-MD-
Member
30? It's pretty much a stable 60fps on my 970/3570k w/ god rays on low, shadow distance on medium & ultra everything else. Only in certain spots do I see a 3-5fps drop.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Face-Off: Fallout 4 - Digital Foundry
- Thread starter Kralamoonard
- Start date
30? It's pretty much a stable 60fps on my 970/3570k w/ god rays on low, shadow distance on medium & ultra everything else. Only in certain spots do I see a 3-5fps drop.
WiseguyMVP
Member
I think the game has fine graphics and a serviceable frame rate. (Xbox One)
So many different perspectives here on what makes a game enjoyable and playable. You can't please everyone.
Having said that, there's certainly room for improvement with any game and I'm hopeful the modding community will help to make the game even better.
So many different perspectives here on what makes a game enjoyable and playable. You can't please everyone.
Having said that, there's certainly room for improvement with any game and I'm hopeful the modding community will help to make the game even better.
Well, making last-gen visuals run at 30fps on a 1.84TF GPU would be an uncontroversial start.
WickedLaharl
Member
It's hilariously absurd that people STILL make the comparison.
Come on, the visuals are well beyond last gen capabilities.
WiseguyMVP
Member
That may be true. Many gamers that frequent these forums have much more tech based knowledge on graphical nuances and such than do I. If you're playing the game from that perspective, I can see how this game may disappoint.
It may be the old Gamebryo engine, lack of dev time, unoptimized code or underpowered hardware?
After all is said and done, is it playable and enjoyable for some? Sure it is
Is it the best game it could have been in multiple ways?(Graphics, story, etc...) That's up for debate.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
I would definitely not say, well beyond.
Destiny got chastised at first, and it is cleaner overall IMO, and better running by far. And I can't care less how many "spoons tho", or how big (since FO4 loads in cubes and has loading points as well. That is not the basis of the topic being discussed.
There is nothing the game does that should be this taxing with what is being rendered. It is just not very well optimized tech. At least by Bethesda.
The exteriors, unquestionably. The interiors, not so much.
neogaffer1
Banned
far cry 4 on last gen systems looks almost as good as fallout 4 at times, outside of the fact that they run at a lower res
edit: even skyrim 360 gets pretty close
Self_Destructive
Member
Because right now they have very focused stories they want to tell, and they consistently push the medium forward.
Just look at Jak and Daxter.. There's no doubt in my mind that Naughty Dog could do a huge open world game that makes Fallout look like trash.
But we don't have to agree on this
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
Because right now they have very focused stories they want to tell, and they consistently push the medium forward.
Just look at Jak and Daxter.. There's no doubt in my mind that Naughty Dog could do a huge open world game that makes Fallout look like trash.
But we don't have to agree on this
Considering how they opened up pathing in TLoU on the PS3, and have expanded on it even more so in UC4, it looks to be they are setting up their tech for an open world experience.
Not even close.
These huge drops in small indoor areas are baffling. I get the shadow LoDs, even though they're quite poor, but this makes no sense whatsoever.
No. Some areas are without hyperbole on a last-gen level. The footage I just posted certainly is. The geometry in the game is last-gen throughout. As are animations, muzzle/fire effects, and most textures. In fact, I cannot think of another game where Digital Foundry felt justified to write a dedicated article arguing what parts of the game are "next-gen" or not. There are some "next-gen" effects put on top of that, but the game looks more last-gen than next-gen. It's easily the ugliest open world game of this generation.
Which would be fine. But not if they cannot make these visuals run at a stable frame rate, not even in small rooms.
The entire are (Corvega Assembly Plan) is a massive shit show frame-rate-wise, inside and outside of buildings. For no apparent reason. It's one of the ugliest areas I've encountered so far.
neogaffer1
Banned
if you made the skyrim pic as colorful as fallout 4 and had it at 1080p the only major differences would be the player model and maybe the tree leaves
and the far cry 4 stuff was pulled from a youtube video, but even then the rock geometry, the water, the dirt at the water's edge look very similar to fallout 4's.
One of my biggest gripes with the game is loading screens and the amount of them. At first we all toyed with the idea that there wouldn't be loading screens but then we realized that the big areas would have loading screens. Turns out there are almost as many loading screens as in fallout 3. I mean it's not just big city areas etc. that need loading. Even just really small apartments need loading screens. I really wanted to have just a small dosage of these. Would have been cool to have a lot more actual windows.
I am really considering to shelve this game for the time being. I really have no issue with the "ugliness" of the game, but playing a game that is at its core a first-person shooter at sustained 20-25 fps during fights is just no fun at all. I hope they patch it thoroughly. What they delivered is tech-wise unacceptable.
Insane Metal
Member
That's horrible. It's probably ~15fps there. In an enclosed space. With no enemies. This game is a mess.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
Oh trust me... people see it.
Primethius
Banned
Worst part of the visuals has gotta be the face models. I played through the opening several times (opening vault door glitches to not open) at 1600p and some of the models.... Yikes!
Indoors look dated and have bizarrely bad performance. But most of the outdoors looks rather nice. It's not Witcher 3 level, but comparable to something like Dying Light.
They can be pretty simple looking, but also tend to be much bigger and with more enemies than what either Skyrim or Fallout 3 had.
The day-of-time dependent lighting can make sceneries look nice, but everything I listed is true there too. The geometry is so simple that it could be done on PS360. In fact, in betrays the fact that game originally started as a cross-gen game.
Which is all fine and good, but it makes it completely incomprehensible how the game cannot maintain a stable frame rate throughout, especially when among the apparent causes for frame rate drops are things like effects during fights, fires, etc., which all really look like last-gen effects. There is nothing special or new about them.
Yeah, they are completely broken and useless. I turned them off after half an hour or so.
Angelus Errare
Banned
No, just no.
I'd love to see a shot of 360 Skyrim that looks like this
https://www.flickr.com/photos/83889674@N02/22937212882/in/photostream/lightbox/
Every game from Bethesda has the same issues but they all keep selling millions so I doubt they'll ever change. I can't understand how they keep producing RPG games with garbage stories/voice acting, and how you're supposed to be immersed when the animations are atrocious, faces don't emote at all and the character models are some of the worst in the business. Fallout games are even worse for me because I don't think the art style is good enough to cover up the shortcomings of the engine. For a barren wasteland it doesn't look anywhere near gritty, or detailed enough. Stock Skyrim for example looked far better to me due to the art style, and I don't remember many people complaining about the graphics there.
The spotty frame rate even on high end PCs just add insult to injury.
The spotty frame rate even on high end PCs just add insult to injury.
I would love to see a shot of PS4/XBO Fallout 4 that looks like this, to be honest.
googleplex
Member
This engine is a mess and frame rates take huge dips for no apparent reason. No one should be trying to use this Fallout 4 as an example as how consoles are "Weak"
CyberPunked
Member
Wow, comparing skyrim on 360. You really don't know what you're talking about
neogaffer1
Banned
you say that as if it's supposed to mean something, and then draw a conclusion out of nowhere as if it's an obvious conclusion.
SmoothBrain
Member
Too bad I don't have a GPU anymore, will wait for the retail price drop of the console version. As much as I like the mods on Bethesda games, the tradeoff seems to be too big for console versions.
The major difference would be the native resolution. Which makes Fallout 4 a current generation game in terms of visuals. There were plenty of games in sub-720p native resolution last generation. In fact I seem to remember a good few games this generation on the Xbox One running in 900p native.
The fact that both the Xbox One and the PS4 SKUs are running at 1080p, albeit at half the framerate of the PC SKU, is nothing to be sniffed at.
neogaffer1
Banned
that's the thing, you can run a last gen game at 1080p or higher on PC, does that immediately not make them a last gen game?
the argument is outside of the rendering resolution, fallout 4 isn't remotely visually impressive and in some areas seem very last gen in nature; the fact that any last gen game can come even close to fallout 4 attests to that.
timetokill
Banned
Well said. The consoles are weak and Fallout 4 has nothing to do with it.
Saucycarpdog
Member
The persecution complex is strong with this one.
Again, it comes down to resolution. Fallout 4 also plays on the PC in 4K. 1080p on current generation consoles and 4K on the PC means that it's a current generation game, not a last generation game. Even if in terms of eye candy it looks the same as Fallout 3 (and the vsynch, lighting and shadows and AA are all superior to Fallout 3 anyway) it's still a current generation title.
For it to be deemed a 'last generation' title the game must be able to run on the 360 or PS3 hardware, and that certainly isn't the case.
neogaffer1
Banned
Saints Row IV runs on current gen consoles at 1080p and can run on PC at 4K--does this mean that it's a current gen game despite originally coming out last gen?
Similarly, BLOPS III has last gen ports--does this mean its a last gen game?
It's how the game looks on the lead platform(s) that defines what gen it really is, and FO4 looks like a last gen game.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
What part of "some" don't you comprehend?
There are very posts in here saying that it is a weak console's GPU or CPU because their rigs get 60fps.
If people use a Bethesda game as a measurement for system prowess, that is disingenuous and quite sad really.
Carry on though.
Because its not a minor thing, 25 hours in and the framerate for a lot of areas is damn near unplayable especially in any combat situations.
2 completely empty areas and they turn into slideshows and this happens all too often throughout the game. People are not asking for much to expect a game that looks like Fallout 4 to run at a consistent framerate and yet people are acting like it is.
Saucycarpdog
Member
Lol. Persecution complex is a fitting phrase for someone who said PC players call console GPUs dog shit GPU compared to PC's. Please show where someone in this thread said that. All I see is people saying PC GPU is more powerful than console GPU, which is a fact. Some posters using F4 as flimsy proof doesn't change that fact.
Here's some advice, stating a fact is not a part of some cooky narrative.
wanderingprostheyltite
Member
Shit performance isn't minor, and as I said earlier a lot of the last gen roots that show readily in FO4 speak to an incredible cheapness on Bethesda's part to update and optimize their engine accordingly. It's disappointing af, especially as one that's normally a huge fan of their games. None of their titles at release looked as dated as FO4 does.
I get the feeling they relegated the FO franchise to red headed stepchild status since Skyrim's success.
I wish I was unaware and ignorant to resolution and performance in games.Because its not a minor thing, 25 hours in and the framerate for a lot of areas is damn near unplayable especially in any combat situations.
2 completely empty areas and they turn into slideshows and this happens all too often throughout the game. People are not asking for much to expect a game that looks like Fallout 4 to run at a consistent framerate and yet people are acting like it is.
Just the other day I saw this dude at my university playing Dota 2 on his laptop at 15-20 fps, and he was completely unaffected.
HomerSimpson-Man
Member
Because its not a minor thing, 25 hours in and the framerate for a lot of areas is damn near unplayable especially in any combat situations.
2 completely empty areas and they turn into slideshows and this happens all too often throughout the game. People are not asking for much to expect a game that looks like Fallout 4 to run at a consistent framerate and yet people are acting like it is.
Man, that performance and visuals with not even enemies on screen.
StrongBlackVine
Banned
Because they don't want to. Horizon Zero Dawn will be a good test for what the PS4 can with open world games although Btatman, Infamous SS, GTAV and TW3(finally) are already good examples.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
I do not disagree. Obviously when I said that, the reason it was in italics, is because there are a few who really swing their prowess around were saying it in so many words. A little hyperbole on my part, but more a paraphrase of satire.
Again, this game's engine specifically is not a reflection of the weaker than PC's GPU's. It is a reflection of their poor optimization.
The Baron Count
Member
Because its not a minor thing, 25 hours in and the framerate for a lot of areas is damn near unplayable especially in any combat situations.
2 completely empty areas and they turn into slideshows and this happens all too often throughout the game. People are not asking for much to expect a game that looks like Fallout 4 to run at a consistent framerate and yet people are acting like it is.
Geez, I really don't get what the heck could be causing drops like that, indoors without a damn thing going on.
That's just weird. There is a big friggin optimization problem with this game.
Because its not a minor thing, 25 hours in and the framerate for a lot of areas is damn near unplayable especially in any combat situations.
2 completely empty areas and they turn into slideshows and this happens all too often throughout the game. People are not asking for much to expect a game that looks like Fallout 4 to run at a consistent framerate and yet people are acting like it is.
I really hope Bethesda is listening to these complaints in particular. Drops like that with nothing going on are clearly some kind of rendering bug. From what I hear, fixing those would make a big difference.
texhnolyze
Banned
Actually, it's not that well optimized for PC either.
Just look at that 3600+ posts in the PC performance thread. Most people are still tinkering their settings for the best performance.