Support NeoGAF

[Svengoolie007]

It doesn't seem like it to me. I've been playing Spider-Man: Miles Morales and Assassin's Creed Valhalla. I prefer both of them on Performance mode running 60 FPS. Valhalla got really choppy when I switched it to Quality mode. Like even just moving the curser around the map was clipping, it was really bad.

Ultimately though, I don't even see the difference visually when I switch it to quality. What even is ray tracing? Something to do with the lighting? I've even watched Youtube comparisons between them and all I can see is Performance mode running better, I don't see any benefit to running it on Quality. Am I just blind? Does HDR play a big role in it? Because a lot of times I turn HDR off because I can't get it to look good on my television no matter how much I mess with the settings.

 

[M1chl]

It's probably boils down to resolution. I never opted for Quality mode, when they started to be a thing, always played in Performance. Gives you the best experience, in my opinion.

 

[ethomaz]

Depend of the implementation.
So it varies from game to game.

There is no rule... because devs chooses what they will do with each mode.

 

[DonJorginho]

So far this gen? Nope.

Native resolution is the biggest waste of resources, dynamic 4K is just as good.

 

[Bartski]

Sitting rather close to the screen I can clearly see the difference on M Morales but I'd never chosen it over the smoothness of Performance mode, especially the recently added RT Performance.

 

[LaughingStock]

4k is a scam. I mean, it looks nice and all. But higher framerate will always be the better option.

 

[Captain Toad]

Try "quality" mode in Demon's Souls. To me, the graphics look the same, but the framerate difference is extremely noticeable. I can't see anyone ever using that mode.

 

[-Arcadia-]

Souls at 60 FPS is amazing. There is figurliterally no other way.

Miles Morales at 60? Eh. I feel like that game looks extremely well done, and smooth, at 30, and I’d rather take full ray-tracing and resolution. It’s one of those where the 60 FPS mode looks a little weird to me, like things don’t move with the proper weight and impact.

 

[Omnipunctual Godot]

I like Souls at 30 in cinematic mode. I played the original, so it's an upgrade.

 

[Bruno_Arrais85]

60fps is the real quality mode.

 

[8BiTw0LF]

Quality modes are for weird people..

 

[iHaunter]

Yes, but not enough to make me want to do it. I'll take Dynamic 4K + 60 fps anytime, RT if they can.

 

[Yoboman]

Try "quality" mode in Demon's Souls. To me, the graphics look the same, but the framerate difference is extremely noticeable. I can't see anyone ever using that mode.

The graphics are definitely superior on quality mode but on the balance of visuals, 60 fps is way more noticeable than the better textures and tesselation

 

[Luipadre]

The thing is... these consoles can put out 60 fps at a pretty good ress now so no point playing in quality mode imo.

 

[Sethbacca]

Initially in Spiderman and MM there was a pretty large difference between the two, but with the new Performance RT mode implemented in both the difference is now minimal.

 

[Kuranghi]

Depends what "look better" means. A higher framerate means you get a smoother presentation and less input lag. A higher resolution means there will be more detail in the image, most people have their TV set up in such a way that resolution differences might not be obvious to them, but a higher framerate will generally always be noticeable no matter how your TV is setup. If you don't see a difference in sharpness/depth of the image then pick the framerate one.

It depends whats important to you, the quality of the pixels is the most important thing for me because I like to look at things in games a lot. I take my time and no matter how smooth the framerate is it won't make the image less aliased or make me able to resolve more detail in the distance, whereas a higher resolution will. When you go to the native res of your panel the image is a lot sharper than even a resolution thats 5% less pixels will. I just capped Trine 4 to 30 fps because native 4K + 60 fps isn't possible on my GPU, much happier with my overall experience now even if there is more input lag.

So, if you mean image/pixel quality, then Quality mode will always looks better (as long as the res is higher than perf mode ofc). If you mean motion quality then a higher framerate is always better, yes.

 

[Kuranghi]

Switching between 30 and 60 rapidly isn't a good way to check which you prefer. Play for 30-45 mins before you decide, your eyes need to adjust to the lower framerate just like they need to adjust for light or colour balance.

 

[Panajev2001a]

Depends what "look better" means. A higher framerate means you get a smoother presentation and less input lag. A higher resolution means there will be more detail in the image, most people have their TV set up in such a way that resolution differences might not be obvious to them, but a higher framerate will generally always be noticeable no matter how your TV is setup. If you don't see a difference in sharpness/depth of the image then pick the framerate one.

It depends whats important to you, the quality of the pixels is the most important thing for me because I like to look at things in games a lot. I take my time and no matter how smooth the framerate is it won't make the image less aliased or make me able to resolve more detail in the distance, whereas a higher resolution will. When you go to the native res of your panel the image is a lot sharper than even a resolution thats 5% less pixels will. I just capped Trine 4 to 30 fps because native 4K + 60 fps isn't possible on my GPU, much happier with my overall experience now even if there is more input lag.

So, if you mean image/pixel quality, then Quality mode will always looks better (as long as the res is higher than perf mode ofc). If you mean motion quality then a higher framerate is always better, yes.

Agreed, well said. On Spider-man Remastered for example the framerate is really noticeable if you go back and forth between the 60 FPS and 30 FPS modes, but also the resolution, the shadows quality, the draw distance, and the amount of NPC’s on screen... and I am playing with the 30 FPS mode to get the kind of NYC I have always wanted in a game. The quality option gets me closer to that.

 

[TonyK]

Quality mode in Miles Morales and Demons Souls looks way better than performance mode for my tastes (LG CX 65" here).

In performance mode both games look to me as a Ps4 game but in 60fps. In quality mode both games seem (almost) next gen. However, 60fps are preferable to play... so I hate to choose.

 

[horkrux]

I mean I haven't actually tried the quality mode in DeS, but I can see that it's not native in performance mode. 1440p on a 4K monitor with normal monitor viewing distance is pretty obvious.
No question that quality mode would look better.

 

[-Arcadia-]

I’m just glad we’re seeing an option for both. Literally the best standard set by the Pro and One X in console gaming, Use your hardware how you’d like.

I especially loved things like Rise of the Tomb Raider One X which went the extra mile, and let you put the bulk of the power into the assets, with a lovely faux-K solution that arguably looked just as good as the actual 4K one.

I’m actually surprised, on a tangent, that we haven’t seen any options for checkerboarding and such, next-gen.

 

[Nymphae]

I will always prioritize frames over some extra graphical details that make the framerate perform worse.

 

[Kuranghi]

If you don't notice a difference between modes just never think about it again and go with performance. You aren't noticing the difference because of many reasons:

* You see the difference but don't consider it meaningful
* Your TV/screen is set up in such a way that the original image is being changed so much that the difference in sharpenss/depth is not obvious anymore. For instance, with dynamic contrast settings, dynamic colour settings, sharpening, dynamic tonemapping
* You don't know what to look for, in terms of difference.
* Your screen is too small/too far away to notice the difference in sharpness
* Your screen is 1080p, which would make spotting the resolution difference much harder

We could all help you see the differences by fixing the problems above, but then you'd have a make a choice between smoothness and image quality (IQ doesn't take motion quality into effect), so you'd gain knowledge but then you'd have to decide.

Ultimately, just listen to wise old Tommy:

 

[Krisprolls]

Quality mode in Miles Morales and Demons Souls looks way better than performance mode for my tastes (LG CX 65" here).

In performance mode both games look to me as a Ps4 game but in 60fps. In quality mode both games seem (almost) next gen. However, 60fps are preferable to play... so I hate to choose.

Demon's Souls in performance mode absolutely looks next gen to me. The lighting and detail is incredible. I must say I didn't spend hours in quality mode though. Looked roughly the same to me at first, without the smoothness 60 fps gives us.

On Miles the best option seems to be the new 60 fps + rt mode for the best of both worlds.

 

[regawdless]

Not noticing all the visual differences like resolution or asset quality, not even the RT reflections in Spider-Man... That's actually a great place to be in. Enjoy your high fps gaming, OP!

 

[Tickle My Tendies]

Demon's Souls in performance mode absolutely looks next gen to me. The lighting and detail is incredible. I must say I didn't spend hours in quality mode though. Looked roughly the same to me at first, without the smoothness 60 fps gives us.

On Miles the best option seems to be the new 60 fps + rt mode for the best of both worlds.

Performance RT mode in both MM and SM:R is BY FAR the worst looking of the three rendering options in either game, IMO. The loss to clarity, details, and added aliasing in the distance is readily apparent to me.

Quality Mode in SM:R, MM, Demon's Souls, Godfall, and Fenyx Rising (the games I have tested) always offers a bump to visual clarity and texture details, due to the resolution bump.

I opt for the standard performance modes in most games, but I stuck with Fidelity Mode in Spider-Man: Remastered, as Insomniac handles 30fps better than almost any other dev. Feels smooth as hell and the resolution + full ray tracing offered look stunning in that mode.

This is all just my perspective based on my viewing experience. It's subjective, everyone is different. I don't think anyone should sincerely say "the mode I prefer is the mode everyone should be using," that's just arrogant and silly IMO.

A new thread about this topic seems to pop up every week or so with the same responses. It's a "spinning our wheels in the mud" kind of conversation. Different people like different things. There really is no right or wrong answer.

 

[Kamina]

Judging from AC Valhalla and Demon’s Souls, Quality mode changes too little to make up for the loss of 60fps fluidity.

 

[Kuranghi]

If anyone is interested I'd be willing to make a thread on here tomorrow where we try and lock down why people choose framerate over image quality. 100% of the time 60 fps will feel better and look better in motion than 30 fps. Fidelity mode is about compromising that motion clarity/responsiveness for a sharper image, which allows you to see more detail generally but also increases the overall depth of the image, so we need to find out why that stuff isn't obvious for people who prefer Perf modes. I'd get everyone to post the following things:

* The exact model of screen/TV you use to play games - and by extension the resolution of it
* How far you are sitting from it
* What picture mode you are using, if its a TV, whether you customised said picture mode with your own preferences

This way you can get an idea for why people aren't seeing the difference in image quality when going over to Fidelity/Resolution mode in a game.

 

[Rikkori]

Keep in mind there is such a thing as 'motion resolution', so when you're actively playing the game and moving around it's not strange for a 60 fps mode to look better than a 30 fps mode. Ultimately we're not playing screenshots, so the resolution difference can be washed out during actual gameplay due to better framerates. As an added bonus, the main form of AA used nowadays is TAA (in various forms), and the way that works is the more frames you can add together the better the final output will be so higher fps = less ghosting, less shimmering, less noise etc. So by having a higher fps you get a lot of visual benefits beyond just the "smoothness" and lower input lag.

Basically in order to make 30 fps worthwhile it has to come with a LOT of visual spectacle attached and there's simply no way that will happen with modern consoles & PCs. It was done more for PS4 & X1 because the trade-offs had to be a lot bigger there due to the very weak CPU, lower memory & the GPUs not really being able to hit a threshold performance for certain key features like SVOGI etc. But now with the PS5 & XSX/S you can get a LOT of optimal visual features and hit 60 fps, and in order to do something to "wow" you it has to be ray tracing (because higher-end rasterised versions are just as expensive but look worse, eg VXAO, HFTS etc) but the consoles just aren't strong enough for it (in terms of adding multiple effects & the quality of it). And so the positive aspect to all this is that we can expect games to have 60 fps modes in general because that will be a more optimal target for games based on the hardware.

 

[base]

Using Performance Mode. The quality mode doesn't change that much.

 

[GAMETA]

Well, well, well, well.... we've come a long way from the cinematic 30fps now, haven't we? Hmmmm....

 

[Boss Mog]

Quality mode looks great in screenshots but as soon as you pan the camera horizontally all that visual fidelity goes down the toilet.

 

[DonJorginho]

I like Souls at 30 in cinematic mode. I played the original, so it's an upgrade.

I can't quite put my disgust into words, I am disappointed in you sir, however I am happy for you and hope you continue the game!

Spoiler

Even if it is more of a slideshow

 

[Lethal01]

For Mile Morales the raytraced reflections in the quality mode makes it look better than the performance mode by far.

When it's just a bump in resolution then absolutely not.

 

[bender]

Souls at 60 FPS is amazing. There is figurliterally no other way.

Miles Morales at 60? Eh. I feel like that game looks extremely well done, and smooth, at 30, and I’d rather take full ray-tracing and resolution. It’s one of those where the 60 FPS mode looks a little weird to me, like things don’t move with the proper weight and impact.

Demon Souls at 15 is the way it was meant to be played. PS3 BBBAAAYYYBEEEEEE

 

[Miles708]

The good thing about the quality mode option is that it's finally showing to the masses how 60fps are better in every circumstance.

 

[JORMBO]

I play in quality mode usually. I like how crisp everything is with the increase in resolution. I notice a difference in how games look between the modes.

 

[TheKratos]

4k that you can only enjoy when standing still or 1440p that you can enjoy while moving fast. 1440p60fps all day for me.

 

[JeloSWE]

I play in quality mode usually. I like how crisp everything is with the increase in resolution. I notice a difference in how games look between the modes.

Crisp when stationary but blurry when in motion. Motion Resolution or Temporal Resolution is as important as Spatial Resolution.

 

[#Phonepunk#]

it does. just switching to quality mode in Demon's and instantly i can tell the difference.

 

[JORMBO]

Crisp when stationary but blurry when in motion. Motion Resolution or Temporal Resolution is as important as Spatial Resolution.

Don’t really notice that.

 

[Kenneth Haight]

Now I’ve went 60 on console there is no going back. Can barely tell the difference on demons souls visuals between performance and quality, but the 30/60 is night and day.

 

[fran.fernandez]

I played miles morales at fidelity mode? 30 fps 4K rt. The 60fps visual were kinda bland for me.
Also the 30 fps is super fluid!

Demon souls I played performance mode 60fps. 30 fps was kinda choppy.

idk what is insomniac secret sauce, but 30 fps lerp is impressive.

 

[GamingArena]

Switching between 30 and 60 rapidly isn't a good way to check which you prefer. Play for 30-45 mins before you decide, your eyes need to adjust to the lower framerate just like they need to adjust for light or colour balance.

Im sorry but there is no scenario in the world where someone would prefer 30fps to 60fps, you can adjust to 30fps after a while if you can't do better sure, but actually preferring 30 over 60 let's be serious.

 

[trikster40]

Spider-Man Quality looks way better than performance IMO. Insomniac are amazing.

 

[jroc74]

For Miles Morales:

I can see the ray tracing difference when switching modes. You just have to know what to look for. This was before the 60fps/RT mode. That mode might be the best of both worlds. Reflective surfaces. One scene when Miles is in some office, switching the modes will show the buildings across the street reflecting on the floor. I think its a night time scene.

For cut scenes, close up shots is easier to see the difference between Quality and Performance. One good one is the Rhino fight at the beginning. Put it on Performance before that fight and leave it on for the following cut scene when its over.

 

[JeloSWE]

It doesn't seem like it to me. I've been playing Spider-Man: Miles Morales and Assassin's Creed Valhalla. I prefer both of them on Performance mode running 60 FPS. Valhalla got really choppy when I switched it to Quality mode. Like even just moving the curser around the map was clipping, it was really bad.

Ultimately though, I don't even see the difference visually when I switch it to quality. What even is ray tracing? Something to do with the lighting? I've even watched Youtube comparisons between them and all I can see is Performance mode running better, I don't see any benefit to running it on Quality. Am I just blind? Does HDR play a big role in it? Because a lot of times I turn HDR off because I can't get it to look good on my television no matter how much I mess with the settings.

If you don't see the difference when switching back and forth then it great, just go for performance. But the reason you can't see would have to do with your screens resolution and how big it is in your visual field, eg how large it is and close you are sitting to the display. For HDR to look good you need a upper mid to top tier LCD or OLED TV. Virtually no monitor is doing it well at the moment.

Raytracing is a technique we use to emulate the behavior and look of light in a physically correct way. The rasterization techniques commonly used in most games doesn't do this at all, games can still look photorealistic because they use backed lighting created in offline raytracing but it's not realtime or dynamic the way RT is. RT is the future of game rendering and has been the de facto way to create photoreal CGI for movies for decades now. It's the holly grail of rendering that will make future games look incredible. We are still a couple of years away for mainstream games to be fully raytraced, for now we will probably focus on reflections and shadows in console games while global illumination will mostly depend on precomputed backed textures for a while more.

 

[GhostOfTsu]

4k vs Dynamic 4k is the biggest waste of ressources and people should stop pushing devs for it just so they can get an erection with "real 4K".

I'm playing Spider-Man Dynamic 4k with RT and I can see zero difference with 4k vs Dynamic 4k. It is the same. Case closed.

Now all games on PS5 can be dynamic RT going forward. Thanks Insomniac!

 

[Represent.]

What? It always looks better.

30fps is the way to go.

 

[puffzor]

What? It always looks better.

30fps is the way to go.

It looks better in still frames. 60fps looks better than 30fps actually playing. Especially 30fps with frame drops, shits unplayable with stutters