• 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.

Metal Gear Solid V: TPP PC vs. PS4 vs. XBO DF Face-Off Definitive Edition

BennyBlanco

BennyBlanco

aka IMurRIVAL69
I was so close to getting this on ps4 for earlier MGO. So glad newegg hooked me up with a code even though I bought my 970 around GTAV launch.

Game looks SO much cleaner on PC.
 
Malcolm9

Malcolm9

Member
ShogunX said:
Damn, PC on high is certainly the way to experience MGSV, in fact it's a little sad in comparison shots to see the amount of people who are going to have to settle for a lesser experience on consoles because we have to wait years for these games to come around. Higher quality shadows, 16x AF and much better LOD all add a lot to the game visually and it wont be long until we see the gap increase with INI edits and mods.

I'm going to have to upgrade my PC.
Click to expand...

Does it affect the gameplay? No.

Obviously the extra graphical effects are nice don't get me wrong, but it still looks pretty glorious on the consoles.
 
Chobel

Chobel

Member
Synth said:
See my post a few posts down. The Xbox One version lacks SSS, and the visual disparity is significantly more noticeable than in the vast majority of games. I don't typically mind 900p enough for it to determine which version of a game I purchase (bought Arkham Knight on X1 for example)... but I'm not buying the X1 version of this, because it looks significantly worse in comparison to the PS4 version. The X1 version running well in isolation doesn't mean much to me, because the game makes compromises as standard to attain that, even in the PS4 version. There's additional compromises on the X1 side here, that aren't typical of ports between the two.. and honestly, this has to some extent been the case with every Fox Engine game (barring possibly PES2016).
Click to expand...

Huh? So you're not buying the game because it's not using the full power of XBO in the most efficient way? That's really weird decision, especially coming from you.
 
O

omonimo

Banned
Synth said:
See my post a few posts down. The Xbox One version lacks SSS, and the visual disparity is significantly more noticeable than in the vast majority of games. I don't typically mind 900p enough for it to determine which version of a game I purchase (bought Arkham Knight on X1 for example)... but I'm not buying the X1 version of this, because it looks significantly worse in comparison to the PS4 version. The X1 version running well in isolation doesn't mean much to me, because the game makes compromises as standard to attain that, even in the PS4 version. There's additional compromises on the X1 side here, that aren't typical of ports between the two.. and honestly, this has to some extent been the case with every Fox Engine game (barring possibly PES2016).
Click to expand...
Are you kidding? They upgrade the res from 720p to 900p without fps compromise and it's significantly worse just because lack of SSS or the lower precise motion blur? O_O Seriously not has any sense. Xbone struggle quite more often to reach 60 fps compared ps4, for its bandwith bottleneck, you can't pretend the impossible. We are not talk of 30 fps here. That's a good port with all considered. I'm really surprised they haven't sacrified the transparancies too.
 
N

Noobcraft

Member
The shadows are pretty terrible (at least on the PS4 version, assuming the Xbox One version is equally bad) and flicker/pop in constantly. That's my only real complaint, otherwise it looks good for a 60 fps title on console.

also, this is a little bit off topic but has anyone else noticed that idling with the idroid open makes the PS4 fan go full on jet engine? It gets very loud.
 
N

Nzyme32

Member
Synth said:
See my post a few posts down. The Xbox One version lacks SSS, and the visual disparity is significantly more noticeable than in the vast majority of games. I don't typically mind 900p enough for it to determine which version of a game I purchase (bought Arkham Knight on X1 for example)... but I'm not buying the X1 version of this, because it looks significantly worse in comparison to the PS4 version. The X1 version running well in isolation doesn't mean much to me, because the game makes compromises as standard to attain that, even in the PS4 version. There's additional compromises on the X1 side here, that aren't typical of ports between the two.. and honestly, this has to some extent been the case with every Fox Engine game (barring possibly PES2016).
Click to expand...

Chobel said:
Huh? So you're not buying the game because it's not using the full power of XBO efficiently? That's really weird decision, especially coming from you.
Click to expand...

Missing out on the game completely due to something like that is pretty bizarre from my perspective. They hardly break the game or make it entirely unplayable, and the effect is so minor if you play on a TV at distance. It isn't as if there was some insidious decision to make it worse that needs to be protested. Then again here I am temporarily playing the game on a mix of low to high on a 4 year old laptop, and still thoroughly enjoying it. Of course moving up to a better machine and running it will be awesome, but the game isn't fundamentally different enough for me to miss it out outright.
 
S

ShogunX

Member
Malcolm9 said:
Does it affect the gameplay? No.

Obviously the extra graphical effects are nice don't get me wrong, but it still looks pretty glorious on the consoles.
Click to expand...

It effects the overall experience at least for me anyway. I'm not one to run through a game headfirst, I prefer to take my time and search every nook and cranny and that's why the visual difference is a big deal. I know not everybody has access to a good PC and a lot of people aren't even going to see this comparison but seeing as I have access to be able to play this game at it's best it's why I'm going to try and do.

My only worry is when the online hits, my friends are on console and will all be playing whilst the PC version doesn't even get PvP until next year.
 
K

Kralamoonard

Member
BennyBlanco said:
I was so close to getting this on ps4 for earlier MGO. So glad newegg hooked me up with a code even though I bought my 970 around GTAV launch.

Game looks SO much cleaner on PC.
Click to expand...

Well, I did play MGS:GZ on PS4 and PC (the latter on higher settings), and although it does look better, I wouldn't say the difference is massive. It's mainly the pop-in/draw distances and texture filtering, but even then, it's not SO much better IMO. I mean I'd say you can't go wrong with either version. Particularly due to the 60fps on PS4.
 
O

On Demand

Banned
ShogunX said:
Damn, PC on high is certainly the way to experience MGSV, in fact it's a little sad in comparison shots to see the amount of people who are going to have to settle for a lesser experience on consoles because we have to wait years for these games to come around. Higher quality shadows, 16x AF and much better LOD all add a lot to the game visually and it wont be long until we see the gap increase with INI edits and mods.

I'm going to have to upgrade my PC.
Click to expand...

Haha, come on. The PC version looks great but in no way is it a "lesser experience" on consoles. More so for PS4.
 
artsi

artsi

Member
Kralamoonard said:
Well, I did play MGS:GZ on PS4 and PC (the latter on higher settings), and although it does look better, I wouldn't say the difference is massive. It's mainly the pop-in/draw distances and texture filtering, but even then, it's not SO much better IMO. I mean I'd say you can't go wrong with either version. Particularly due to the 60fps on PS4.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I have TPP on both PS4 and PC (I've played around 20 hours on both). While the PC version looks better you don't really think that this looks bad when playing on PS4.
Personally I'm most bothered by the lack of AF when you notice it, Afghanistan isn't bad but you see it best in Africa when the ground is wet.

The controls are more responsive on PS4 when playing on gamepad. It feels better for some reason, there's a weird deadzone on PC and the analog curve is different.
 
S

ShogunX

Member
On Demand said:
Haha, come on. The PC version looks great but in no way is it a "lesser experience" on consoles. More so for PS4.
Click to expand...

For me this is a big deal when it comes to something like Metal Gear Solid at least. I often let my friends dictate where my gaming experiences take place but -

LVnQnrV.png

hGccOxk.png

7HNuR1N.gif


Not this time.
 
K

KHlover

Banned
Malcolm9 said:
Does it affect the gameplay? No.

Obviously the extra graphical effects are nice don't get me wrong, but it still looks pretty glorious on the consoles.
Click to expand...

Idk the increased Draw Distance does effect gameplay, I think. You can make kills with the Sniper Rifle from so far away that the enemy won't EVER spot you. You can also scan enemy vehicles earlier. Isn't that much, but it's something.
 
artsi

artsi

Member
KHlover said:
Idk the increased Draw Distance does effect gameplay, I think. You can make kills with the Sniper Rifle from so far away that the enemy won't EVER spot you. You can also scan enemy vehicles earlier. Isn't that much, but it's something.
Click to expand...

No it doesn't really matter.. the important objects like enemies or vehicles have priority. You don't get any "fog", just some less important objects disappear far away on PS4.

Like I said above I've clocked 20 hours on both versions and there's zero gameplay difference, PC has mouse aiming which is easy mode and that's it.
 
H

Henrar

Member
alexandros said:
There were some severe compromises made in the console versions. For example:
Click to expand...

Actually, there is more than what you wrote:

Therein lie some surprises. Model detail on PS4 and Xbox One runs at a lower quality than PC's low setting. Contrary to its labeling, this affects the draw distance for geometry and foliage across open areas - and surprisingly, the current-gen standard can't be matched on any of the PC's four preset levels here. Up close, all details draw in at the same level of density, but on console they simply fade in at a closer range. On the plus side, current-gen platforms have volumetric clouds effect enabled (which isn't enabled on default mode) - meaning clouds move dynamically across the sky on each, casting shadows across the ground below. For Xbox One, this marks an upgrade over its Ground Zeroes incarnation, where this effect was absent.
Click to expand...
 
S

Summer Haze

Banned
Surprised to see the console draw distance level is so low compared to PC maxed. I saw my friend playing this on PS4 the other day and the one thing I was really impressed with was the abundance and draw distance of the foliage. A big step up from the days of Skyrim on the 360 having a tiny draw distance for ground foliage. There was a noticeable draw-in circle around the player at all times.
 
S

silva1991

Member
Glad I went for the PS4 version. it came out like a week earlier where I live and I couldn't resist the day one physical edition with the map.

I was afraid that I made the wrong decision and the pc version will be drastically better like The Witcher 3, but obviously it's not.
 
J

Jedi2016

Member
Kralamoonard said:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't that GIF the 4K PC version? So I don't know if it's really a representative comparison.
Click to expand...
Depends on what you're trying to demonstrate. The only difference 4K makes is model draw at very long distances (which isn't really noticeable here) and better antialiasing due to the downsample.

But that's not what's being demonstrated... we're talking about lighting and reflections, and those are available independent of resolution. So the picture stands.
 
N

Nvzman

Member
ShogunX said:
Damn, PC on high is certainly the way to experience MGSV, in fact it's a little sad in comparison shots to see the amount of people who are going to have to settle for a lesser experience on consoles because we have to wait years for these games to come around. Higher quality shadows, 16x AF and much better LOD all add a lot to the game visually and it wont be long until we see the gap increase with INI edits and mods.

I'm going to have to upgrade my PC.
Click to expand...
There is no "lesser experience" by playing it on console. Most people don't give a shit about the tiny touches that make the game look minimally better. It's still operating at 1080p at 60fps with gorgeous graphics.
Now if people are playing it on PS3 and Xbox 360, then they really are missing out on the smooth-ness of the current gen releases.

Cool to see how well optimized the PC version is as well.
 
O

omonimo

Banned
alexandros said:
I don't think you understand what the things you highlighted mean. Read the article carefully.
Click to expand...
He said in the draw distance console version uses lower detailed models than the low setting on PC. Isn't it quite predictable considered the CPU difference? What's shocking? 60 fps on console are quite demanding.
 
D

Dictator93

Member
One thing DF may not have noticed:
As with Ground Zeroes, PC at max settings gives us a more refined, bokeh depth of field in cut-scenes - as altered through its post-processing setting, where console rests at the high preset.
Click to expand...

The bokeh on PC is not just limited to cut-scenes, rather it is on at all times in gameplay, with weapon zooming, and with the binoculars. It just has a very low default f-stop.

You can see the difference between the normal gaussian in gameplay and the bokeh quite easily if you check the difference (gaussianed objects have a thick outline near the camera).
El_Chino said:
Couldn't this just be a glitch? SSS is not really expensive from what I've heard.
Click to expand...

It depends, normal screen space sub surface scattering is pretty cheap. Stuff like what cryengine games, the order, and such do is a lot more expensive.
 
S

Synth

Member
Chobel said:
Huh? So you're not buying the game because it's not using the full power of XBO in the most efficient way? That's really weird decision, especially coming from you.
Click to expand...
omonimo said:
Are you kidding? They upgrade the res from 720p to 900p without fps compromise and it's significantly worse just because lack of SSS or the lower precise motion blur? O_O Seriously not has any sense. Xbone struggle quite more often to reach 60 fps compared ps4, for its bandwith bottleneck, you can't pretend the impossible. We are not talk of 30 fps here. That's a good port with all considered. I'm really surprised they haven't sacrified the transparancies too.
Click to expand...
Nzyme32 said:
Missing out on the game completely due to something like that is pretty bizarre from my perspective. They hardly break the game or make it entirely unplayable, and the effect is so minor if you play on a TV at distance. It isn't as if there was some insidious decision to make it worse that needs to be protested. Then again here I am temporarily playing the game on a mix of low to high on a 4 year old laptop, and still thoroughly enjoying it. Of course moving up to a better machine and running it will be awesome, but the game isn't fundamentally different enough for me to miss it out outright.
Click to expand...

Sorry for the late response. No I'm not intending to skip the game entirely. I'll just be buying it for PS4 instead. I have both consoles, but often buy multiplats on X1 so long as the visual differences aren't pronounced enough for me to care (900p isn't something I tend to care about). The visual difference just happens to be enough for me to care about here.

I'm not saying "Fuck Konami" or anything here lol. Just that Fox Engine stuff so far has definitely favoured the PS4 moreso than most games on other engines have. If I only had an X1, I'd still buy it for that.

El_Chino said:
Couldn't this just be a glitch? SSS is not really expensive from what I've heard.
Click to expand...

No idea really. I prefer not to rely on potential future patches tho.
 
N

nib95

Banned
I notice more of a sharpness difference between the Xbox One and PS4 versions on DF's actual comparison tool than I do the images in the OP, despite the OP's images being PNG. Not sure why that is. Even the console format text above the images is much sharper on DF's site than it is in the OP's images. Wonder if it's to do with the way the browser works with the Retina display.

On a side note, DF really need to start using PNG's in their comparison images instead of JPEG's. What's the point of the comparison if you're comparing compressed JPEG's?

Anyway, outcome is the same as ever. PC > PS4 > Xbox One. I think Konami did a great job across the board, especially getting these console versions to look that good whilst being a near locked 60fps.
 
G

Grief.exe

Member
ShogunX said:
7HNuR1N.gif


Not this time.
Click to expand...

I was always looking into the distance on that one, didn't even look at the stark contrast between shadows right next to Snake.

nib95 said:
Anyway, outcome is the same as ever. PC > PS4 > Xbox One. I think Konami did a great job across the board, especially getting these console versions to look that good whilst being a near locked 60fps.
Click to expand...

Targeting 60 FPS in an open-world game on consoles should be commended, even though I'm selfish and would prefer them to target 30 FPS for fidelity reasons.

Fox Engine is magical.
 
T

Tagyhag

Member
Grief.exe said:
Targeting 60 FPS in an open-world game on consoles should be commended, even though I'm selfish and would prefer them to target 30 FPS for fidelity reasons.

Fox Engine is magical.
Click to expand...

But the more people that play 60fps and see how better it is for these types of games, the more people that will demand it in the future.

Then again, that hasn't really worked out with COD...
 
E

El_Chino

Member
Dictator93 said:
One thing DF may not have noticed:


The bokeh on PC is not just limited to cut-scenes, rather it is on at all times in gameplay, with weapon zooming, and with the binoculars. It just has a very low default f-stop.

You can see the difference between the normal gaussian in gameplay and the bokeh quite easily if you check the difference (gaussianed objects have a thick outline near the camera).


It depends, normal screen space sub surface scattering is pretty cheap. Stuff like what cryengine games, the order, and such do is a lot more expensive.
Click to expand...

Synth said:
Sorry for the late response. No I'm not intending to skip the game entirely. I'll just be buying it for PS4 instead. I have both consoles, but often buy multiplats on X1 so long as the visual differences aren't pronounced enough for me to care (900p isn't something I tend to care about). The visual difference just happens to be enough for me to care about here.

I'm not saying "Fuck Konami" or anything here lol. Just that Fox Engine stuff so far has definitely favoured the PS4 moreso than most games on other engines have. If I only had an X1, I'd still buy it for that.



No idea really. I prefer not to rely on potential future patches tho.
Click to expand...
Oh, so it varies from engine to engine?
 
O

On Demand

Banned
ShogunX said:
For me this is a big deal when it comes to something like Metal Gear Solid at least. I often let my friends dictate where my gaming experiences take place but -

http://i.imgur.com/LVnQnrV.png[IMG]
[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/hGccOxk.png[IMG]
[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/7HNuR1N.gif[IMG]

Not this time.[/QUOTE]

Freeze framing and zooming in on specific things is one thing. When i compared pics between PS4 and PC as is on a 60" TV the PC still looked better yes, but it's not as great as people make it seem and it's definitely not a lesser experience on the consoles.

That last pic is maxed out at 4K. Not really a fair comparison. Even so, all i see is a LOD issue. Those lights are there too on PS4.


[quote="alexandros, post: 177743591"]There were some severe compromises made in the console versions. For example:[/QUOTE]

The game is toned down a little in certain areas vs PC, how does that translate into a lesser experience? Those compromises are not big enough apparently since when playing i don't notice them.


The last gen versions are more affected.


[quote="Durante, post: 177747404"]Well, as far as "experiences" can be ordered, for the purpose of a technical comparison, it's most certainly lesser.[/QUOTE]

When scrutinising it can seem that way, actually playing the game is a different story. I wouldn't call an open world game at 1080p/60 lesser.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Kojima reveals that Metal Gear Solid: Peace Walker was supposed to be MGS5 at first
Game Dev
16
1K
VinnyMac replied
Metal Gear Solid: Master Collection Vol. 1 | Review Thread
News
28
3K
Badlucktroll replied
Digital Foundry: Metal Gear Solid Master Collection Vol. 1 - DF Tech Review - PS5/Xbox Series X/Switch + PC Tested!
2 3
106
10K
Team Andromeda replied
Metal Gear Solid V: Ground Zeroes was at one point intended to be the first episode of a larger episodic series, creator Hideo Kojima has revealed.
Game Dev
38
3K
Draxon Gamer replied
[Digital Foundry] New PS5 Pro GPU details emerge - including a 2.35GHz max boost clock
News Hardware Platform 3 4 5 6 7
310
23K
Lysandros replied
Top Bottom