PS3 version (Beta) looks great: http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL4885DDB335CC0239
-
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.
Dragon's Dogma Demo Impressions
- Thread starter Bukana
- Start date
played both demos. the 360 version has tearing, ps3 version has constant stutter/sub-30 framerate.
Cannon Goose
Member
Just preordered the PS3 version. Starting to get excited!
Despite being thoroughly unimpressed by the videos of this game that were shown in the other thread, I downloaded and gave this a bash on the PS3.
Rubbish frame rate aside, it's prett damn excellent and my opinion is wholly changed! I enjoyed the combat (particularly the ability to grab onto larger enemies and hack away) and the banter between party members. The demo leaves a lot off the table though (how does levelling work? What actually is this place I'm running around in etc etc), but that's fine.
So consider this a win for demos - I'm in!
Rubbish frame rate aside, it's prett damn excellent and my opinion is wholly changed! I enjoyed the combat (particularly the ability to grab onto larger enemies and hack away) and the banter between party members. The demo leaves a lot off the table though (how does levelling work? What actually is this place I'm running around in etc etc), but that's fine.
So consider this a win for demos - I'm in!
I found the 360 version blurrier.
Baconsammy
Banned
Same framerate issues from the demo are in those "beta" videos.
True.
OfWhiteSkinOnRedLeather
Member
Next week. Game doesn't come out for two weeks.
Dick Justice
Banned
Hmm, considering how they added borders to cover the fact that it's sub-HD, you'd think the framerate would at least be more stable. Shame. Hate how developers this gen care more about their games looking pretty than actually being playable.
The game ultimately doesn't even look that good. The town footage posted a page before looks absolutely dreadful. Shame.
PhoenixSFT
Member
Does anyone else find the constant overlapping party banter annoying? Otherwise, fun demo. The combat felt solid if a bit hectic, and the grab mechanic is awesome.
Baconsammy
Banned
I find the animations of some of the enemies to be quite good, but otherwise the world looks incredibly bland. I can only assume it's letterboxed and bland in order to best maintain a solid framerate with spells going off. But then again they've apparently failed to even do that on the PS3 version.
Yes, I know you can turn off the text of your party, but I hope we can also turn off their voices.
Maybe Japanese developers struggle more with the techside, concerning open world, next gen titles? I can't quite remember a prime example of a Japanese open wolrd game that was technically impressive.
Capcom has put a lot of money on this so i don't think the budget is a concern, either.
Capcom has put a lot of money on this so i don't think the budget is a concern, either.
It seems to run well enough on the 360 though, but it's really weird how bad it runs regularly on the ps3, since the engine allows them to squeeze in like 2 tornados with lightning and meteor shooting down from the sky, but the framerate when nothing is happening is struggling to reach 30fps.
I find the shadows, shade, and lighting to be very impressive. The design of the world is very impressive as well. Nothing is really flat as there are many hills and cliffs. Can't say the same for other western developed open worlds. Yes it is unfortunate that DD has a few technical problems but the style and design makes me see past that.
As well as the attention to all of the little details that many other prettier open world games lack. Such as:
- Cloth physics
- Destruction
- The fantastic magic and elemental effects
- The lighting
- Unscripted climbing on enemies and how they react to where you are
- Even getting wet shows on clothing and will extinguish your lantern, should you have it equipped.
- The gameplay variety in general
There are lots of little things going on in this game that will overshadow it not having the best eye candy or smoothest framerate. That said, saying it is some unplayable, broken mess on the PS3 is simply not true. It may not be up to some people's standards, but it is hardly that bad.
As far as the overall look of the game, I love it. It has a natural, earthy tone that gives it a more believable vibe. And the detail on the monsters is fantastic. Considering the size of the game and all of the little things it does, it is pretty impressive to me.
Baconsammy
Banned
Which big Western open world games are completely flat? The last two I played were anything but (Amalur, Skyrim).
In my opinion anything that causes the framerate to be as bad as what is seen in the PS3 version should be removed. A smooth framerate is far more important than me seeing trees sway or my character's cloth moving. As for the world itself, bleh. Describing it as drab would be kind. Boss animations, though, are great.
The_Hitcher89
Member
Does it ever rain. I can imagine the atmosphere being great if you're stuck in the woods, in the dark while it rains and you're being attacked by goblins
LOL, the game is not some unplayable wreck, and I'll leave it at that. The hours of footage of it being played without issue on PS3 proves it. It is just not acceptable for you, and that's fine. But I don't want to beat that dead horse again.
As for the world itself, I love it. I am sure many others will as well. To each their own yet again, I suppose.
Yeah, I do think the world is "blend", but it's simply what they chose for an open world and it does lack some variety, but I really like what they do with it, you see leaves flying across the screen, you have trees and bushes animating and also reacting from spell cast, some parts of the environment like bricks will collapsed with destruction effect, clothes animates and also with water effect, hair also animates, the animations are really good, the boss even responds differently based on your weight, and I'm sure there are a lot of details we've yet to find out.
Though I think they really should've went with unique monsters than the D&D stuff, it would've gotten a lot more praise.
Yeah I kind of agree with that, heck I'd take 30fps over stupid fsaa, but a lot of devs don't seem to care about framerate nowadays :/ and it's not just DD too
Never said it was an unplayable mess (in case you were referring to me) as for the rest, it's not a disaster by any stretch, but if i look at games like Red Dead Redemption or Just Cause 2, i don't really see where Dragon's Dogma has the upper hand.
You talk about little details, RDR has plenty of those, with a much more detailed world and far less tearing/framerate problems (on 360, at least) to speak of.
Can't speak for Skyrim, as i played it on PC.
The style of Dragon's Dogma was not in question either in my post (although i think it's a bit bland, from what we've seen-- though miles better than Amalur's) but the details in the environments are certainly not stunning, from what i've seen.
Regarding destruction: I'm not sure what you're referring to, what can you destroy, aside from crates and barrels? (serious question)
With that said, don't get me wrong, i'm still impressed with the game in general, as it is something new gameplay-wise and these are just mere speculations based on the videos/demo, when i'll have the game in my hands, i'll see what it is really capable of doing.
Baconsammy
Banned
RDR and Just Cause 2's worlds are in a different league than Dragon's Dogma. Not sure its fair to compare them.
Talking about those two games has made me want to go back and play them. I've never seen a game world as beautiful and diverse as JC2's, and on top of that it runs amazingly well.
I was not aiming my post at you, more or less just speaking in general in saying that the PS3 version is more than playable, despite some frame dips. In other words, it is not to the point of making the game a chuggy, freezing slideshow. But I understand that some are more sensitive to that kind of thing, regardless. That's fine.
In terms of destruction, I was just talking about footage we have seen of various wooden structures, tents, etc that collapse when hit or ran into. I did not mean that it was on the the level of Red Faction or anything, but it is still neat to have physics like that on some level in an open world RPG like this.
As far as comparing it to games like Red Dead or Just Cause 2, not sure I would even go there. As this is more of an action RPG. Show me another one that has a day/night cycle, where night is actually night and becomes nearly survival-horror-like. How about unscripted climbing around on monsters, even ones that take flight? How about the Pawn System? As far as action role playing games go, Dragon's Dogma most certainly stands out from the pack with some unique features.
HoodWinked
Gold Member
lol at people thinking judder and constant sub 30fps looks good or acceptable on ps3. the preview vids made pretty much solidified the expectations.
Yeah RDR's world is mostly empty (it's a desert!) and JC2 has beautiful landscapes but mostly rehashed content when it comes to the villages and small towns in the game. Also pretty much everything but the landscapes look like ass in that game.
No doubt they run better than DD appears to but I don't think it's as simple as just saying that.
LOL back at you. The game is more than playable and how it runs is not at all uncommon for a game of this size on consoles.
HoodWinked
Gold Member
not saying its unplayable but its silly when some people actually have a choice between two platforms and pick wrongly.
<--like getting this on ps3 over 360.
Who are you to tell me I am choosing wrongly because I want the PS3 version? The PS3 version plays fine to me and many others. Plus, I prefer the controller and zero screen tearing. Not to mention that the hours of footage they have freely showed features a game that is being played without issue on PS3. If it is unacceptable for you, that's fine. Just don't decide for us all, OK?
Which could be said about RDR too.
Lets be honest: we only have a choice between two systems, and even then, that choice isn't all that great. Performance is pretty terrible on either system.
However, the DD demo plays better than the FULL version of Skyrim on PS3, even WITH the latest patches, so I guess I can't complain.
I'm honestly pretty impressed with the lighting they packed into DD, as well as the cloth physics, and overall armor designs. It looks quite good for consoles.
I no longer have that choice but if I did I would still go with PS3. That screen tearing is brutally bad and if I was going to get so upset over a slightly lower framerate then I wouldn't play console games at all, as 99% are sub 30.
R_thanatos
Member
neither version goes beyond 30fps
360 version has a slight better average but has tearing
ps3 version has 0 tearing but ran with less frames on average
Both version are playables without issues
Why get it on consoles when a PC version is available?
Baconsammy
Banned
JC2's content is its biggest problem for sure. But the world destroys DD's. Not sure what about the landscape looks like ass to you, but I'll give it another look. Maybe I'm misremembering it. I do know that DD's foliage, rocks etc look pretty shitty. The way the trees all wave in time looks really silly to me. Ultimately it comes down to the gameplay, which I'm hoping holds up with DD. I tired of JC2 after about 50 hours. I never tired of Red Dead, especially online. I wouldnt call RDR empty. It's empty in the same sense that DD is empty. Lots of nothingness and then a town/castle. RDR has caverns, towns, elevated traintracks, riverbeds etc. It's quite nice. The towns are pretty simplistic and lackluster like DD, though. Unless there's some amazing cities that simply haven't been shown yet.
As far as framerate goes, it's playable on PS3, but it's unplayable to me. Any game that is affected consistently by a poor framerate is one I wont be spending money on (thus unplayable). Fortunately for me the 360 version is incredibly smooth in comparison when it matters most - during combat and running around. Tearing isn't a problem. I dont see it when I'm actually controlling the character, and if it did bother me I can turn my 360's video setting to 720p to fix the problems with Capcom's lackluster engine.
MagicWithEarvin
Member
There is no PC version of Dragon's Dogma (yet, at least). I'm hoping there is, though.
Agreed with this.
Dat sarcasm.
Baconsammy
Banned
There's not been a single PS3 video yet that shows DD running without a low framerate.
No the landscape looks great in JC2. But the people, villages, ground vehicles etc all look terrible.
I never said that it did not have dips. I said that the game has been played without issue. Meaning that despite having it dip a few frames here and there, there has been no footage presented that shows that it affects the gameplay. The game was played without issue in hours of live, unfiltered footage on PS3. That is a fact, Jack.
Baconsammy
Banned
I'll just have to agree to disagree with you on that. The people, villages, and vehicles all look really good. They're just repetitive. Graphically they're all more impressive than anything I've seen in DD outside of the awesome animation of the Chimera etc. The people in DD look really terrible to me. Almost waxy.
I'm not talking about dips in framerate. The PS3 version is running at a consistently bad framerate in all the videos that's been linked. I wish it did run well, because despite hating the dual shock, I'd gladly buy the PS3 version if it had a framerate as good as the 360 plus no tearing. It's why I chose Saints Row The Third on PS3 over the 360.
MagicWithEarvin
Member
It's really hard to tell some times on here.
Well they are different, true, but are still open worlds, so you can at least make a comparison with how much stuff they crammed in, with decent performances.
I love those features (dark nights and such) but i'm not sure that has a real weight on performances, if anything, you see less stuff with darker nights.
Again, i was speaking from a more tech POV, rather than a design one.
Barring the ability to climb on enemies, that must be taxing on performance, to some extent, i'd imagine.
RDR has SOME empty areas, due to its setting, but in the north it has some pretty good forests, so when you go there, the game has to handle them anyway, even though most of the rest of its world it's desert (it's not like it's loading the whole map at once).
JC2 may have reused assets (as far as i've seen, so does DD, tbh) but it's packed with stuff (trees, flowers) AND lets you fly a jet from one part of the map to the other in a matter of seconds, without too many problems, so i still think it's very impressive.
Again, i'll GLADLY eat a crow if when the game comes out it'll be technically more impressive than these two; regardless of how it turns out though, i can't wait to play it.
Sorry a few frames lower on average is unacceptable for you. For many of us, it's more than fine. Just go with the 360 version and roll with it.
360 Avg:28.014fps Min-Max:23.0-30.0fps Tear:27.391%(27.391%)
PS3 Avg:23.512fps Min-Max:18.0-30.5fps Tear:0.000%(0.000%)
http://ps360.ldblog.jp/archives/53618921.html
If you look at the videos from that site, dog 360 stays between 28-29 fps during combat whereas dog ps3 is between 23-25 fps which makes it almost unplayable for me.
Baconsammy
Banned
A few isnt bad, but 8-10 is.
Look at the post above your last one. On average, the demo was 5 FPS higher on the 360, but the PS3 fluctuated more. Good thing it's an old build. But at any rate, I am done arguing over 'TeH SuPeRiOr VeRzIoN.' At the end of the day, it's the same damn game and they are both playable, but with their own issues. Take your pick and enjoy the game.
Yeah that totally ruin things.
When i was a console-only owner, i could even go with a 23fps game, kinda bothered maybe, but still accepting it.
Now i'm used to 60fps, so already 30 is a tad annoying, below that it's impossible not to notice.
Still, i hate tearing and don't have a 360 anyway, so Ps3 it is (i'll double dip for a PC version, if it comes out).