really weird that the load times are slower on PS4 compared to the switch
Not really. The Switch is loading from the internal flash storage while PS4 is loading from the slower internal HDD. If the PS4 had an SSD installed it may load faster.
really weird that the load times are slower on PS4 compared to the switch
really weird that the load times are slower on PS4 compared to the switch
How is that weird?really weird that the load times are slower on PS4 compared to the switch
really weird that the load times are slower on PS4 compared to the switch
The low gap between PS4 and Switch is good news for future UE4 games on Switch that aren't so low res on PS4 to begin with.Game is running sub 540p on the Switch yet people saying it's good news.
There are many PS4 games that are 1080p30 that are doing many many more of those "other things" that people supposedly know nothing about. It's pretty obvious why this one is so surprising.
really weird that the load times are slower on PS4 compared to the switch
It's a small indie game not made by Shinen, so whats surprising is how it compares to Switch, not how it looks absolutely, because it is very unlikely that the quick port job to Switch, somehow lead to that version being particularly well optimized over PS4, it's simply Tegra X1's strengths put up against AMD's GCN in UE4 and coming out closer than virtually anyone suspected. That is really what the video and thread are about too, not how this compares to Horizon, but how this looks on these 2 platforms.
It's a small indie game not made by Shinen, so whats surprising is how it compares to Switch, not how it looks absolutely, because it is very unlikely that the quick port job to Switch, somehow lead to that version being particularly well optimized over PS4, it's simply Tegra X1's strengths put up against AMD's GCN in UE4 and coming out closer than virtually anyone suspected. That is really what the video and thread are about too, not how this compares to Horizon, but how this looks on these 2 platforms.
Game is running sub 540p on the Switch yet people saying it's good news.
really weird that the load times are slower on PS4 compared to the switch
Switch indeed run UE4 .
lol
People who have the Switch version:
Are time trials missing, yes or no?
Okay, I'll keep waiting until they officially say whether they will patch them in or not.Yes.
And I'm not interested in the console wars aspect personally. I think people on both platforms should expect this to run much better. You're right, it doesn't compare to horizon. Horizon also runs at 1080p30 without issue. They aren't pushing the graphical or effects envelope, it should at least be native res.
You're right, plenty of indies don't push any bleeding edge graphics, and they aren't expected to. But I at least expect them to hit the native res of the device if they aren't. Come on.
Slow down, the console wars aspect is beyond what I'm talking about, this thread isn't a console war thread, and the comparison is just a real result, what is interesting in Switch keeping up so well is that porting other games shouldn't be a large problem, the thing you aren't noticing here is that the game is pushing this art style on these platforms and maxed out at these resolutions, that isn't an issue with the developer, it's an issue with the performance of the platforms. PS4 Pro proves the developer can hit 1080p and 60fps, PS4 just isn't powerful enough to do this because PS4 Pro is capable of about 6 TFLOPs mixed precision, which is likely used in this case, as Switch shouldn't be this close to PS4 without mixed precision.
Try to change perspectives here, yes they could have lowered graphic fidelity to something that would run 1080p on the PS4, or 1080p on the Switch even, they chose to instead push 1080p on PS4 Pro at 60fps.
I wonder if they capped the frame rate from 45-50 to stable 30fps in exchange for special effects like the shadowing and water effects on the ps4 version, or if the ps4 could have ran at 45fps capped with the special effects.
It doesn't add up that the ps4 pro has the special effects with twice the framerate and 40% better resolution. Pro only has 2x as powerful gpu and 25% CPU. Then again. Ps4 pro can run fp16 like thr Switch, while OG ps4 can't? Hmmm.
Don't be silly, FP16 doesn't exist!jk
It definitely is very interesting. The Pro runs at 1080p and 60 fps, which translates to more than three times the number of pixels per second. They have to use fp16 code to make this happen, since I can't see them optimising for the Pro but not the OG PS4. That could be why Switch is closer to PS4 than expected as well.
PS4 Pro should be hitting 4K checkerboard on this game, not 1080p. That is my expectation when a game looks like this. There is literally no way this game is "maxing out" any of this hardware as is.
Under 720p is nowhere close to being acceptable.
I can understand your thinking here, but honestly game looks pretty great, lots of powerful effects are being thrown around, this is UE4 after all. It just doesn't have all the set pieces and more realistic tone you are use to, but technically it's not slouching, especially for an indie game.
Yep, that looks like the case, also means that a small studio can take advantage of mixed precision pretty easily, especially with the quick and dirty port to Switch. Game is actually pretty great looking too.
I can understand your thinking here, but honestly game looks pretty great, lots of powerful effects are being thrown around, this is UE4 after all. It just doesn't have all the set pieces and more realistic tone you are use to, but technically it's not slouching, especially for an indie game.
It's also sad that i can read posts from people who clearly can't enjoy a game if it's graphics aren't up to some standard. The game is great.
Dat 3DS feel.Ñot even 480p resolution on handheld mode??? Disgusting
Nobody should buy this 😷
I play PC RPGs from the 90s and text based games, I can live with subpar graphics. My point was about the "it's great news".
Don't be silly, FP16 doesn't exist!jk
It definitely is very interesting. The Pro runs at 1080p and 60 fps, which translates to more than three times the number of pixels per second. They almost have to use fp16 code to make this happen, since I can't see them optimising for the Pro but not the OG PS4. That could be why Switch is closer to PS4 than expected as well.
I'm not saying lazy. They may have tried their hardest. It may just be incompetence. Or it could be a lack of resources. Either one is not an excuse to the end customer. We have seen this same hardware do far more technically, why would I accept this performance? It's not like this is a game of the generation or something.
I wonder if such would mean PS4 Pro was the lead console they were developing for, effectively.
I wouldn't say that. fp16 basically means that you use differently sized variables (16 bit instead of 32 bit floating points) at certain points, which come at a loss of accuracy. For plenty of processes this loss is not problematic, and in those instances using fp16 is an almost free way to get extra power out of systems that support double speed fp16 processing (like the Switch and PS4 Pro, and unlike the PS4 OG and Xbox One). I wouldn't call that having PS4 Pro as the lead platform, just that it happens to be one of the systems that benefits most from the choice of fp16 programming.
Sad that peoples are just seeing X resolution and then extrapolate a shitload of things out of it. Temporal AA is a huge improvement in overall visuals over just numbers, as DF mentionned.
This game needs a demo for the Switch. I'm interested in it but hearing conflicting reports on how blurry it is in undocked mode. If I could just see for myself I'd know whether I want to get this on PS4 or Switch.
This game needs a demo for the Switch. I'm interested in it but hearing conflicting reports on how blurry it is in undocked mode. If I could just see for myself I'd know whether I want to get this on PS4 or Switch.
1536 x 864 on PS4
I agree with wanting a demo but for me it's more about the controls. It seems very unintuitive to me, which is holding me back from buying it right away.
wtf ... what year is this? come on!
Sad that peoples are just seeing X resolution and then extrapolate a shitload of things out of it. Temporal AA is a huge improvement in overall visuals over just numbers, as DF mentionned.
I feel like DF went out of their way to discourage shit posting comments by going to great lengths to explain why the image quality is still great even without 1080p but it seems few listened. Like you said, people just see X resolution.
Yes, it sounded very positive and I'm not surprised even on YouTube it looks really good.I'd even wager that most people didn't watch the video and hear John talk about that at all. It's mighty impressive that this temporal upscaling managed to fool most of GAF for a while into thinking this was 1080p.
One of the benefits of a flash storage drive is that it's far faster than the hard drives in the PS4/XB1. Game cards and SD cards are faster too.
To be fair, the other reason why this is so surprising (<900p, <720p) is because of how good it's looked in videos and in person. Which again begs the question, if it look so good why do people care what the resolution number is? If UE4's TAA is so good that it makes 1536 x 864 look like 1920x1080, then why is this a problem?
EDIT: Maybe devs should start a new bullshit metric where they factor in AA and resolution to come up with a new number. Snake Pass is 6,000 glorps!
It's a start. This was a port that was literally done in less than three months and the fact that it actually runs decently in that timeframe is impressive in itself. I fully expect more UE4 indie titles to have more time for optimization which should allow for higher resolutions.Game is running sub 540p on the Switch yet people saying it's good news.