Support NeoGAF

[thelastword]

It's still early. As developers learn the tricks on both consoles things will improve, but right now most are going to be quick ports at low PC settings.

There's no tricks to be learnt, this is not the best the PS4 can do, anybody who's pushing that rhetoric is doing so with alterior motives. There are many open world games on the PS4 that look better than dying light already, they also have AF, a million times better IQ, better textures and effects and higher precision lod.

Thanks for making this.

I still remember discussions last year about how the consoles will probably match high (but not ultra) settings in multiplatform titles for a long time, and how the only differences between the console and PC version will be resolution.

Truthfully, even I wouldn't have expected an early 2015 game to run any setting at lower than the lowest possible on PC on the "next-gen" consoles, but there we have it.

How convenient for you to note such a curiosity. Do you know at what lod setting 7850 owners play without getting huge dropped frames? Here's a guy who's playing with this card and he's only averaging mid 20 frames, I don't know his resolution, but his framerate is definitely not as good as that of the PS4.

I swear, if Pong came to the PS4 and it had some framedrops or was missing a shade of black somewhere, some persons would call out these weak consoles and their laptop cpu's and weak gpu's. Maybe with a joker grin on their faces too.

 

[Seanspeed]

What world do you live in? lol

That one where PS4 and PS4 owners are forever being persecuted by gamers and the media. It seems a lot of people live there.

 

[Dictator93]

There's no tricks to be learnt, this is not the best the PS4 can do, anybody who's pushing that rhetoric is doing so with alterior motives. There are many open world games on the PS4 that look better than dying light already, they also have AF, a million times better IQ, better textures and effects and higher precision lod.

How convenient for you to note such a curiosity. Do you know at what lod setting 7850 owners play without getting huge dropped frames? Here's a guy who's playing with this card and he's only averaging mid 20 frames, I don't know his resolution, but his framerate is definitely not as good as that of the PS4.

I swear if Pong came to the PS4 and it had some framedrops or was missing a shade of black somewhere some persons would call out these weak consoles and their laptop cpu's and weak gpu's.

You have no idea what you are talking about and it hurts to read. Nearly every sentence is full of so many holes. Please stop.

 

[thabiz]

That one where PS4 and PS4 owners are forever being persecuted by gamers and the media. It seems a lot of people live there.

OMG. this is the funniest thing ive read all day. bravo sir.

 

[Kezen]

A performance patch is coming :
https://steamcommunity.com/linkfilter/?url=http://forum.techland.pl/topic/2656-patch-is-coming-your-way/

 

[Seanspeed]

Here's a guy who's playing with this card and he's only averaging mid 20 frames, I don't know his resolution, but his framerate is definitely not as good as that of the PS4.

CPU optimization is definitely quite poor in the PC version of Dying Light. And that guy is using an AMD CPU, which is a fairly poor CPU in the first place. Not surprised at his results. Hopefully Techland can do something about it as there's clear room for improvement.

I'm not sure what your point is, though. You want PC gamers to stop talking about what PC games can do better than the consoles or something? I don't get it.

 

[Projectjustice]

That one where PS4 and PS4 owners are forever being persecuted by gamers and the media. It seems a lot of people live there.

I own a PS4 and I dont feel this way. I feel bad for them. =(

 

[TrouzzzerSnake]

I'm surprised people are so hellbent on the difference between PS4 and PC for this game.

I mean, I'd be upset with my PS4 if I paid $400 for it and Dying Light was the best it was ever going to do. But there are already much better looking games on the console showcasing its performance/cost effectiveness.

No reason to get bent out of shape because developers went for near-parity with Xbox One.

 

[DarkOneX]

Regardless of the game looking better on PC by a large margin, and that's undenyable, having played both versions (bought the PC one for cheap from a gaffer) and picked up the PS4 one the night of release it still looks great on PS4. If you stop and stare at things in the distance it'll be still hard to notice anything wrong unless you have the PC one going next to you and look for the things. When you are actually playing the game you aren't worried about this crap, it still looks fantastic on PS4 too. There were times I was playing it last night in certain scenes that just looked downright insane with the sun poking through the trees, fence, etc it still looks great and is still just as fun and the LOD stuff doesn't affect the gameplay in the least.

 

[Buburibon]

CPU optimization is definitely quite poor in the PC version of Dying Light. And that guy is using an AMD CPU, which is a fairly poor CPU in the first place. Not surprised at his results. Hopefully Techland can do something about it as there's clear room for improvement.

I'm not sure what your point is, though. You want PC gamers to stop talking about what PC games can do better than the consoles or something? I don't get it.

Some PS4 owners/fans seem to feel seriously affronted when threads such as this one encourage these types of comparisons/discussions.

I don't get it either.

 

[Compsiox]

Regardless of the game looking better on PC by a large margin, and that's undenyable, having played both versions (bought the PC one for cheap from a gaffer) and picked up the PS4 one the night of release it still looks great on PS4. If you stop and stare at things in the distance it'll be still hard to notice anything wrong unless you have the PC one going next to you and look for the things. When you are actually playing the game you aren't worried about this crap, it still looks fantastic on PS4 too. There were times I was playing it last night in certain scenes that just looked downright insane with the sun poking through the trees, fence, etc it still looks great and is still just as fun and the LOD stuff doesn't affect the gameplay in the least.

You never know how much you'll miss something when it gets taken away if you never had it in the first place. PS4 players will never know how much better it is on pc because they haven't experienced it in person.

Words of Wisdom.

 

[ClaptoVaughn]

Some PS4 owners/fans seem to feel seriously affronted when threads such as this one encourage these types of comparisons/discussions.

I don't get it either.

It's what happens when you interpret "platform vs platform" as "them vs me." They make it personal and defend it as such.

This happens on all sides though, not just PS4 or console.

 

[boeso]

Some PS4 owners/fans seem to feel seriously affronted when threads such as this one encourage these types of comparisons/discussions.

I don't get it either.

People become too attached to their console so when it gets put in a bad light, they defend it because its become a part of that person. Brain's built that way, apparently. Goes both ways of course.

 

[Dargor]

You never know how much you'll miss something when it gets taken away if you never had it in the first place. PS4 players will never know how much better it is on pc because they haven't experienced it in person.

Words of Wisdom.

There is nothing being "taken away" from PS4 players though. This is just what the console is capable of, for this game in particular, without having major performance issues.

Its the same thing that happen to PC players that doesn't have a rig with enough power to run the game at max. Was something taken away from them too? I don't think so.

 

[Durante]

I'm surprised people are so hellbent on the difference between PS4 and PC for this game.

The interesting (and unexpected) part is where the console setting slots in compared to the range of settings available on the PC. That's (as far as I know) currently unique to this game, which is why it's being discussed.

How convenient for you to note such a curiosity. [sputum cut]

Welcome to my ignore list!

 

[Caayn]

I'm surprised people are so hellbent on the difference between PS4 and PC for this game.

I mean, I'd be upset with my PS4 if I paid $400 for it and Dying Light was the best it was ever going to do. But there are already much better looking games on the console showcasing its performance/cost effectiveness.

No reason to get bent out of shape because developers went for near-parity with Xbox One.

It's a tech thread, people are undoubtedly going to talk about the technical differences between different versions of a game. And it'll trigger some more conversations as this is the first title this generation to go lower than the lowest settings on PC.

And I'm sure that you've got proof to back-up the claim that the devs went for "near-parity", whatever that may mean. Because there's nothing from a performance stand point that backs-up such a statement.

 

[Buburibon]

It's what happens when you interpret "platform vs platform" as "them vs me." They make it personal and defend it as such.

This happens on all sides though, not just PS4 or console.

People become too attached to their console so when it gets put in a bad light, they defend it because its become a part of that person. Brain's built that way, apparently. Goes both ways of course.

That's right, I've seen select users of other platforms act in the very same manner here on GAF and elsewhere online. Gotta love evolutionary psychology I guess.

 

[KiraXD]

i kinda like the fuller look of the trees in the distance rather than the shimmery "detailed" look... iono.

 

[nOoblet16]

While the consoles are indeed mid/mid-high end machines compared to the high end and enthusiast level hardware you can get on PC, the argument that "we are already seeing games run at less than high and hence it'll become worse next year" ignores the fact that even last gen there were games early on that ran at lower settings on consoles (360's Quake 4 was worse than PC in many ways, likewise for Prey and many other games).

The argument that developers won't get anything else out of these consoles due to their straightforward architecture is also not completely true as these consoles are still not exactly PC like for like, and it ignores the fact that software level improvement is a thing too. Devs would often come up with alternatives as well such as post process AA from last gen when so many games were running with absolutely no kind of edge smoothing, or the AO from Farcry 4 which even though isn't nvidia's HBAO+ is an alternate implementation that provides similar results...etc etc. That's just one of the reasons for that, Dying Light also seems to be not using the CPU cores properly from what I've gathered so far, so using it as an example for the limits is kind of disingenuous.

There's also the thing about GPU compute not being standard yet. I know a lot of people would say that it is not a one stop solution (yes it isn't but it is something substantial) and that even implementing it will take performance away from CPU if a dev were ever to use GPU compute. That is theoretically true but practically GPUs have a lot of spare cycles with the current graphic techniques we use and these spare cycles are the cycles that will be used for GPU compute. So they are "effectively free" relative to the way GPU workloads work right now.

 

[medenko]

so can they fix PS4 version a little then?

 

[Realyn]

Some PS4 owners/fans seem to feel seriously affronted when threads such as this one encourage these types of comparisons/discussions.

I don't get it either.

Look at the Sunset Overdrive black crush. Dozens of people weren't able to notice it either. After it was pointed out for 8 pages straight people changed their opinion from "I don't see it" to "But it looks better this way". Yeah ... that actually happened lol.

 

[Alebrije]

Whats the deal to compare PC vs PS4? the firsth one will always have better performance.

 

[Air Zombie Meat]

Whats the deal to compare PC vs PS4? the firsth one will always have better performance.

Guess we should stop comparing xbone and ps4 games too then.

 

[Compsiox]

There is nothing being "taken away" from PS4 players though. This is just what the console is capable of, for this game in particular, without having major performance issues.

Its the same thing that happen to PC players that doesn't have a rig with enough power to run the game at max. Was something taken away from them too? I don't think so.

I already said that something that wasn't given can't be taken away so no. Nothing was taken away from the PS4 version.

My words stand true though.
If you were to try the Oculus Rift DK1 without knowing DK2/Crescent Bay existed you would enjoy it and think it's the best of it's time when in reality it isn't. But you wouldn't realize it because you haven't experienced the new one(s) and all of their upgrades.

 

[derExperte]

so can they fix PS4 version a little then?

I read something about a coming fix for the non-existent AF.

 

[delta25]

Some PS4 owners/fans seem to feel seriously affronted when threads such as this one encourage these types of comparisons/discussions.

I don't get it either.

Because generally threads of this nature always turn into a dick swinging contest between PC gamers, especially in this case when there is a clear difference between the versions being compared and discussed. Nothing wrong with the comparison in question, the problem lies in PC gamers and their amazing ability at looking for any possible way to look down on yet another aspect of console gaming.

 

[Kinthalis]

While the consoles are indeed mid/mid-high end machines compared to the high end and enthusiast level hardware you can get on PC, the argument that "we are already seeing games run at less than high and hence it'll become worse next year" ignores the fact that even last gen there were games early on that ran at lower settings on consoles (360's Quake 4 was worse than PC in many ways, likewise for Prey and many other games).

The argument that developers won't get anything else out of these consoles due to their straightforward architecture is also not completely true as these consoles are still not exactly PC like for like, and it ignores the fact that software level improvement is a thing too. Devs would often come up with alternatives as well such as post process AA from last gen when so many games were running with absolutely no kind of edge smoothing, or the AO from Farcry 4 which even though isn't nvidia's HBAO+ is an alternate implementation that provides similar results...etc etc. That's just one of the reasons for that, Dying Light also seems to be not using the CPU cores properly from what I've gathered so far, so using it as an example for the limits is kind of disingenuous.

There's also the thing about GPU compute not being standard yet. I know a lot of people would say that it is not a one stop solution (yes it isn't but it is something substantial) and that even implementing it will take performance away from CPU if a dev were ever to use GPU compute. That is theoretically true but practically GPUs have a lot of spare cycles with the current graphic techniques we use and these spare cycles are the cycles that will be used for GPU compute. So they are "effectively free" relative to the way GPU workloads work right now.

I'd be tempted to agree with you (well, I do agree wiht some points) if it WERE just this game.

But it's not. It's the same story in most multiplat games so far. Many have even weaker GPU's on PC (750ti) besting the PS4.

Something's up.

 

[thelastword]

What world do you live in? lol

The world where I have a PC and PS4, may I pass please? Did you see the topic title or is this a hurr durr ps4 lod setting lower than low rofl topic?

So....We can't say the PC version is better if we're running it maxed out at 60fps ?

Now here's somebody worth responding to, well, maybe I'm saying that, it's only becasue it's one of the advantages that a pc-man is most proud of or would retort ad-nauseum in any comparison topic, but of course that's par for the course based on the superior hardware in higher end gaming pc's.

What about 30fps locked + much better LOD and AO/DOF (and possibly shadows and foliage) ?

Much better LOD if you have the hardware, I'm talking 100% where you can see a clear difference. Do you really believe that the PS4 GPU/CPU combo can't do better lod than that of the xbone, as it stands it seems that the PS4 version is hitting much higher frames regularly since it's always going beyond it's 30fps cap. That only means that there's some headroom there.

Because I can absolutely do that on my system (4770k / 970) and the maxed LOD is "playable" but it fluctuates very wildly. Can drop from 60 to 45 just by looking around when there is a lot of geometry on screen. The game definitely needs a performance boost on PC but as it stands a PS4 beating experience can he had with ease. That's something thelastsword may have forgotten (or chosen to).

Seems like a lot of persons with a similar gpu to the PS4 or even above to it are struggling to hit 1080 30fps, check the link with 750ti, most persons are barely hovering over 20 fps. Lets also not forget that your CPU is $329 and your Gpu is $350. So it's par for the course, you get higher frames for a higher cost. I've never argued that.

I appreciate the screens you posted, can you tell me the resolution you're running it, I assume it's 1080p, No offense, but this is one ugly game, which is why it's strange that pc guys are using it to push the low detail envelope. It's similar to xbone fans talking up the AF on strider. Oh well, In any case take a look at some screens from the console screenshot thread.

Are these so far apart in beauty from the screens you posted on your wayyyyyy superior cpu/gpu combo?

CPU optimization is definitely quite poor in the PC version of Dying Light. And that guy is using an AMD CPU, which is a fairly poor CPU in the first place. Not surprised at his results. Hopefully Techland can do something about it as there's clear room for improvement.

I'm not sure what your point is, though. You want PC gamers to stop talking about what PC games can do better than the consoles or something? I don't get it.

Poor cpu against what, the weak jaguar laptop cpu's? Well I'll be damned, are you suggesting the jaguar cpu in the PS4 is superior to his AMD cpu? My word.

 

[Realyn]

Because generally threads of this nature always turn into a dick swinging contest between PC gamers, especially in this case when there is a clear difference between the versions being compared and discussed. Nothing wrong with the comparison in question, the problem lies in PC gamers and their amazing ability at looking for any possible way to look down on yet another aspect of console gaming.

Read the first pages and count the people swinging dicks and the people saying there's no difference.

 

[Kinthalis]

Because generally threads of this nature always turn into a dick swinging contest between PC gamers, especially in this case when there is a clear difference between the versions being compared and discussed. Nothing wrong with the comparison in question, the problem lies in PC gamers and their amazing ability at looking for any possible way to look down on yet another aspect of console gaming.

No one is forcing anyone to engage in these technical threads though, people are free to peruse other threads that interest them - and more to the point: discussing the technical differences between platforms is what we're doing here.

"Dick waving PC gamers" is what some people's persecution complex and fanboyism has settled on as their juvenile interpretation of what we're doing, but that's not reality.

 

[Compsiox]

Because generally threads of this nature always turn into a dick swinging contest between PC gamers, especially in this case when there is a clear difference between the versions being compared and discussed. Nothing wrong with the comparison in question, the problem lies in PC gamers and their amazing ability at looking for any possible way to look down on yet another aspect of console gaming.

Well in most cases we pay a lot more money than what people pay for consoles so we look for the exclusive features huge to small that justify our $1-2k gaming machines. I own all consoles for exclusives games and nothing else. Almost every multiplatform game is better on PC and PC has what consoles can't: functional MMOs so I use that as my justification.

 

[TrouzzzerSnake]

The interesting (and unexpected) part is where the console setting slots in compared to the range of settings available on the PC. That's (as far as I know) currently unique to this game, which is why it's being discussed.

I personally feel both your statement reasoning and my own are one and the same, certainly the first part.

I understand PS4 will never come even slightly close to what a suped-up PC can do. I just want to preface with that.

What I was trying to communicate is that the PS4 can certainly do better than its current LOD. That's evidenced by other titles on the platform, and the fact that those other titles are doing much more than Dying Light, and doing it better.

I also personally wonder... what if the developers had a neat little bar chart that went from 0 to 100, and what if they sat back and looked at this chart, would they give put the bar at 100? would they say 'That's it! That's the best this platform (PS4) can do! We're giving the best possible product to our customers'?

I look at other titles and I don't think that bar is all that close to 100, for whatever reason(s) that may be.

 

[Compsiox]

Poor cpu against what, the weak jaguar laptop cpu's? Well I'll be damned, are you suggesting the jaguar cpu in the PS4 is superior to his AMD cpu? My word.

It's a proven fact that Intel+Nivida are much better than AMD anything. Just saying.

 

[Kinthalis]

I personally feel both your statement reasoning and my own are one and the same, certainly the first part.

I understand PS4 will never come even slightly close to what a suped-up PC can do. I just want to preface with that.

What I was trying to communicate is that the PS4 can certainly do better than its current LOD. That's evidenced by other titles on the platform, and the fact that those other titles are doing much more than Dying Light, and doing it better.

I also personally wonder... what if the developers had a neat little bar chart that went from 0 to 100, and what if they sat back and looked at this chart, would they give put the bar at 100? would they say 'That's it! That's the best this platform (PS4) can do! We're giving the best possible product to our customers'?

I look at other titles and I don't think that bar is all that close to 100, for whatever reason(s) that may be.

What other titles on PS4 is doing an open world with tons of zombies/NPC's with better LOD levels? Curious.

 

[Dictator93]

Poor cpu against what, the weak jaguar laptop cpu's? Well I'll be damned, are you suggesting the jaguar cpu in the PS4 is superior to his AMD cpu? My word.

Notice the view distance. It is significantly higher than the PS4s in that video yu linked. Hence why his low end AMD cpu is struggling.

You linked a video of someone who is obviously cpu limited given everything that is obvious about hardware and that we know about this game, yet you mention his GPU. It shows how truly little you know what you are talking about.

 

[Totobeni]

PS4 version is weird, not even matching the PC medium, maybe Techland should've hired another studio doing the console ports

also the AF on PS4 is sure an issues for some time now and still going, the Saint Row port got that going as well.

Whats the deal to compare PC vs PS4? the firsth one will always have better performance.

PS4 usually get the better console version so it's fair to compare that to the PC one. last gen Xbox 360 usually get the superior versions of games and we kept getting these comparisons to inform people. also these thread providing useful information about porting newer techs used in new games.

 

[Compsiox]

PS4 usually get the better console version so it's fair to compare that to the PC one. last gen Xbox 360 usually get the superior versions of games and we kept getting these comparisons to inform people. also these thread providing useful information about porting newer techs used in new games.

That is not what he is saying. Hes saying there is not really a point in comparing the two because PC will always come out on top cause that's just how it works.

 

[Foxyone]

Whats the deal to compare PC vs PS4? the firsth one will always have better performance.

It's also of interest what kind of PC hardware is necessary to match the console version.

 

[belvedere]

This is just sad for the PS4

You mean the engine. Enjoying the hell out of the game, but it looks like shit on both platforms. To use this game as a graphical showpiece for any platform is silly.

 

[Air Zombie Meat]

That is not what he is saying. Hes saying there is not really a point in comparing the two because PC will always come out on top cause that's just how it works.

Thats stupid though. People might have a ps4 and a pc and want to decide which version to get. Threads like this help give an impression of what the game will run like on their pc (thanks to benchmarks and the like) compared to the ps4 version. If the comparison upsets you just ignore the thread.

 

[Dictator93]

You mean the engine. Enjoying the hell out of the game, but it looks like shit on both platforms. To use this game as a graphical showpiece for any platform is silly.

Game has PBR, high LOD distance (on PC), per object motionblur, bokeh, etc... pretty much all standard next gen stuff and done well.

Only problem is the CA.

 

[icecold1983]

is ps4 version confirmed 1080p? watched some gamersyde vids of both versions and ps4 version seems more blurry but with a better pp aa

 

[Compsiox]

Thats stupid though. People might have a ps4 and a pc and want to decide which version to get. Threads like this help give an impression of what the game will run like on their pc (thanks to benchmarks and the like) compared to the ps4 version. If the comparison upsets you just ignore the thread.

If people have the money to build a PC and want to they probably will. If they don't they will go to console automatically so I don't see a problem.

 

[delta25]

No one is forcing you to engage in these technical threads though - and more to the point: discussing the technical differences between platforms is what we're doing here.

.

This isn't a discussion on the comparisons at hand, this has turned into a discussion on console gaming and its bleak future with a continuing disparity between multiplatform titles as the generation progress. This happens anytime a thread like this in which console gaming is shown in a rather sub-par light, in this case being the perspective on the differences between platforms, its a fuse that gives PC gamers the ability to turn the discussion into a way in which it works in their favor and support their views on console gaming as a whole.

 

[TrouzzzerSnake]

What other titles on PS4 is doing an open world with tons of zombies/NPC's with better LOD levels? Curious.

Games, besides sequels, are obviously designed to be different to stand out, so I don't have a perfect twin to offer up for your request.

I would vote Second Son, however. Great draw distance, lots of enemies/cars/pedestrians all on screen and all the way down the streets, but also heavy particle effects, elevated framerate, and tons of other visual bells and whistles. I think the raw compute-power seen in that game, in comparison to Dying Light on the same platform, shows that Dying Light isn't where it could be.


Edit: not saying it's bad - just that aspects like LOD probably have the resources available to be improved upon, though again, just clarifying, not even close to 100% LOD on PC

 

[Dictator93]

is ps4 version confirmed 1080p? watched some gamersyde vids of both versions and ps4 version seems more blurry but with a better pp aa

you mean in comparison the xb1 version?

 

[Kezen]

Now here's somebody worth responding to, well, maybe I'm saying that, it's only becasue it's one of the advantages that a pc-man is most proud of or would retort ad-nauseum in any comparison topic, but of course that's par for the course based on the superior hardware in higher end gaming pc's.

I'm not a "60fps or nothing" kind of guy and I do not believe the only way to have a "better" experience than consoles is to run at 60fps. In my case I believe I can say I would not trade my PC version for I billion PS4 versions.
It's far, far from perfect but that's the best option I have.

I'll take it.

Much better LOD if you have the hardware, I'm talking 100% where you can see a clear difference. Do you really believe that the PS4 GPU/CPU combo can't do better lod than that of the xbone, as it stands it seems that the PS4 version is hitting much higher frames regularly since it's always going beyond it's 30fps cap. That only means that there's some headroom there.

Well LOD is both CPU and GPU heavy so there must be a way for the PS4 to pull noticeably ahead but how much we cannot be adamant. As it stands both consoles have more or less the same LOD based on footage and shots I've seen and this is a far cry from PC's 50% draw distance let alone the max value which causes erratic performance. It's "playable" I guess but I chose to set the slider to 50. It's a good compromise and gives me much better performance with other settings cranked to max.

Seems like a lot of persons with a similar gpu to the PS4 or even above to it are struggling to hit 1080 30fps, check the link with 750ti, most persons are barely hovering over 20 fps. Lets also not forget that your CPU is $329 and your Gpu is $350. So it's par for the course, you get higher frames for a higher cost. I've never argued that.

2gb cards are a spent force in this game. It was bound to happen, optimized or not. The writing was on the wall ever since the console specs were made official. Sure, they could certainly at least try but frankly why would they ? The return is not worth the optimization ressources thrown at it. I will not hold it against Techland, what is more concerning is the very bad scaling. This is assuredly the culprit for the disappointing performance. However, I would not go as far as to say this is the kind of scaling they must have on consoles considering it's easier with APIs tailored around their hardware.

I appreciate the screens you posted, can you tell me the resolution you're running it, I assume it's 1080p, No offense, but this is one ugly game, which is why it's strange that pc guys are using it to push the low detail envelope. It's similar to xbone fans talking up the AF on strider. Oh well, In any case take a look at some screens from the console screenshot thread.

With a single 970 1080p is the best course of action. Screenshots don't do it justice not to mention I've never been particularly skilled in the art of screenshotting. The game has PBR at least on some materials, nice lighting and good texturework. HBAO+ is also a very nice touch on PC. Overall I would say this is a beautiful package on PC, unfortunately they have not been very subtle with the chromashift and the film grain, they wanted to give a filmic tone but to a degree it undermines the artwork.

Are these so far apart in beauty from the screens you posted on your wayyyyyy superior cpu/gpu combo?

The return on investment is not the best one could hope for but there is a definite improvement in terms of visuals. The problem is that it comes at an egregious cost even taking into account high-level APIs.
Hardware permitting the PC version sports much better AO , DOF and LOD. That's enough for me considering I do not feel entitled to anything special just because I play on PC. As I've stated countless times already I'm 100% fine with console parity so as long as performances reflects that and that's not really the case for Dying Light. It does not come as any surprise that they already are working on a CPU patch.

 

[icecold1983]

you mean in comparison the xb1 version?

no, pc.

 

[Compsiox]

This isn't a discussion on the comparisons at hand, this has turned into a discussion on console gaming and its bleak future with a continuing disparity between multiplatform titles as the generation progress. This happens anytime a thread like this in which console gaming is shown in a rather sub-par light, in this case being the perspective on the differences between platforms, its a fuse that gives PC gamers the ability to turn the discussion into a way in which it works in their favor and support their views on console gaming as a whole.

Here's what i had to say as a open minded PC gamer:

Well in most cases we pay a lot more money than what people pay for consoles so we look for the exclusive features huge to small that justify our $1-2k gaming machines. I own all consoles for exclusives games and nothing else. Almost every multiplatform game is better on PC and PC has what consoles can't: functional MMOs so I use that as my justification.

 

[Air Zombie Meat]

If people have the money to build a PC and want to they probably will. If they don't they will go to console automatically so I don't see a problem.

It isn't that black and white. For example I have a relatively old pc and a ps4 so the decision of which version to get isn't clearcut. Sometimes I'm better going pc, sometimes ps4. Threads like this help me decide.