Disgusting. Deleting the patch ASAP.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
VG Tech: Dark Souls 3 Patch 1.11 PS4 Pro Frame Rate Test (Unlocked Frame-rate)
- Thread starter LelouchZero
- Start date
Disgusting. Deleting the patch ASAP.
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
That's what I'd call a sweeping statement.
You're basically throwing every 60 FPS console game under the bus there. Rarely do console 60 FPS games not have any drops. I personally believe an average frame rate of 50 FPS w/ drops and less frame pacing is a big improvement over 30 FPS w/ drops and frame pacing.
Which is why i said optimization. We've had games like AC Unity and more recently the new Homefront which culled some less noticeable effects for performance gains on the CPU front in their patches.
Though it's probably too much to ask for more options from Japanese developers, Square aren't bothering fixing frame pacing in the HQ mode and didn't provide option to cap the Lite mode, I wouldn't expect it from From either.
Yeah, this.
voodoowoolf
Neo Member
a
There are plenty of games that hold 60 over long stretches and drop frames in heavy load situations or just single ones occasionally. That's what I call a 60 FPS game. This here is not one of these.
Absolutely agreed.
molnizzle
Member
I don't understand. inFamous was basically a launch window game and showed every developer how to do it. Give players the option of unlocked or 30 locked framerates. It's a simple menu option that pleases both camps.
What is the deal with being so oblivious and/or stubborn as to not offer SIMPLE options like this to please your fanbase? This shit should have been the norm for every unlocked game that doesn't stay around 60 fps.
What is the deal with being so oblivious and/or stubborn as to not offer SIMPLE options like this to please your fanbase? This shit should have been the norm for every unlocked game that doesn't stay around 60 fps.
Head.spawn
Junior Member
ISee
Member
People complaining about uneven frame timings in a game with unlocked fps: That's how it is without gsync or free sync if you don't want to have screen tearing.
The DS3 30fps frame timing issue is probably tied to triple vsync. Whenever the game isn't able to output a frame in 33ms it holds the previous frame for 50 ms and outputs the following frame for just 16ms. This results in two frames being output in 66ms, which is what you want in a 30fps game where every frame is supposed to last for 33ms. But those two frames are distributed uneven which results in feelable stutter. Adaptive vsync would probably fix that because a frame could be drawn even if it isn't completely done, this would of course result in screen tearing but feel much smoother.
In general to get an even frametiming (with vsync enabled) fps have to be a multiple of 60 (on 60 hz displays). So frame timings have to either be at steady 16ms intervals (60fps), 33ms intervals (30 fps), 50 ms intervals (20 fps), 100 ms intervals (10 fps) etc.
This is impossible with unlocked framerates and vsync because fps are all over the place. Some frames here seem to be drawn in 33 ms while other seem to only last for 16 ms (from what I've seen so far in the video).
So two frames are being shown for a total of 50ms (16+33) which results in an fps of 45 (50ms:2=25ms ; 1000:25=45 fps).
Framepacing is uneven in this mode but it is a lot smoother than the previous 50ms + 16ms pacing at 30 fps because the maximum amount of time a frame is on screen is 33ms and not 50ms.
I hope I was able to explain why an even frametiming is expected in a game locked at 30/60 fps while it isn't in a game with an unlocked framerate. I'm also just a layman so please excuse if I made a mistake somewhere.
The DS3 30fps frame timing issue is probably tied to triple vsync. Whenever the game isn't able to output a frame in 33ms it holds the previous frame for 50 ms and outputs the following frame for just 16ms. This results in two frames being output in 66ms, which is what you want in a 30fps game where every frame is supposed to last for 33ms. But those two frames are distributed uneven which results in feelable stutter. Adaptive vsync would probably fix that because a frame could be drawn even if it isn't completely done, this would of course result in screen tearing but feel much smoother.
In general to get an even frametiming (with vsync enabled) fps have to be a multiple of 60 (on 60 hz displays). So frame timings have to either be at steady 16ms intervals (60fps), 33ms intervals (30 fps), 50 ms intervals (20 fps), 100 ms intervals (10 fps) etc.
This is impossible with unlocked framerates and vsync because fps are all over the place. Some frames here seem to be drawn in 33 ms while other seem to only last for 16 ms (from what I've seen so far in the video).
So two frames are being shown for a total of 50ms (16+33) which results in an fps of 45 (50ms:2=25ms ; 1000:25=45 fps).
Framepacing is uneven in this mode but it is a lot smoother than the previous 50ms + 16ms pacing at 30 fps because the maximum amount of time a frame is on screen is 33ms and not 50ms.
I hope I was able to explain why an even frametiming is expected in a game locked at 30/60 fps while it isn't in a game with an unlocked framerate. I'm also just a layman so please excuse if I made a mistake somewhere.
Can't have a locked 60 with most AMD CPUs on PC
http://www.techspot.com/review/1162-dark-souls-3-benchmarks/page5.html
http://www.techspot.com/review/1162-dark-souls-3-benchmarks/page5.html
molnizzle
Member
...right.
Which is why there should be an option to cap the frame rate at 30 with even frame times.
That's the entire point of people bringing up the uneven timings you get with the variable frame rate.
Risk Breaker
Member
That frametimes graph is hilarious, but I prefer shit framepacing at 50 FPS than at 30 FPS, so this is good.
Bloodporne
Member
"Miyazaki-san, people have been wondering what's going on with all these frame pacing issues. What's your take on all this?"
ISee
Member
Not going to argue with that. Of course there should be an option to lock the framerate to 30.
I'm not defending from soft, I just wanted to explain why there is uneven framepacing.
LordOcidax
Member
Clear
CliffyB's Cock Holster
Game always had a somewhat variable frame-rate, so I really don't get the drama.
While I do dislike unlocked frame-rates like this it is ultimately a better option than 30fps with severe frame pacing issues. Neither choice is optimal but things are better now on the Pro.
That said, what we're seeing here is very much in line with comparable PC hardware running Dark Souls 3 at 1080p. So further improving performance would require deeper changes to the engine, I'd imagine. As it stands, it performs as expected considering the hardware.
That said, what we're seeing here is very much in line with comparable PC hardware running Dark Souls 3 at 1080p. So further improving performance would require deeper changes to the engine, I'd imagine. As it stands, it performs as expected considering the hardware.
A 30fps locked with no framepacing is all we're asking for.
Well, I'd like to see correct frame-pacing as well but it clearly isn't going to happen.
Polygonal_Sprite
Gold Member
Rarely do PC games (especially ports of big AAA console games) stick to a locked 60fps either unless you have hardware which is way above recommended specs. No engine is perfect and can be strained at times which causes drops.
Do you think it's fair to say that Japanese developers don't care as much about the technical side of engines etc ? (Dark Souls, Bloodborne, FFXV, NieR, Nioh, Zelda etc).
OsirisBlack
Banned
Plays much better... well at least to me. Also BB is better with boost mode on, not sure it's locked but it feels much better.
BigEmil
Junior Member
Exactly.
You'd be surprised how many PC gamers are actually not playing at locked 60fps and never really check and they don't notice or care enough to realise.
Do you have any clue why this seems like such a difficult fix for FROM?
What in their engine could be the cause of this?
Frostman
Member
I agree, I jumped on just to check it out. I would choose this over the 30 + bad framepacing any day.
It's not ideal. I wouldn't be surprised if we continue to see bad framepacing in Froms upcoming games. They don't see it as a priority to fix.
Japanese devs all shit the bed with this.
Not really, since the refresh rate of the TV is 60. Only true 60 or 30 FPS feel (somewhat, in the latter case) smooth, 20 or 15 could also be evenly paced but is too low to feel good.
At "locked" 45 FPS you would display two new frames then repeat the second one, then again from the beginning - not smooth, but may feel more even than varying frame pacing. Or you could introduce tearing that would occur in the dead center of the screen, which would be horrible.
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
Exactly my point.
This notion of "if it isn't either locked 30 or locked 60, it is terrible" is baffling me. we're seeing much better performance and less frame pacing. It's a win win.
That's how I played Skyrim on my Intel graphics Laptop with the frame rate locking .ini file mod from Nexus DB. I actually thought it was A-OK
WheelHoss1
Member
I'm sorry but this is the direct result of all you nerds saying resolution doesn't matter and performance is everything.
Maybe mods should stop deleting my threads.
Maybe mods should stop deleting my threads.
D
Deleted member 325805
Unconfirmed Member
I was lucky enough to play DS3 on PC at a locked 60fps and it was one of the big highlights of my gaming year, it's crazy to me that the devs don't put more focus on performance on the console versions. I also finished Bloodborne on PS4 and the difference in fluidity is so massive I can't even put it into words, the frame pacing issue was the real killer, obviously 30fps vs 60fps is no contest but a rock solid 30fps with correct pacing feels so much better than what we got with Bloodborne.
Maybe they could hit 60fps at 900p on the Pro? Offer a full performance mode.
Maybe they could hit 60fps at 900p on the Pro? Offer a full performance mode.
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
Maybe posts like this are why the mods delete your threads ?
Greatest Ever
Member
Why do I get dips on my i5-6500 and 980ti?
At least name the one title with rock solid performance and sublime frame pacing. Gravity Rush 2.
If they could offer the option to lock the framerate at 30 (like so many devs do) nobody would complain. I do not get how any decent, experienced developer would not offer this simple option really... there is no excuse.
Liabe Brave
Member
Exactly. One constant framerate, not a "wildly fluctuating" one.
This is what all games look like if not at 30fps or 60fps constantly. There's nothing notably worse than expected here.
Not precisely true. Because there's a ceiling 10fps above the average, but the game sometimes drops 15fps+ below the average, that means it has to spend a little time holding 60fps to balance. So it spends slightly more time above 50fps than below it.
I am not writing off your complaints. It sucks that this impacts your enjoyment, and I wish it were otherwise. You have every right to be disappointed and annoyed.
But note that stating an unlocked framerate is definitively "wrong", and that the only way to accept it is to be unable to perceive it, writes off the other side of the argument.
Yep. Though the stutters now are a third shorter than the previous ones, which means input-to-motion lag is improved.The point being, it was stuttery before, it still stutters now.
Displays update at a fixed 60Hz rate.
If a game is running at anything which is not a divisor of 60, it will stutter.
45 FPS is about the worst-case scenario because it will constantly be flipping between 16.67ms and 33.33ms frames.
The good thing is that HDTVs will have an equivalent to G-Sync/FreeSync in a year or two with HDMI 2.1's Variable Refresh Rate Game Mode.
This will synchronize the refresh rate to the frame rate, eliminating the stuttering that you get with unlocked framerates on a fixed 60Hz refresh rate display.
Hopefully that's something which can be retroactively supported in games on a "PS4 Pro 2" hardware revision, without requiring game-specific patches. (on PC you just force V-Sync to be disabled)
No, again. 45 fps is not constant framerate. And CAN'T BE in a vsynced scenario.
If you buy a car that only can run at 30 mph and 60 mph, when you end your travel with a 45 mph in average, you CAN'T say that was a constant speed.
45 fps means half of the time the REAL framerate is 30 fps and the other half of the time is 60 fps.
Frames per second is always an average, in one second. Doesn't show the full story.
EDIT:
This
Blackthorn
"hello?" "this is vagina"
Yeah I'd agree with this.
Locked 60 fps > 30 fps with even frame pacing > Unlocked framerate > 30 fps with botched frame pacing > Unlocked, highly variable framerate.