• 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.

Digital Foundry: The Outer Worlds: Spacer's Choice Edition - PS5 vs Xbox Series X/S Tech Review, Performance Tested

Draugoth

Draugoth

Gold Member



  • 0:00 The pitch: $10 for upgraded graphics, up to 4K 60fps, plus all DLC
  • 1:18 Performance concerns on all platforms
  • 3:38 Original vs Spacer's Choice Edition graphics comparisons
  • 5:50 The difficulty in producing comparisons, huge aesthetic differences
  • 6:59 Graphical bugs / downgrades in Spacer's Choice Edition
  • 8:07 Modes explained: 60fps performance vs 30fps cinematic
  • 10:00 Cinematic mode: image quality comparisons
  • 12:05 Performance mode: image quality comparisons
  • 13:17 Cinematic mode performance
  • 15:26 Performance mode performance
  • 16:44 Performance testing summary: PS5 vs Series X vs Series S
  • 17:56 Wrapping up: YMMV, but I'd rather play the original version


adamsapple said:
TL;DR

- Bad port.
- Performance and Cinematic modes are broadly identical minus removal of SSR and lower AO quality. New patch drops grass density on Performance mode as well.

- PS5|SX run dynamic 4K in cinematic mode with drops to 1440p. Series S runs at 972p with no major DRS spotted.
- Series S drops grass and AO settings in comparison to X and PS5.
- In Performance mode Series S again runs at lower settings, all consoles remove SSR.
- PS5 and SX both still run at dynamic 4K but drops are more frequent. Series S sticks to the same resolution mostly.
- Currently, SX has a foliage advantage in Performance mode, as the newest patch (out only on PS5 so far) reduces grass density

- Cinematic mode: Bad frame pacing, PS5 version drops more frames compared to Xbox, as low s 15 FPS at times during combat. In Traversal PS5 can drop a few frames, both Xbox's generally stay at 30.
- Performance mode: Lower average FPS on PS5. Higher average on Xbox machines but prone to more hitching to 80ms spikes.
- Big outdoor battles can drop to low 40s on all. Both can also drop below 30 at times in the worst cases.
Click to expand...

​

​

 
Last edited:
adamsapple

adamsapple

Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
TL;DR

- Bad port.
- Performance and Cinematic modes are broadly identical minus removal of SSR and lower AO quality. New patch drops grass density on Performance mode as well.

- PS5|SX run dynamic 4K in cinematic mode with drops to 1440p. Series S runs at 972p with no major DRS spotted.
- Series S drops grass and AO settings in comparison to X and PS5.
- In Performance mode Series S again runs at lower settings, all consoles remove SSR.
- PS5 and SX both still run at dynamic 4K but drops are more frequent. Series S sticks to the same resolution mostly.
- Currently, SX has a foliage advantage in Performance mode, as the newest patch (out only on PS5 so far) reduces grass density

- Cinematic mode: Bad frame pacing, PS5 version drops more frames compared to Xbox, as low s 15 FPS at times during combat. In Traversal PS5 can drop a few frames, both Xbox's generally stay at 30.
- Performance mode: Lower average FPS on PS5. Higher average on Xbox machines but prone to more hitching to 80ms spikes.
- Big outdoor battles can drop to low 40s on all. Both can also drop below 30 at times in the worst cases.
 
Last edited:
Kuranghi

Kuranghi

Member
I find this to be mostly worse in every way, the presentation is like a shitty ENB mod with the intra-frame contrast set too high but then on the flipside the interiors fog/haze is mostly a negative imo. The changes to the real-time lighting from the sun in cutscenes and out of them makes things look funky, its like AC3 Remastered where they've applied a new lighting system but it doesn't really work well with the models and produces weird results. As if the tech people didn't have any communication with the people responsible for the final result.

The performance is trash though. (Not knocking Tom here btw, just paraphrasing) "Its basically locked to 30fps but it has bad frametime fluctuations", well it doesn't really matter if its locked to 30fps if its constantly having a frametime stutter that makes it look like 20fps does it?

I think just play the original version and save your $10, but thats annoying because presumeably all the DLC costs more than $10.
 
adamsapple

adamsapple

Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
Apologies for the rushed summary, but this just seems like a bad port.

Until patches massively overhaul it, it just seems like running the legacy One X / PS4 Pro version on newer consoles with a better 60 FPS is the better option.
 
BbMajor7th

BbMajor7th

Member
Lack of technical finesse aside, this is a lousy port. I didn't love the original art direction for the game, but it was nonetheless consistent and clearly considered. This looks more like an overwrought Skyrim graphics mod than a professional port. The patchy framerate is just the cherry on top.

Also, if you ship your next-gen port with 'increased foliage', but can't be arsed to at least give it a shading pass so it doesn't look fake and out of place, then don't expect me to be impressed.
 
Last edited:
F

Feel Like I'm On 42

Member
Kuranghi said:
I find this to be mostly worse in every way, the presentation is like a shitty ENB mod with the intra-frame contrast set too high but then on the flipside the interiors fog/haze is mostly a negative imo. The changes to the real-time lighting from the sun in cutscenes and out of them makes things look funky, its like AC3 Remastered where they've applied a new lighting system but it doesn't really work well with the models and produces weird results. As if the tech people didn't have any communication with the people responsible for the final result.

The performance is trash though. (Not knocking Tom here btw, just paraphrasing) "Its basically locked to 30fps but it has bad frametime fluctuations", well it doesn't really matter if its locked to 30fps if its constantly having a frametime stutter that makes it look like 20fps does it?

I think just play the original version and save your $10, but thats annoying because presumeably all the DLC costs more than $10.
Click to expand...

Exactly. This is everything I hate about publishers today. No respect for their customers, no respect for the game they're selling. Outsourcing this to a crappy studio with no attachment to the game. Just getting it do e as cheaply as possible but spending a lot to market it.

God i hate these companies
 
Riky

Riky

$MSFT
7x7RPJx.jpg


Split memory bandwidth strikes again.
 
winjer

winjer

Gold Member
Feel Like I'm On 42 said:
Exactly. This is everything I hate about publishers today. No respect for their customers, no respect for the game they're selling. Outsourcing this to a crappy studio with no attachment to the game. Just getting it do e as cheaply as possible but spending a lot to market it.

God i hate these companies
Click to expand...

They probably sourced out this "upgrade" to the lowest bidder. And the results show.
 
Nydius

Nydius

Member
I honestly feel bad for Obsidian in this whole mess because they’re going to be dragged under the bus even though they had nothing to do with this mess. This is entirely on the shoulders of Virtuos Games, Private Division, and Take Two.

The original version got a backwards compatibility aware patch back in March 2021 that, at least on Series X, got the game running at a solid 4k/60 with an implementation of auto HDR. This downgrade can do neither.

My personal opinion is the graphics “updates” aren’t really that great anyway. Colors are oversaturated, especially reds, oranges, and purples. Everything is made to look flashy now with bright contrast and neon signs added damn near everywhere. The new lighting makes NPC faces in close up dialogue scenes take on an almost cel shaded cartoonish quality. Areas that are supposed to be drab and dreary are now too bright and colorful.

Edit:
01011001 said:
IT'S NOT THE BEST CHOICE,
IT'S SPACER'S CHOICE!!!
Click to expand...
Don’t forget the first one you hear in the first minutes of the game when you run into the Spacer’s Choice grunt bleeding out in the cave:

“You’ve tried the best, now try the rest! Spacer’s Choice!”
 
Last edited:
silent head

silent head

Member
Nydius

Nydius

Member
Alebrije said:
Is this port developed by Obsidian? I mean they usually deliver good products.
Click to expand...
Nope. This “remaster” was outsourced to Virtuos Games and pushed out by Private Division ASAP because, if I recall correctly, they’re going to lose the licensing rights to the game later this year.
 
winjer

winjer

Gold Member
adamsapple said:
traversal stutter maybe ? the faster SSD coping better with it ?
Click to expand...

My thoughts exactly.
We can see that the PS5 also has a hitch at roughly the same time, but much smaller.
It might be related more directly to data decompression, something that the PS6 SSD controller is much better at.
 
Last edited:
Nydius

Nydius

Member
adamsapple said:
Yes, I'm not dropping any money. Very happy with the base games game pass version running at ~4K and a much better 60.
Click to expand...
I bought the upgrade only because the Game Pass version was upgradeable for DLC owners despite their repeated claims we’d have to own both.

I’ve already gone back to the original.

Losing $10 is no big deal but I regret giving them any money for this. They should be giving us money for being their QA department.

Late Edit: I forgot Microsoft had a digital refund page and I was still inside the 14 day window to submit a request. They processed it instantly. I didn't lose out on $10 after all. I think I'd rather use that $10 to buy a physical disk copy off ebay to have in my collection.
 
Last edited:
Alebrije

Alebrije

Member
Captiosus said:
Nope. This “remaster” was outsourced to Virtuos Games and pushed out by Private Division ASAP because, if I recall correctly, they’re going to lose the licensing rights to the game later this year.
Click to expand...
Well there it is. Anyway I blame Obsidian for the lack of QC and outsursing instead of doing it themselfes.
 
adamsapple

adamsapple

Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
silent head said:
stevivor.com

Sony says Microsoft "might release a PlayStation version of Call of Duty where bugs and errors emerge"

Sony has again lashed out at Microsoft's planned acquisition of Activision Blizzard, saying its competitor "might release a PlayStation version of Call of Duty where bugs and errors emerge only on the game's final level of after later updates."
stevivor.com stevivor.com
Seth Meyers Lol GIF by Late Night with Seth Meyers
Click to expand...


Developed by Virtuous Games and published by Private Division.

Sadly, it might have turned out better all around if Obsidian developed and MS published it.
 
intbal

intbal

Member
Probably could sell a lot more if they had just left the tech alone and upgraded the female models instead.
 
XesqueVara

XesqueVara

Member
TakeTwo really trying to milk whatever they can of The Outer Worlds Huh, must hurt don't having the rights of the sequel.
 
Saber

Saber

Gold Member
My god...sometimes I forget this game character face models are ugly.
The upgrade seems to make everything more bright and colorful...uglier than before.
 
adamsapple

adamsapple

Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
DenchDeckard said:
Ooof. So the ps5 version has been patched to reduce foliage and its still running that bad? Am I reading that right?
Click to expand...

Correct, so far only the PS5 version has been patched and despite that it's generally the worst performing of the 3. They could/should keep the SX version as is and not reduce the foliage, it'd be a pointless downgrade unless it guarantees a more stable 60 FPS by freeing up the CPU.
 
DenchDeckard

DenchDeckard

Moderated wildly
adamsapple said:
Correct, so far only the PS5 version has been patched and despite that it's generally the worst performing of the 3. They could/should keep the SX version as is and not reduce the foliage, it'd be a pointless downgrade unless it guarantees a more stable 60 FPS by freeing up the CPU.
Click to expand...

Maybe that's what's causing the random stutters. Trying to stream in the foliage?
 
Nydius

Nydius

Member
DenchDeckard said:
Ooof. So the ps5 version has been patched to reduce foliage and its still running that bad? Am I reading that right?
Click to expand...
Yep. After the patch dropped social media was on fire with complaints that it didn't address anything. At most, it's slightly reduced stuttering on PS5. Frame rates are still all over the place. Pre and post-patch testing shows it still regularly drops down into the high 30s post-patch on PS5.
 
Last edited:
Fake

Fake

Member
I can't believe a game as ugly as that can become even more ugly.

The NPC faces are so fucking terrible. Somehow they make the old lady hair even more bad.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Digital Foundry: Brothers: A Tale of Two Sons Remake - PS5/XSX/S Tech Review - UE5 Nanite/Lumen Come at a Heavy Cost
2 3
100
5K
SlimySnake replied
[Digital Foundry] Avatar: Frontiers of Pandora - PS5/Xbox Series X|S Tech Review - Graceful Scaling vs Maxed PC
Trailer 2 3
101
10K
JackMcGunns replied
Digital Foundry The PS5 GPU in PC Form? Radeon RX 6700 In-Depth - Console Equivalent PC Performance?
5 6 7 8 9
441
18K
yamaci17 replied
Teardown - Stunning Physics & Destruction - PS5/Xbox Series X/S - DF Tech Review
Review
20
3K
touchfuzzy replied
[Digital Foundry] Rise of The Ronin: PS5 Tech Review - A Superb Action RPG... But Can It Sustain 60FPS?
Analysis Review 2
85
5K
adamsapple replied
Top Bottom