• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Digital Foundry: Performance Analysis: The Evil Within

This is somewhat true. It's the maps that are the problem not the action. The maps which suffer from performance drops run poor regardless of whether there are enemies on screen or not.

So it goes along with the pc thread where looking at fires and being outdoors will cause 20 or more fps drops while dozens of enemies leave the frame rate relatively unaffected. Is this an idtech problem or are some of the maps just poorly designed? This does suggest that they can't fix the problem through patches unless they actually change some of the renders or remove the offending effects themselves.
 
It runs at 20 fps but it feels like 30 to me.

it runs at 60 on a moderate desktop.

According to DF it runs around console framerates with similar settings on a mid-range desktop.

I'd assume that means 30-40 average.


Just watched a guy playing with a I5 4670K and an R9 280X 3GB. Game was stuttering every time the camera moved. Looked awful too...graphically.
 
How does it run on a PC with a Radeon R7-265? I would expect well considering the 750Ti runs it well but it might be a title that favours Nvidia hardware so it would be interesting to see it.
.

I'm using an R9270 and 30fps indoors but it can go as low as 24fps outside when there is campfires/fog etc. So I doubt you would get a solid 30fps with a 265, changing graphics options seems to make no difference either.
 
Doom uses id-tech 6. so I think it's safe to say that id-tech5 is already dead.

John Carmack's Id-tech 4 was a complete and utter mess and id-tech 5 is a complete failure. this guys is past his glory day for sure. good thing that id-tech 6 will be Carmack-free.

Are you fucking serious with this comment? By no means will I say the engines are perfect, but they tried to push new tech that no one else was doing at the time. John is, and always will be, one of the smartest guys in the industry.
 
Strangely, while I'm usually quite sensitive to framerate, I did notice a bit of hiccups during the first 5 minutes, but then it never really bothered me again. (Playing on PS4)

Maybe I acclimated to it, IDK, maybe I was too hyped. :P

I'm only mid-chapter 3 though, so I guess it gets worse later on. A shame, really. :/
 
I never understood the obsession with resolution and frame rate. I'm playing on ps4, yeah it looks ugly at times but it is fully playable. The whole notion of graphics and slight performance issues completely ruining a game is alien to me, but there are people sensitive to it. I would like to understand why it's so important to some.
 
The technical issues just solidified it. I enjoy survival horror games but I'm not a 'huge' fan, so much other stuff coming right now anyway.

it's a great game now and it will remain so when you decide to pick it up at a lower price The technical deficiencies are a bummer, but there's a lot of meat on this product. Game is dripping with atmosphere

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.

no, it doesn't. The game is playable, looks decent and is so far a quality experience on the ps4. So far well worth the price of entry for me.
 
A few times before the game was released, Bethesda mods on their forums stated that the performance was still being ironed out but they expected it to be a soli 30 fps at launch. Guess that went out the window.
 
This is somewhat true. It's the maps that are the problem not the action. The maps which suffer from performance drops run poor regardless of whether there are enemies on screen or not.
The big thing I've found that drops the framerate on PS4 is fire and it's proximity to the camera. If Sebastian is carrying a torch or is near a bonfire it'll tank, even with no enemies in the area.
 
I never understood the obsession with resolution and frame rate. I'm playing on ps4, yeah it looks ugly at times but it is fully playable. The whole notion of graphics and slight performance issues completely ruining a game is alien to me, but there are people sensitive to it. I would like to understand why it's so important to some.
Because they are sensitive to it.
 
I would like to understand why it's so important to some.

Many would prefer most games to run at 60fps, which makes it even more bothering that some games are, again, beginning to lower the standard even more and accept sub-30fps framerates. Framerate (and glitches like tearing) directly impact the playability of the game. With this new generation as-good-as-locked 30fps should become a non-negotiable standard. While such games are still playable/enjoyable, where else would we or QA draw the line to prevent such performances to become frequent/accepted?
 
So it goes along with the pc thread where looking at fires and being outdoors will cause 20 or more fps drops while dozens of enemies leave the frame rate relatively unaffected. Is this an idtech problem or are some of the maps just poorly designed? This does suggest that they can't fix the problem through patches unless they actually change some of the renders or remove the offending effects themselves.

The game isn't optimized for shit.
 
I got it on Ps4, the performance is not so bad.

My thoughts as well. It's okay, not giving me any trouble, anyway.

However, it turns out the super widescreen is annoying as hell. That's not really the issue - any aspect ratio is fine as long as the camera is placed properly - but the camera is often not placed properly. My own character's head is off screen in close quarters, and it wouldn't be if they were using the whole screen (or pulled the camera back a bit). It's quite off-putting.
 
Not sure if it's the style of the game but the blacks look like shit. More a blue color and I understand the film grain look but this just looks like something is wrong.

IMG20141015174132.jpg


The color has been exaggerated in the photo but you can see the difference between the black menu screens and the dark/black effect in the game.
 
Considering the hardware it's running on, this is easily one of the most technically inept videogames ever created.

I agree. The game has huge bars (bigger than Blu ray movies), cant keep a steady 30 frames per second and has PS 2 art assets (no kidding, the textures in this game are awful).
 
Is this the last idtech 5 game? This engine just needs to die. Wolf was the only game to use it well, and even then it wasn't that great. I'll pick this up when its super cheap, hopefully its just RE4 again.

Wolfenstein didn't really use it any better than RAGE, did.

Still lacked dynamic lighting and suffered from texture pop-in and dogshit muddy textures when examined up close.

Honestly, The Evil Within is the most impressive looking idTech 5 game I have seen.
 
I usually don't complain about performance issues but it was really bad on Chapter 4 on Xbox One. I've only made it to chapter 5 so I don't know if it gets worse but it was a jittery mess in such a small space. The resolution looks horrible too. I thought it was just the film grain but that adds another level of fuzziness to an already low res image. That being said, I'm still really enjoying the game despite it's technical shortcomings.
 
Mikami is not a programmer and he is not responsible for his engine. Beside his last game ie. Vanquish had a very unstable framerate too and no one cared.

Exactly. Shinji is the story teller here, he is in no way responisble for the piss poor engine or optimizations (lack of).
 
I agree. The game has huge bars (bigger than Blu ray movies), cant keep a steady 30 frames per second and has PS 2 art assets (no kidding, the textures in this game are awful).

PS2 art assets and you aren't kidding?

http://www.gfycat.com/ImmaculatePopularCanary

while you may be able to make a valid argument criticizing elements of the presentation, saying something goofy like that just discredits anything else you have to say.

I find the game to be, at most times, very good looking, with excellent use of filters, effects, and lighting -- and awesome character models.
 
[...] even the entry-level enthusiast GTX 750 Ti offers console-style frame-rates at 1080p on max settings.

I find it astounding that my Frankenstein'd desktop (Q9450 + 8GB RAM + 750 Ti) could feasibly play this at a similar level to a PS4. I doubt I'd get similar performance from any other current-gen PC port.
 
Be sure to check out the two clip downloads that I included. It highlights a severe issue with the way the game runs on Xbox One. It's very similar to the bug that plagued several Bethesda "Gamebryo" titles where the simulation runs at a different frame-rate than the renderer causing non-stop skipping. Looks absolutely dreadful while playing and makes the XO version feel as if it is always choppy. Only goes away during cutscenes, really.

I thought it felt way off 30 when i played it last month. I was certainly surprised to see many people claiming it was fine on XB1 after purchasing it.

Game sounds like a technical mess.
 
One weird thing; the frame rate is actually very similar to Ryse on XO but the camera, lack of hq motion blur, and frame distribution makes it seem much much worse.
 
I find it astounding that my Frankenstein'd desktop (Q9450 + 8GB RAM + 750 Ti) could feasibly play this at a similar level to a PS4. I doubt I'd get similar performance from any other current-gen PC port.

At the same settings, including AA....your system is actually about equal to the PS4 at worst, it might would even win in the framerate department on some games.

For example.

Looking at benchmarks across the web I found this for Shadow of Mordor...

With a 750 Ti with a 3770k and running @ 1920x1080 High Preset...that benchmark averaged 43.4fps. The console version of that game (both X1 and PS4) run at 30fps. The console versions also use a medium level LOD and have less foliage.

I know your CPU is no 3770k, but a lot of games are now more GPU dependant. Also, your Q9450 would, again, at worst...equal the AMD CPUs in these consoles. I'd think you could average near 30 in a lot of games with the mix of high and medium the PS4 will get.
 
Isn't there some patch for xbone version that fixes the framerate? So maybe DF didn't get it?

Many people in the OT said the xbone version is "smooth".
 
Isn't there some patch for xbone version that fixes the framerate? So maybe DF didn't get it?

Many people in the OT said the xbone version is "smooth".
Dark10x has confirmed multiple times that they had the patch. I guess the people reporting it was smooth in the OT aren't sensitive to framerate.
 
Sounds genuinely terrible. Unfortunately example of trying to leverage third party tools/engines not working out too well. No way I;m keen to touch this on console given this analysis and Xbox owners in particular should be wary I guess.

After Wolfenstein and given the huge black borders (not something I'm against in principle if used well for framing BTW) so not hating on the borders themselves) this should run better than this.

It's on PC too? Been so focused on Alien Isolation this has kind of being pinging away vaguely on the edge of my upcoming games radar and I haven't checked it out much although I do like a good horror game.
 
Isn't there some patch for xbone version that fixes the framerate? So maybe DF didn't get it?

Many people in the OT said the xbone version is "smooth".

This is the latest version of the game. It means that people aren't as sensitive to it or as I guessed played it in a way to avoid some of the worst parts. The bad performance is tied to levels so it is smooth in some areas and terrible in others.
 
I never understood the obsession with resolution and frame rate. I'm playing on ps4, yeah it looks ugly at times but it is fully playable. The whole notion of graphics and slight performance issues completely ruining a game is alien to me, but there are people sensitive to it. I would like to understand why it's so important to some.

I find things like poor framerate and jaggies take me out of the experience and break the immersion. You can't get lost in the game anymore, because it's consistently reminded you that it's just a game.
 
I've said this but I'll say it again: They shouldn't have messed with Idtech 5 which is an engine designed for 60 fps. Heavily modifying an engine like that can only bring bad results.
 
I never understood the obsession with resolution and frame rate. I'm playing on ps4, yeah it looks ugly at times but it is fully playable. The whole notion of graphics and slight performance issues completely ruining a game is alien to me, but there are people sensitive to it. I would like to understand why it's so important to some.
Why you post here if you don't understand the tech obsession? Honest question.
 
Dark10x has confirmed multiple times that they had the patch. I guess the people reporting it was smooth in the OT aren't sensitive to framerate.

This is the latest version of the game. It means that people aren't as sensitive to it or as I guessed played it in a way to avoid some of the worst parts. The bad performance is tied to levels so it is smooth in some areas and terrible in others.

Did anyone complain about the framerate in OT (xbone version)?
 
I never understood the obsession with resolution and frame rate. I'm playing on ps4, yeah it looks ugly at times but it is fully playable. The whole notion of graphics and slight performance issues completely ruining a game is alien to me, but there are people sensitive to it. I would like to understand why it's so important to some.

You are complaining about people complaining about performance in a thread about performance? What!?
 
The 750Ti coming up strong over and over again. It's quite an impressive card for the price and power consumption.

It sure is. I'm kinda tempted to have my first build include a 750 ti + i3 so I can benchmark and do comparisons myself, as well as have something at least 5x stronger than this laptop (finally gaming at native res would be good enough for me).
 
Top Bottom