Support NeoGAF

[biteren]

this makes me worry about Doom reboot's performance

 

[Late Flag]

If the technical performance is that bad, I'm going to just hold off on this one. I can live with poor optimization on a $30 game, but I'm not dropping $60 on one that can't even maintain 30 fps.

 

[Nzyme32]

this makes me worry about Doom reboot's performance

That is on IDTech6, not 5 like this game. Although, yeah, not sure how the engine is going to end up at this rate

 

[Xaero Gravity]

Is this how you rebuttal being wrong? Bad performance is near the very top of the list of "valid things to complain about".

Yawn.

Spoiler

Am I doing it right?

 

[Spaced Harrier]

This deserves to flop. Especially with all the other games out recently and coming out. People should invest their money elsewhere and refuse to put up with these technically inept developers.

Technically inept =/= Creatively bankrupt.

If you had to pick between this or say Destiny flopping would you really pick the evil within?

 

[Arulan]

Really? Because day one console version of AC4 for PS4 was patched. And then I believe it got delayed for PC.

You think Call of Duty:Ghosts got patched first on PC?

When bread and butter is xbox and PlayStation for Activision.

You think Bethesda is looking to make the most money on PC? Then you are delusional, if I was a business man I would make sure the updates went out to closed platform first than a platform that is more open and has more variables to patch.

You're not only misunderstanding StevieP but you continue to completely miss the points both Durante and Alexandros have laid out for you. The game has technical problems across all platforms, but if you have a modest PC capable of reaching the 30 fps minimum the PC version is already better than the console experience. Furthermore you can already tweak the black bars out fairly well, and in a few days I'm sure that'll be completely solved. Further community fixes will likely fix a lot of other minor issues which will always be present on the console versions. And if you choose you can attempt to run the game at >30 fps, hopefully with an optimization patch it'll be easier to achieve.

The point is that matching the console versions is fairly trivial, the issues and problems that are plaguing the PC version are not in doing that, but in vastly surpassing them and customizing our experience. The console versions at best will solve their frame pacing issues (assuming they can), but they'll always be locked at 30, they'll always have black bars, and will remain static. The PC version is not only already better, but will continue to get better and you'll have more control over your experience with the game. Is that so hard to understand?

 

[AgentOtaku]

this makes me worry about Doom reboot's performance

Different engine (idTech6) and being handled internally at id Software.

 

[StrongBlackVine]

Technically inept =/= Creatively bankrupt.

If you had to pick between this or say Destiny flopping would you really pick the evil within?

Neither game deserves to flop. I have both.

 

[WordsintheWater]

while I certainly understand that some people are more sensitive to framerate than others, and some people care more than others, for me it varies by game -- and while I agree with everyone else that 60 fps as a rule is always best regardless of genre, (TLOU RM proves this) the absence of it is felt far more in some games than others.

In the case of TEW, this is a game lavishly adorned with various filters, effects, glows, and carefully thought out, highly contrasted lighting. With this overall soft and "well-mixed", for lack of a better term, look -- The presentation isn't as sensitive to framerate as that of, say, an action heavy FPS or a racing game.

So, yea, this is a game with a highly processed presentation and suspenseful pacing. I'll admit I've noticed a few dips in framerate, and the fact that this is mainly right at the beginning of the game is probably feeding the hysterical reaction we're seeing from some, but as an entire experience -- I just wouldn't characterize this game as one with a particular framerate issue. It, yes, feels fine to me.

It'd be such a shame if anyone missed out on this terrific game because they are so preoccupied with letterboxes or small fluxuations in framerate. Games like this don't come along every year. Anyone who liked RE4 or likes survival horror is doing themselves a horrible disservice if they pass on this over something technical.



if serious, case in point. what a shame.

So far I have noticed it in the beginning of Chapter 1 and a bit in Chapter 3 and the worst was a particular part in Chapter 4, it was so atrocious at that point, could hardly play it I was getting so dizzy. Chapter 5 has been perfectly fine so far though. So yes it's not constant, but it is an issue and wish it would have been addressed, it made the game less enjoyable for me at those parts. As a whole I think the game is awesome though and not worth not purchasing if you're only choice is the PS4 version.

 

[TGO]

As a whole I think the game is awesome though and not worth not purchasing if you're only choice is the PS4 version.

That makes zero sense.

 

[IvorB]

to me, the 30 fps feels like 30 fps, to them it doesn't, I guess take your pick.

Doesn't matter to me either way to be honest as I have no intention of buying this game.

 

[WordsintheWater]

That makes zero sense.

Why not? Despite the framerate issues it's worth purchasing

 

[Lonely1]

What baffles me is all the hubris about 4GB of VRAM prerelease. It makes no sense now. Was it damage control for the poor performing Console version? I don't regret buying this game, but I'm a bit disappointed by both, the game itself and it's presentation. I'm I wrong on thinking that RAGE is still the best looking ID Tech game?

 

[Shin-Ra]

I sure hope so. Only thing it's good for is 60 FPS (which TEW hilariously managed to avoid) and it actually causes weird issues on PC above 60 so eh. Competition and blah blah blah, but I see increasingly little reason to use not UE4

How many UE4 games have we seen the performance for exactly?

What surprises me is that despite the film ratio, the FoV is described as "narrow". That sounds pretty fucked up.

It's the same case with The Order.

Some of these "cinematic" devs don't know what they're doing/talking about.

I capped these from the Gamescom gameplay compilation trailer

Where's the narrow, obstructive FoV exactly?

 

[TheChewyWaffles]

Since the consoles can't even maintain 30 FPS, anything which runs above 30 FPS minimum is clearly superior. Keeping that in mind, and perusing this chart:

We see that you really don't need anything remotely like a "monster" PC to get an experience which is clearly superior to the console one. Sub-€150 cards manage just fine.

I'm a huge console gamer, and I've always let my gaming PC take a back seat (even though it's an i7 2600k / GTX 760 soon to upgrade to a GTX 970 / 16GB ram), but I had a revelation not too long ago that my reasons for buying games for consoles weren't the best. I also recently solved my washed-out look for my BenQ projector and now my gaming PC looks great and works properly with my surround system, something that had been keeping me from embracing PC gaming of late, too.

The point is that the weakness of the now current-gen consoles has more or less pushed me back into the embrace of PC gaming. I am sick of low FPS and poor IQ when I can get great FPS and great IQ while basically using hardware that is 3 years old (my processor) and keeping my GPU relatively up to date. I'll get exclusives for the consoles and enjoy them, but multiplats are going back to PC's.

 

[pager99]

Technically inept =/= Creatively bankrupt.

If you had to pick between this or say Destiny flopping would you really pick the evil within?

Come on it doesn't dreserve to flop I'm sure they tried their best and put their heart and soul into this game

 

[Papacheeks]

You're not only misunderstanding StevieP but you continue to completely miss the points both Durante and Alexandros have laid out for you. The game has technical problems across all platforms, but if you have a modest PC capable of reaching the 30 fps minimum the PC version is already better than the console experience. Furthermore you can already tweak the black bars out fairly well, and in a few days I'm sure that'll be completely solved. Further community fixes will likely fix a lot of other minor issues which will always be present on the console versions. And if you choose you can attempt to run the game at >30 fps, hopefully with an optimization patch it'll be easier to achieve.

The point is that matching the console versions is fairly trivial, the issues and problems that are plaguing the PC version are not in doing that, but in vastly surpassing them and customizing our experience. The console versions at best will solve their frame pacing issues (assuming they can), but they'll always be locked at 30, they'll always have black bars, and will remain static. The PC version is not only already better, but will continue to get better and you'll have more control over your experience with the game. Is that so hard to understand?

And my argument that the engine was not optimized, which was my very first post. And with all the issues on both proves my point.

And the stability of 30fps is with what they were using for testing. WHich was a i7 5960 with DDR4 2400MHZ and SSD.

So anyone with a NON-SSD, an average AMD, or intel quad and lets say a 560ti or higher will not be able to keep 1080p 30 frames. Which was brought up by other posters in the thread.

So if your running a i7 with a 760 gtx you probably can hit constant 30 yes. But anything below those specs i doubt will be consistent, because even with their set up it seems to dip below that in some cases.

And like others have said it's hit or miss in different levels of the game.
More than likely will patch the console version before PC. ANd they even say if you can get pass the dips PS4 or PC.

ANd with the issues on the steam forums without a patch right now, I would go PS4, as you dont have the other variables that can cause the instability's that the pc one can have.

Those test's they did were on a high end cpu, with DDR4 2400, and high end SSD.

Like I said with Durante's chart he showed and some one else showed with cpu's anything in the middle ground in terms of both cpu and gpu will not have a always consistent 30.

And as far as patches go console will more than likely come first with stability patch.

I would rather rent it on gamefly then buy it later when the steam patches roll out at a cheaper price than to scour the forums of steam, nvidia and such to get it to work with my system.

 

[StevieP]

And my argument that the engine was not optimized, which was my very first post. And with all the issues on both proves my point.

And the stability of 30fps is with what they were using for testing. WHich was a i7 5960 with DDR4 2400MHZ and SSD.

So anyone with a NON-SSD, an average AMD, or intel quad and lets say a 560ti or higher will not be able to keep 1080p 30 frames. Which was brought up by other posters in the thread.

So if your running a i7 with a 760 gtx you probably can hit constant 30 yes. But anything below those specs i doubt will be consistent, because even with their set up it seems to dip below that in some cases.

And like others have said it's hit or miss in different levels of the game.
More than likely will patch the console version before PC. ANd they even say if you can get pass the dips PS4 or PC.

ANd with the issues on the steam forums without a patch right now, I would go PS4, as you dont have the other variables that can cause the instability's that the pc one can have.

Those test's they did were on a high end cpu, with DDR4 2400, and high end SSD.

Like I said with Durante's chart he showed and some one else showed with cpu's anything in the middle ground in terms of both cpu and gpu will not have a always consistent 30.

And as far as patches go console will more than likely come first with stability patch.

I would rather rent it on gamefly then buy it later when the steam patches roll out at a cheaper price than to scour the forums of steam, nvidia and such to get it to work with my system.

LOL good god man. Put down the warrior flag for a moment.
You don't need SSDs with overclocked ram and those tests that Durante posted show that you can get an average of 30fps on a bloody i3.

There is quite literally NO reason to pick up the PS4 version of the game AND expect it to be better if you own an even-modest gaming rig. The PC version of the game IS better due to hardware. It will always be better, post patch pre patch etc etc unless you're running a Core 2 Duo with a bloody 8400GS or something silly like that.

But if you're going to gamefly it, put the keyboard down and go enjoy your game

 

[Leb]

And my argument that the engine was not optimized, which was my very first post. And with all the issues on both proves my point.

And the stability of 30fps is with what they were using for testing. WHich was a i7 5960 with DDR4 2400MHZ and SSD.

So anyone with a NON-SSD, an average AMD, or intel quad and lets say a 560ti or higher will not be able to keep 1080p 30 frames. Which was brought up by other posters in the thread.

So if your running a i7 with a 760 gtx you probably can hit constant 30 yes. But anything below those specs i doubt will be consistent, because even with their set up it seems to dip below that in some cases.

And like others have said it's hit or miss in different levels of the game.
More than likely will patch the console version before PC. ANd they even say if you can get pass the dips PS4 or PC.

ANd with the issues on the steam forums without a patch right now, I would go PS4, as you dont have the other variables that can cause the instability's that the pc one can have.

Those test's they did were on a high end cpu, with DDR4 2400, and high end SSD.

Like I said with Durante's chart he showed and some one else showed with cpu's anything in the middle ground in terms of both cpu and gpu will not have a always consistent 30.

And as far as patches go console will more than likely come first with stability patch.

I would rather rent it on gamefly then buy it later when the steam patches roll out at a cheaper price than to scour the forums of steam, nvidia and such to get it to work with my system.

Apropos of nothing in particular, I have to say that certain kinds of parody are especially challenging. On the one hand, you want to include a few winks for your more astute readers, but on the other hand, you've got to keep the parody subtle enough that what you're saying is believable on its face.

Sometimes nailing that balance is hard, is all I'm saying.

 

[Shin-Ra]

 

[HeelPower]

correct. don't let a technical detail or a few dropped frames (really, it's not as bad as some of you are making out) cause you to miss out on such a lovingly made, brilliant game. I just love this game so much.

Game is so goood.

A shame it gets below 30 fps ,but oh well..whatever.

 

[psychotron]

Just finished chapter 3. Frame rate went to total shit during it. I like the game but it's rough as hell.

 

[Booker Dewitt]

Was gonna pick up the XBO version while Sony fixes my DS4...but now I'm gonna wait 'till I get it back. Unless a patch comes out that fixes the weird sync issue on XBO, can't justify spending money on it. Probably be on sale by then too.

 

[Yibby]

I'm I wrong on thinking that RAGE is still the best looking ID Tech game?

Rage looks as good as The Evil Within, even better in some situations. I think some of the vistas of the city in TEW are pretty weak.

 

[jett]

How many UE4 games have we seen the performance for exactly?


I capped these from the Gamescom gameplay compilation trailer



Where's the narrow, obstructive FoV exactly?

Seriously? The character is taking 40% of the screen in two of those shots.

 

[Skyzard]

Rage looks as good as The Evil Within, even better in some situations. I think some of the vistas of the city in TEW are pretty weak.

Your post and the screenshots... they don't match up

TEW looks really good with cranked up settings.

 

[RoboPlato]

Seriously? The character is taking 40% of the screen in two of those shots.

Outside of those two it's not nearly as much as in TEW and, like I mentioned before, Galahad's position stays static whereas Sebastian moves. Those two super close ones are also scripted exploration moments and it pulls back in combat whereas it's always the same in TEW.

 

[Soccer4life]

Xbone is just......

 

[Papacheeks]

LOL good god man. Put down the warrior flag for a moment.
You don't need SSDs with overclocked ram and those tests that Durante posted show that you can get an average of 30fps on a bloody i3.

There is quite literally NO reason to pick up the PS4 version of the game AND expect it to be better if you own an even-modest gaming rig. The PC version of the game IS better due to hardware. It will always be better, post patch pre patch etc etc unless you're running a Core 2 Duo with a bloody 8400GS or something silly like that.

But if you're going to gamefly it, put the keyboard down and go enjoy your game

Yea and all those cpu's tests with a 780ti.

Try again. like to see the average score with 8gb of various speed ddr3 memory, 560ti or 570 run the game on max @ 1080p with constant 30fps, no stutters, or dips.

or crashing which seems to be happening a lot for nvidia users setting their settings to high.

 

[Papacheeks]

LOL good god man. Put down the warrior flag for a moment.
You don't need SSDs with overclocked ram and those tests that Durante posted show that you can get an average of 30fps on a bloody i3.

There is quite literally NO reason to pick up the PS4 version of the game AND expect it to be better if you own an even-modest gaming rig. The PC version of the game IS better due to hardware. It will always be better, post patch pre patch etc etc unless you're running a Core 2 Duo with a bloody 8400GS or something silly like that.

But if you're going to gamefly it, put the keyboard down and go enjoy your game

So your saying that I'm wrong in saying the game is unoptimized? When Digital Foundry admitted it? WHich was what I was saying.

And if you have a 700 series or higher card, with DDR4 and a I7 you can run the game at 1080 30 fps. I am not disputing that, im saying not everyone has those configurations, or maybe have less, and can't run the game at stable/ constant 30 fps @1080p because of the issues with the game in general.

And also make note that priority wise I see them putting out patch on console before we see patch on pc.

If you have the specs of what they tested on or something close then yes go PC, if you dont then go console or wait. Which is what I said.

And comes back to my original argument that is backed up by what is shown by digital foundry that the engine/ game is un- optimized.

And I never made a reference that the PS4 was better, I said if you don't want hassles if your PC is not tip top, then maybe go console. And looking on steam forums this game has major stability issues.

I have no issue with you my issue is with LAB and other people who seem great at shitting on me when My original argument is backed by the article.

 

[TAJ]

LOL good god man. Put down the warrior flag for a moment.
You don't need SSDs with overclocked ram and those tests that Durante posted show that you can get an average of 30fps on a bloody i3.

There is quite literally NO reason to pick up the PS4 version of the game AND expect it to be better if you own an even-modest gaming rig. The PC version of the game IS better due to hardware. It will always be better, post patch pre patch etc etc unless you're running a Core 2 Duo with a bloody 8400GS or something silly like that.

But if you're going to gamefly it, put the keyboard down and go enjoy your game

That's awfully dismissive for someone who clearly doesn't understand the difference between average and minimum frame rate.

 

[dmr87]

What baffles me is all the hubris about 4GB of VRAM prerelease. It makes no sense now. Was it damage control for the poor performing Console version? I don't regret buying this game, but I'm a bit disappointed by both, the game itself and it's presentation. I'm I wrong on thinking that RAGE is still the best looking ID Tech game?

Pro-tip, take system requirements with a bowl of salt.

Id tech 5 was really a shit engine. Looks like no one can make it work even at 30 fps

Wolfenstein was fine, no idea about last gen versions though.

 

[StevieP]

So your saying that I'm wrong in saying the game is unoptimized? When Digital Foundry admitted it? WHich was what I was saying.

And if you have a 700 series or higher card, with DDR4 and a I7 you can run the game at 1080 30 fps. I am not disputing that, im saying not everyone has those configurations, or maybe have less, and can't run the game at stable/ constant 30 fps @1080p because of the issues with the game in general.

And also make note that priority wise I see them putting out patch on console before we see patch on pc.

If you have the specs of what they tested on or something close then yes go PC, if you dont then go console or wait. Which is what I said.

And comes back to my original argument that is backed up by what is shown by digital foundry that the engine/ game is un- optimized.

And I never made a reference that the PS4 was better, I said if you don't want hassles if your PC is not tip top, then maybe go console. And looking on steam forums this game has major stability issues.

I have no issue with you my issue is with LAB and other people who seem great at shitting on me when My original argument is backed by the article.

It seems to me you don't need a 700 series card and ddr4 (lol what?) to beat console performance. This article will show you that

That's awfully dismissive for someone who clearly doesn't understand the difference between average and minimum frame rate.

I'm sorry, does the minimum framerate look drastically different on that i3 test? Or did you have something to contribute with your own test?

 

[Papacheeks]

It seems to me you don't need a 700 series card and ddr4 (lol what?) to beat console performance. This article will show you that



I'm sorry, does the minimum framerate look drastically different on that i3 test? Or did you have something to contribute with your own test?

Please show me in this Eurogamer article where they show the game running on a mid-range card, mid range cpu with regular ddr3 at 1080p and at constant 30fps as average and minimum fps?

 

[JohnGrimm]

Wolfenstein was fine, no idea about last gen versions though.

It's 720p60fps on both consoles, with the engine automatically scaling down resolution/effects to maintain the framerate, which is what it was designed to do.

 

[nOoblet16]

Rage looks as good as The Evil Within, even better in some situations. I think some of the vistas of the city in TEW are pretty weak.

RAGE has good art but it's obviously the least technically competent of the three idTech5 games we have. The game has completely static and pre baked lighting and it does not even have something as basic as specular maps. Wolfenstien looks much much better and the Evil within is definitely the most dynamic of all the three idTech5 games in terms of rendering, just that it runs bad.

 

[The Inventor]

...As a whole I think the game is awesome though and not worth not purchasing if you're only choice is the PS4 version.

That makes zero sense.

It does to me, TGO.

Old school survival horror deserves better. I hope these games end up in good, skilled hands next time.

 

[SniperHunter]

I knew this would happen... japaense dev working with id tech 5 = lolz

 

[Insane Metal]

Huh. I played some 40 minutes earlier today and I didn't notice framerate drops at all (PS4). Was it the update? Or I was just enjoying the game too much?

 

[Broder Salsa]

Need more letterboxing

 

[ProfessorMoran]

I knew this would happen... japaense dev working with id tech 5 = lolz

Is there even an iTech 6? It seems to me that iTech 5 is basically really outdated at this point.

 

[SparkTR]

IdTech5 is terrible, who would've thought designing an engine around a console that would be obsolete in under a couple of years was a bad idea. Hard to believe Carmack was so short sighted, if the engine even had a bit of a PC focus in mind when it was developed it would have been ideal for the new generation.

 

[plagiarize]

Please show me in this Eurogamer article where they show the game running on a mid-range card, mid range cpu with regular ddr3 at 1080p and at constant 30fps as average and minimum fps?

We have plenty of people in the PC performance thread running the game at 1080p and 30+ fps on midrange PCs. Plenty.

The game is badly optimized period, on any platform... but your best bet is PC if you have a mid range system. Then you'll likely get a stable 30 fps compared to what you see on PS4.

 

[Renekton]

Their engines are not optimized. And the development kits are still not as mature as they could be.

You must have extensive software engineering experience in this field.

 

[Papacheeks]

We have plenty of people in the PC performance thread running the game at 1080p and 30+ fps on midrange PCs. Plenty.

The game is badly optimized period, on any platform... but your best bet is PC if you have a mid range system. Then you'll likely get a stable 30 fps compared to what you see on PS4.

Yea was reading that thread, seems that there is some tinkering going on to get full 60fps?

But the 30 fps is not constant from what I;m reading having the game run on high, with mide range cpu and mid range gpu.

Seems to go down into the low 20's when there's a lot more on screen in the later chapters of the game.

But yea my main argument was the game was not optimized well on any platform. ANd if you didn;t want to tinker with stuff, and have possible crashing issues which i read people were having on steam, then go for PS4 version if it's an option to you.

 

[Corpekata]

SSDs, DDRD3 ram, next are you going to bring up more barely relevant stuff like the power supply? Maybe the quality of SATA cables?

 

[Papacheeks]

You must have extensive software engineering experience in this field.

Doesn't take a rocket scientist to look at games like Thief, and Evil Within and see how un-optimized games are when you compare them to others that run fine on the same PC configs and consoles.

 

[Nethaniah]

SSDs, DDRD3 ram, next are you going to bring up more barely relevant stuff like the power supply? Maybe the quality of SATA cables?

God i wish i had bought another case, maybe then the game would run better.

 

[Papacheeks]

SSDs, DDRD3 ram, next are you going to bring up more barely relevant stuff like the power supply? Maybe the quality of SATA cables?

No but as you see from the other poster above me he acknowledges my original statement that the game is not optimized well on console or PC.

And looking at the dips in the other thread people are getting at certain area's of the game shows you this, and shows you how more testing needs to be done on the PC side of Eurogamer's article. As they clearly focus more on consoles. And acknowledge if you dont have something close or within what they were testing on you might have issues.

 

[Dead]

Was under the impression that Bone was same resolution as PS4 prior to purchase

Feel kind of shitty now. Should have bought the game on PS4. Ugh.