IMO. My game only crashed at launch 1 in maybe 15 times, before you even get to the game menu. Invaluable tool with lots of quality of life improvements.

Resistance is fantastic AND let's you disable the damn flies lol.

Very easy to install and add additional mods and easy to remove.

 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Avro Arrow
Every FarCry game needs the Mod Launcher IMO. My game only crashed at launch 1 in maybe 15 times, before you even get to the game menu. Invaluable tool with lots of quality of life improvements.

Resistance is fantastic AND let's you disable the damn flies lol.

Very easy to install and add additional mods and easy to remove.

You know, I had that same problem with FC5 crashing over and over and over again. I found an online posting telling people how to fix the crashes. The fix was so unexpected that I thought it was absurd. I tried it anyway because I didn't want to go through the hassle of re-installing it. Here's how things went for me:

I finished FC5 the first time and went back to it 1.5 years later. In that time, I had removed my page file because, with 16GB of RAM, W7 didn't need it. As it turned out, FC5 DID need a page file no matter how much RAM I had and it didn't like "System Managed Size" page files either.

That posting I mentioned said that FC5 is crashing because it NEEDS a page file even if you have enough RAM that W7 can do without one. Since I had no shortage of HDD space, I created a page file with a minimum and maximum size of 8192GB, thinking that this was a waste of time. Well, true to the poster's word, the game never crashed again after creating that page file.

I don't know if 8192GB was overkill but I easily had the space for it and it worked so I never bothered trying something smaller like 1024, 2048 or 4096GB.

Crazy, eh? 😊
 
You know, I had that same problem with FC5 crashing over and over and over again. I found an online posting telling people how to fix the crashes. The fix was so unexpected that I thought it was absurd. I tried it anyway because I didn't want to go through the hassle of re-installing it. Here's how things went for me:

I finished FC5 the first time and went back to it 1.5 years later. In that time, I had removed my page file because, with 16GB of RAM, W7 didn't need it. As it turned out, FC5 DID need a page file no matter how much RAM I had and it didn't like "System Managed Size" page files either.

That posting I mentioned said that FC5 is crashing because it NEEDS a page file even if you have enough RAM that W7 can do without one. Since I had no shortage of HDD space, I created a page file with a minimum and maximum size of 8192GB, thinking that this was a waste of time. Well, true to the poster's word, the game never crashed again after creating that page file.

I don't know if 8192GB was overkill but I easily had the space for it and it worked so I never bothered trying something smaller like 1024, 2048 or 4096GB.

Crazy, eh? 😊
The rule used to be 1.5x your RAM but that I think stems from before we had a ton of RAM (in the GB's rather than MB's). I have 64GB and by that rule a 96GB page? I think not. At most these days 8GB. I think I have mine set to either 2 or 4gb.

Ideally you want it on an SSD dedicated for caching since as you know the page file is constantly being read and written to so you don't want to do that to your main SSD or NVMe drive. Flash memory has limited read and write cycles.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Avro Arrow
The rule used to be 1.5x your RAM but that I think stems from before we had a ton of RAM (in the GB's rather than MB's). I have 64GB and by that rule a 96GB page? I think not. At most these days 8GB. I think I have mine set to either 2 or 4gb.
Honestly, before the problem with FC5, I wasn't using a paging file at all and everything worked just fine.
Ideally you want it on an SSD dedicated for caching since as you know the page file is constantly being read and written to so you don't want to do that to your main SSD or NVMe drive. Flash memory has limited read and write cycles.
Actually, that's the reason why I don't put it on an SSD. I just put it on a spinning drive.
 
You'll get better returns putting it on even a junker SSD over an HDD.

Anyway FastFishy (OP) has some info that hopefully will help.
I'm sure that's true but the thing is, I have 32GB of RAM as it is. I could run Windows without a page file and it would probably be fine (I've never seen my PC use more than 12GB of RAM at any one time). One person I spoke to does something that I used to do but forgot about. I'll just make a RAM disk and use that for the page file. I easily have the 8GB to spare (I think that my PC has no more than 2GB currently allocated) and a RAM disk would be much faster than any SSD.

It also sure beats taking up a SATA port with a throwaway drive.