-
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
thelastword
Banned
you are saying so many different things in that one sentence that it does not seem cogent. I only saw the framerate dip to the 30's towards the end of the video, but very brief instances during traversal......
I still maintain this could hold 60fps better than what we see here, the hardware is definitely capable. Hopefully FROM continues improving performance.
Absolutely, this already looks much smoother than the 30fps with dips with framepacing issues. Remember the main issues people have had with BB and DS3 is it's framepacing, well the most vocal anyway. This patch improves fluidity and controller response over the 30fps version, on average it stays around 50fps. That's a nice improvement from FROM who probably just did a quick patch without any optimization. I hope they continue to improve performance et al.....
I can't see much from the video, but VGtech spoke nothing of improved visuals etc...?
Vasili2K38
Member
As much I love NeoGAF, sometimes the overreaction here is baffling. As qI said in the patch thread, the game feels very smooth compared to the previous state. An like you said, in this video yo see the average is around 50s fps. Then you have people talking like tbe average is 30-40s, -_- I don't understand.
The real critic here is From should add a framerate lock option, options are always good.
GreyOcelot
Member
I agree. Unlocked with dips > 30 with frame pacing and dips. It is noticeably better. I wonder if this is ultimately the solution for frame pacing. In that case I'd very much welcome at Bloodborne patch
karasu
Member
Why are you blaming the Pro? It's not like this is the limit of its capabilities. Blame FROM Software for not doing a very good job.
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
Man.
A lot of hyperbole in this thread. I would highly recommend posters actually watch the video before posting.
90% of the time during game play the frame rate is either around 50 FPS or above. Lowest game play I saw was 45~ and that was in the scene with a dozen enemies on screen at once, those are usually areas where the OG Pre patch version would drop below 30 as well. For those comparing this with FFXV, FFXV doesn't go any higher than 45 FPS in Lite mode unless you're staring at the ground, this is doing much better in terms of performance.
This is a huge improvement in performance and higher frame rates will alleviate the 30 FPS frame pacing judders considerably. Would love to see what NXGamer or DF have to say in their commentary. For me, this is actually convincing me to pick the game up for PS4 now.
A lot of hyperbole in this thread. I would highly recommend posters actually watch the video before posting.
90% of the time during game play the frame rate is either around 50 FPS or above. Lowest game play I saw was 45~ and that was in the scene with a dozen enemies on screen at once, those are usually areas where the OG Pre patch version would drop below 30 as well. For those comparing this with FFXV, FFXV doesn't go any higher than 45 FPS in Lite mode unless you're staring at the ground, this is doing much better in terms of performance.
This is a huge improvement in performance and higher frame rates will alleviate the 30 FPS frame pacing judders considerably. Would love to see what NXGamer or DF have to say in their commentary. For me, this is actually convincing me to pick the game up for PS4 now.
LelouchZero
Member
It fluctuates between 33-60 'throughout the whole video', 33 being the absolute minimum and 60 being the max.
Performance is mostly in the mid 40s, it doesn't dip much below that, while it averages around 50 fps. Perhaps I should have said high 40s? Admittedly 'fluctuates' is a poor choice of words on my part, I'll change 'fluctuates' to 'ranges' and improve the clarity of the post.
It's incapable of running it at a locked 60 fps in it's current state, people with realistic expectations foresaw this as they looked at the limitations of the hardware and software and knew what to reasonably expect.
FantasticMrSnake
Member
When youtube says the video is at 1080 @ 60fps, is it interpolating the ~48fps to 60fps? so we don't actually see how it looks and feels on the ps4 right?
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
Except it's not wildly fluctuating .... watch the video at least.
Looks like an improvement, at least from what I played on Xbone.
No. We can mostly see how it really is.
No. We can mostly see how it really is.
I did watch the video.
One moment its 60, the next 45, 50, 55, 48.
Its all over the place.
There is no way that will feel more comfortable to play than a locked 30.
That and the framepacing is still broken.
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
If you've played any of Platinum's action games, it seems to run just like that. Honestly, I can't believe people are so upset about this.
Something like FFXV I can understand where the frame rate doesn't really ever get anywhere close to 50, so you're always hovering in that middle spot. This, the cut-scenes and whenever you're lighting bonfires or going through the mist door things (i forgot what they're called) drop to mid to low 40's.
But during actual combat, it's always on the 50~ or above mark. Like I said in a post earlier, lowest in-game point I saw was when the player is facing the dozen or so human-like enemies. There's a drop when he kills the monster on the roof and its dying, but again, not in combat.
Oh shit you're right. I'd better chuck my copies of Bayonetta and Bayonetta 2 in the bin. I mean what's the point? Should have just locked then at 30fps. /S
I will gladly take 60ish fps in dungeons and 45 fps in busy outdoors areas over an inconsistent 30fps.
Sorry but I can't agree.
A consistent locked framerate will always be preferable to a fluctuating one.
At least for me. The option should be there for a locked 30.
Granted the broken framepacing kinda ruins it either way.
So Bayonetta should have been 30fps?
The PS3 version? Yeah it should've been locked to 30. I mean it has drops as low as 20.
You should watch the PS3 version in action. It wouldn't even be a good 30 fps game.
Hah ok you got me. Not every game.
But Bayonetta was kind of an awful mess of frame rate drops and screen tearing even back on the 360.
That game just needed more optimisation.
Polygonal_Sprite
Member
Same here. People moan about 30fps on console then they give people the option to play a game at a much higher framerate and they still moan. I get that it's not perfect but for me it takes only a few mins for my eyes to adjust to the fluctuating framerate and I'm fine. I'd rather have 45-50 than 30 with drops. Of course also offering a locked 30 for those that prefer that would be the perfect scenario.
I wonder if they could get similar results with Bloodborne.
Well i don't see how dark souls 3 is much different! The pacing is slower but the higher frame rate is still greatly beneficial.
Agree though, Bayonetta wasn't very well optimised.
Nobody cares about Bayonetta on ps3. That's like bringing up the Amiga in a Street Fighter 2 discussion.
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
Well .. DS3 runs a modified BB engine, which in turn runs on a modified DS2 engine. If they're able to get DS3 to 50 and above during game play, they should be able to match or even exceed it on BB, which is an older game.
But realistically I think it's way too late to expect a BB patch. Only way I see it happening is if they announce BB2 at E3 or something and bookend with "And also, BB has a Pro patch available right now".
Garrett Hawke
Member
No it's not.
We discussed this in the other thread, with evidence of the cpu requirements for 60fps on pc, and it is impossible for the pro cpu to do this.
BB looks technically more advanced than DS3, though.
I'm one of the guy who can spot fluctuation in framerate but isn't affected at all by it while playing. So if it looks 60fps-ish, i'm very hyped to try it.
Not in the recent patch (in the useable performance mode, quality mode works like crap). They completely unlocked the framerate.
BigEmil
Junior Member
Exactly
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
With optimization, they could very easily do 60 FPS. It's not "impossible", it just might require a more optimized performance patch needing more nip tucks than just cranking up the performance profile.
What? It's not technically more advanced. It's the exact same engine/quality of geometry and effects.
Without strict vsync, 45 fps means it runs at 60 fps 2/3 of the time and 30 fps 1/3 of the time but jumping between those frame times every two frames.
That's a good example of wildly fluctuation.
I mean, sometimes it's like people don't know what 45 or 50 fps means in a regular TV.
If the cpu can't keep up it might be pretty hard to drop visual quality to get to 60 fps.
Looks. I don't know if it is more advanced. It is a lot more pleasing to the eyes.
I think fluctuating framerates above 30 is worse than a well frame paced constant 30 fps, but that's really a personal opinion thing. Of course a stable 60 fps is better, but hey! They should offer the choice of 30 vs unlocked, since people have such different opinions on that.
Liabe Brave
Member
What you're describing is fluctuating frame pacing, not fluctuating frame rates. It makes no sense to measure framerates instantaneously.
And did you actually look at the stats? The average framerate is 50fps, but the 95th percentile is 45fps. That means it spends a meaningful amount of time holding 60fps.
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
This.
A lot of us are either jumping to conclusions after reading the OP. Or completely ignoring the stat file and just skimming through the video.
Average frame rate is 50 FPS. It's *way* better than what FFXV's Lite mode does now and a massive improvement over getting a locked 30 FPS game. If the average was ~40, that I would completely agree is not a good solution. Frame pacing seemingly is drastically reduced too as the game refreshes on 16.6 MS 80% of the time.
This is a good patch.
blastprocessor
The Amiga Brotherhood
Good MORE devs need to provide unlocked framerates. Provide a lock for the moaners (and watch the video FFS).
No. What I'm describing is 45 fps with vsync.
Garrett Hawke
Member
Average frame rate being 50fps is terrible.
That is not smooth, on any display. It doesn't matter if it's a higher number than 30 if it's not solid.
No, they couldn't. There is a PC port of DS3 - we know the requirements of the engine to get a smooth 60fps.
If they had a magic optimise button they would use it and improve the frame rate on all platforms, which they haven't done.
Garrett Hawke
Member
Wow this looks so good. Really fixed the frame time issue!
So people don't accuse me of cherry picking, this is what you get when it's "smooth":
You could saw wood with that frame time graph.
Those percentiles are misleading. Average 50 FPS while hardly ever going below 40 means it spends just about exactly as much time below 50 fps as above. Which is in line with what the video is showing. The performance increase is nice, but there just should really have been an option to lock at 30 fps without any frame pacing issues. It absolutely is possible now.
I am happy for you people that can't perceive those issues, but please don't write us gamers that are sensible to it off as just wanting to complain about everything. I look at the video and see stuttering. It's not that I can't play such games at all, but I constantly feel like there is something wrong (which it is), which distracts heavily from the gameplay.
This is different though, I mean in a vaccum if you just look at the frametime graph yea it looks worse. But this frametime instability is caused due to actual change in framerate, the previous one wasn't. Uneven frametimes at locked 30FPS will feel worse, even if it is spread apart, compared to uneven frametimes caused from FPS between 40-60FPS. The former would appear choppy and juddery, the latter would only appear juddery.
Garrett Hawke
Member
Oh I know, but it's still horrible in a different way. They should've fixed the framepacing and increased the resolution and texture filtering.
The point being, it was stuttery before, it still stutters now.
