www.eurogamer.net
He is going to get mad.
I mean thats pretty silly though. 1872p is what? 6 million pixels? 6.5? whats the point of targeting a resolution that high limiting your rendering budget when you can just target 1440p or 3.7 million and get almost double the GPU power in return?
6.2m to be precise, imo bigger hit to frame time is rt
RT reflections are typically 35% hit on performance on PC. 6.2/3.6 = 72% so much bigger hit.
Nobody can describe what "next gen" is supposed to look like. And when they do, they whip out tech demos. Which no game ever hits, because it's just a damned tech demo.
I've been playing Star Wars: Jedi Survivor these last few weeks and I don't think the SpiderMan 2 demo shown is on the same level visually as that game.
as long as it's not FSR2, I am fine with softer but stabe image.
That’s because it’s not. There’s PS4 games that clear Spider-Man 2.
This must be a case of you need to see the game in person because based on the videos I've seen online, Jedi Survivor doesn't impress me one bit. HU, DF, and other outlets keep going on about how great the game looks but I just don't see it.
The scale in Survivor is not on the same level either.
It's reasonable to say that devs should focus less on framerate and resolution and more on other stuff, like what would a 1080p/30fps PS5 game look like? But then the game would get raked over the coals for being a 1080p/30fps game, that's just a fact. We've seen it a million times. Jedi Survivor and Forspoken both got criticized for their low base resolutions even though they were using FSR, and people have wanted devs to use techniques like FSR in console, and the whole point of these techniques is that you lower the base resolution lmao. So you're damned if you do damned if you don't. It's fixed hardware, you can't have it all, devs make choices based on how they feel to best present the game. They can't win.Nobody can describe what "next gen" is supposed to look like. And when they do, they whip out tech demos. Which no game ever hits, because it's just a damned tech demo.
With that said, it's using DRS, so how does DRS impact the graphics budget? It will hit low when it needs to and hit high when it can, and 99% of the time you won't be able to discern the difference with how well the tech is now.
Game definitely looks much better on a good HDR set and running on local hardware than any YouTube video will be able to show.
What are you talking about? See below. They are still wasting 72% of their GPU budget on rendering pixels. And what evidence do you need? Ratchet was pixel counted and it was running at native 4k. What more evidence do we need?
These trailers have the difficulty settings usually on their easiest modes. I remember Uncharted trailers the same happened.
Who says they aren’t? Why do you think there is some secret sauce that they haven’t figured out to generate more pixels?
Nahh a lot of people keep telling me we don't need a Pro console because no games really push the PS5 as is
I mean, you said it. Games look much better on your local 4K set with HDR and all the trimmings versus a video. But, oh you knowwwww!
Even miles went down to 1800p from native 4k. Maybe even lower. Thats just the price you have to pay for a locked framerate. 99% of the time its native 4k. just like most of the time it will be 1872p or whatever its highest resolution is. Even Ratchet in its RT performance mode went all the way down to 1080p to ensure a 60 fps lock. But it mostly stayed at 1440p.
