Support NeoGAF

[Feel Like I'm On 42]

I don't understand your point? It's a D&D game based on dice rolls... Why exactly do we need 120fps?

This game is a godsend to the world where we want to convert D&D to digital, because our geeky ass friends are too busy to get together; maybe not so much to the world of high end PC's.

He explained it to you in detail. Just because it's not an action heavy game doesn't mean that 60 fps wouldn't look and feel better, esp on next gen consoles in 2023 at $70.

His other point is one you and many other gamers probably can't understand. There's this almost macho idea among YOUNGER gamers that it's somehow not cool to complain about a game. Especially if the game is really good and well liked. I see this all the time. It's the reason the word "entitlement" gets thrown around. The reason the idea that if you complain about graphics and performance you're not a "true gamer" or that "gameplay over graphics".

I'm also around 40 years old so I've been gaming since the nes games but ironically, the people who defend subpar performance and graphics are actually quite immature, tho of course they don't think they are. Maybe us old guys realize a little better the value of money or we realize how silly it is to vehemently defend the companies that are marketing and realeasing these products. I'm not sure exactly what the reason is but I know gamers often have it backwards. These companies will take advantage if us if we let them and one way they've been doing that is by not delivering on promises!

Whether it's missing features or missing performance targets either way WE are the consumers and we should demand better. We should AT LEAST not defend the devs when it results in a lesser experience. If you really think 30 is just as good as 60 in ANY game I don't know what to tell you. You've literally been trained to accept subpar products if you need to go to the length of defending this.

 

[King Dazzar]

He explained it to you in detail. Just because it's not an action heavy game doesn't mean that 60 fps wouldn't look and feel better, esp on next gen consoles in 2023 at $70.

His other point is one you and many other gamers probably can't understand. There's this almost macho idea among YOUNGER gamers that it's somehow not cool to complain about a game. Especially if the game is really good and well liked. I see this all the time. It's the reason the word "entitlement" gets thrown around. The reason the idea that if you complain about graphics and performance you're not a "true gamer" or that "gameplay over graphics".

I'm also around 40 years old so I've been gaming since the nes games but ironically, the people who defend subpar performance and graphics are actually quite immature, tho of course they don't think they are. Maybe us old guys realize a little better the value of money or we realize how silly it is to vehemently defend the companies that are marketing and realeasing these products. I'm not sure exactly what the reason is but I know gamers often have it backwards. These companies will take advantage if us if we let them and one way they've been doing that is by not delivering on promises!

Whether it's missing features or missing performance targets either way WE are the consumers and we should demand better. We should AT LEAST not defend the devs when it results in a lesser experience. If you really think 30 is just as good as 60 in ANY game I don't know what to tell you. You've literally been trained to accept subpar products if you need to go to the length of defending this.

Well so I've been told. If you want more than 30fps, then you've no right to be expecting that from a console and you need to fuck off and buy a PC. Apparently. Good isnt it.

 

[Feel Like I'm On 42]

Well so I've been told. If you want more than 30fps, then you've no right to be expecting that from a console and you need to fuck off and buy a PC. Apparently. Good isnt it.

We've been getting 60 fps all gen long. They decided to include one. Lower some settings and optimize your game!

 

[devilNprada]

He explained it to you in detail. Just because it's not an action heavy game doesn't mean that 60 fps wouldn't look and feel better, esp on next gen consoles in 2023 at $70.

His other point is one you and many other gamers probably can't understand. There's this almost macho idea among YOUNGER gamers that it's somehow not cool to complain about a game. Especially if the game is really good and well liked. I see this all the time. It's the reason the word "entitlement" gets thrown around. The reason the idea that if you complain about graphics and performance you're not a "true gamer" or that "gameplay over graphics".

I'm also around 40 years old so I've been gaming since the nes games but ironically, the people who defend subpar performance and graphics are actually quite immature, tho of course they don't think they are. Maybe us old guys realize a little better the value of money or we realize how silly it is to vehemently defend the companies that are marketing and realeasing these products. I'm not sure exactly what the reason is but I know gamers often have it backwards. These companies will take advantage if us if we let them and one way they've been doing that is by not delivering on promises!

Whether it's missing features or missing performance targets either way WE are the consumers and we should demand better. We should AT LEAST not defend the devs when it results in a lesser experience. If you really think 30 is just as good as 60 in ANY game I don't know what to tell you. You've literally been trained to accept subpar products if you need to go to the length of defending this.

I don't really want to argue with you old men... all I can tell you I used to play text based D&D conversions to PC before it evolved to stick figures. If you can't play D&D at 30 fps, I don't know what to say.

 

[ShaiKhulud1989]

Double dipped on PS5 due to local co-op with my wife.

It's basically PC ultra, so I'm totally fine with 30 fps. And given the fact that we are parents of a very active 4yo boy, by the time we reach Act 3 Larian will release not only all patches, but a new game.

Also, gamepad controls are masterfully done and adapted to console. Stay awhile and listen, freaking Diablo 4.

 

[King Dazzar]

I don't really want to argue with you old men... all I can tell you I used to play text based D&D conversions to PC before it evolved to stick figures. If you can't play D&D at 30 fps, I don't know what to say.

I used to play static text based adventures on a ZX Spectrum where no frame rate was needed. But that doesn't mean I don't want a smooth 60fps experience with an RPG even when its turn based. We're still moving and panning a camera. Its great that you're happy with 30fps. Some of us enjoy 60fps a lot more and find 30fps jarring. Its fine for us to enjoy and value different presentations. To each their own.

 

[devilNprada]

I used to play static text based adventures on a ZX Spectrum where no frame rate was needed. But that doesn't mean I don't want a smooth 60fps experience with an RPG even when its turn based. We're still moving and panning a camera. Its great that you're happy with 30fps. Some of us enjoy 60fps a lot more and find 30fps jarring. Its fine for us to enjoy and value different presentations. To each their own.

To each his own correct, but I don't remember even asking you. If you don't like it don't play it what else do you want me to say.

 

[Feel Like I'm On 42]

I used to play static text based adventures on a ZX Spectrum where no frame rate was needed. But that doesn't mean I don't want a smooth 60fps experience with an RPG even when its turn based. We're still moving and panning a camera. Its great that you're happy with 30fps. Some of us enjoy 60fps a lot more and find 30fps jarring. Its fine for us to enjoy and value different presentations. To each their own.

Esp because I'm on an OLED so like you said it doesn't matter the game, it's the panning of the camera that makes 30 feel bad

 

[yamaci17]

I mean it is not even 30 fps. it literally avgs. <25 fps in that location. stop this bullshit.

 

[Feel Like I'm On 42]

Tend to agree. particularly as so many developers heralded the shift to SSD as such a huge game changer. Be interested to know where all the extra horsepower is going. FFXVI, for example, is a good-looking game, but it's not 720p/60 with dips pretty. Ditto for Remnant II and Immortals of Aveum - good-looking games with a few next-gen flourishes but nothing that really looks leagues beyond what a 1.4TF PS4 with a mechanical HDD and a netbook CPU could manage.

TLOU2 runs at a stable1080/30 on base PS4; the PS5 can run it at 1440/60 without breaking a sweat, but TLOU Part I, which is natively coded for PS5, looks much the same and runs at the same numbers, despite the scope of the game being much more limited than TLOU2 (it was originally designed for the PS3, after all). With those two factors taken into account (and the massive streaming bump on PS5), TLOU P1 should have either looked or performed leagues better than a PS4 game running BC, but it really doesn't.

Also, despite TLOU P2's campaign running twice the length of TLOU P1's, it manages to have nearly identical file sizes, despite the Kraken compression and the fact that SSDs should make file sizes more manageable by eliminating duplication.

Thank You! Last of Us Remake really pissed me off for Sony's primiere studio to have full access to PS5 and its not more graphically impressive than LoU2?! Seriously would love for someone to explain stuff like this and why games have seemingly underperformed all gen on these consoles. My theory is it's because Sony and MS have become multiplat with PC and we're basically getting screwed over on console because of that. We're not getting that extra benefit consoles used to get from optimization and the SSD/io system, which was designed to help give ps5 that boost, is no longer a priority for development because games are being made for ps5 and PC.

It's bullshit if you ask me that Sony laid out the importance of all those specializations that make up the ps5's i/o and hasn't redesigned their engines to capitalize on this. Look at Spiderman 2 ...it's another LoU p2 situation!

 

[Destruction-1002]

Thank You! Last of Us Remake really pissed me off for Sony's primiere studio to have full access to PS5 and its not more graphically impressive than LoU2?! Seriously would love for someone to explain stuff like this and why games have seemingly underperformed all gen on these consoles. My theory is it's because Sony and MS have become multiplat with PC and we're basically getting screwed over on console because of that. We're not getting that extra benefit consoles used to get from optimization and the SSD/io system, which was designed to help give ps5 that boost, is no longer a priority for development because games are being made for ps5 and PC.

It's bullshit if you ask me that Sony laid out the importance of all those specializations that make up the ps5's i/o and hasn't redesigned their engines to capitalize on this. Look at Spiderman 2 ...it's another LoU p2 situation!

You know about the law of diminishing returns?

That the main reason why generational leaps have been smaller over time

Doom 1 and Half Life are just 5 years apart, think about that

 

[Feel Like I'm On 42]

Sorry if I came across like an asshole, not my intention. The conversation around FPS ever since the new consoles came out has been...tiring lol. I know you weren't trying to make the argument AGAINST higher frames, I just personally do fit the mold of "I can't really play games anymore @ 30fps". Call it being spoiled, petty, etc, I have just become so accustomed to no less than 90+ that 30fps feels terrible. My wife was super happy about the new FF game and she probably leans more towards your way of thinking about "fuck it if the game is fun I can deal with some motion blur and slideshow action". She played it for a little bit after just recently playing a lot of CP2077 on PC and she was like "yea, I can't really do this for long periods anymore". Also disagree or not but Destiny 2 @ 60fps feels shitty after you've played it @ 120fps, people who say there isn't a difference are straight up lying and delusional.

Sure people can deal with lower FPS, again I have owned every console up to the most recent ones, I played competitive shooters at 30fps and looking back I have no clue how I did it cause if I tried to do that now it would feel totally foreign to me. I don't even use my PS5 much nowadays, but I love tech and I'd like to see the consoles get beefed up where they can start to product more consistent results. But honestly that is only really possible if they substantially raise the cost which kinda defeats the purpose of a cheaper all in one solution console.

Don't apologize to him. He continued to throw little insults and every aspect of his posts are the complete opposite attitude that gamers should have. He's trting to gaslight us into thinking we our standards are rediculous despite them being nothing of the sort, esp when talking about a $70 game on next gen consoles. His attitude is the reason why progress in these areas is so slow in the console space. It's actually an anti gamer mentality. If this game was pushing serious boundaries tech wise than maybe he'd have a point. Instead he's telling devs it's ok to release a game unoptimized, not taking advantage of the SSD while charging a premium because him and his fellow fanboys are telling them we don't need good performance. Fuck that. That's the definition of soft.

 

[Feel Like I'm On 42]

You know about the law of diminishing returns?

That the main reason why generational leaps have been smaller over time

Doom 1 and Half Life are just 5 years apart, think about that

That doesn't explain at all why, since LoU1 is not improved graphically over lou2 on ps5, how a game made natively on PS5 isn't easily improved over one made for ps4 then ported to ps5. We're talking about a console 3x more powerful than a ps4 pro with am SSD and much faster CPU. You're right about diminishing returns but there should still be noticeable improvements.

 

[Destruction-1002]

That doesn't explain at all why, since LoU1 is not improved graphically over lou2 on ps5, how a game made natively on PS5 isn't easily improved over one made for ps4 then ported to ps5. We're talking about a console 3x more powerful than a ps4 pro with am SSD and much faster CPU. You're right about diminishing returns but there should still be noticeable improvements.

Only just 3x time more power in 7 years?
If the PS5 was 25x more powerful than PS4, it would be another story

 

[solidus12]

Only just 3x time more power in 7 years?
If the PS5 was 25x more powerful than PS4, it would be another story

3x more powerful in 4 years compared to the Pro; PS5 is much more powerful than standard PS4.

 

[Destruction-1002]

Tend to agree. particularly as so many developers heralded the shift to SSD as such a huge game changer. Be interested to know where all the extra horsepower is going. FFXVI, for example, is a good-looking game, but it's not 720p/60 with dips pretty. Ditto for Remnant II and Immortals of Aveum - good-looking games with a few next-gen flourishes but nothing that really looks leagues beyond what a 1.4TF PS4 with a mechanical HDD and a netbook CPU could manage.

TLOU2 runs at a stable1080/30 on base PS4; the PS5 can run it at 1440/60 without breaking a sweat, but TLOU Part I, which is natively coded for PS5, looks much the same and runs at the same numbers, despite the scope of the game being much more limited than TLOU2 (it was originally designed for the PS3, after all). With those two factors taken into account (and the massive streaming bump on PS5), TLOU P1 should have either looked or performed leagues better than a PS4 game running BC, but it really doesn't.

Also, despite TLOU P2's campaign running twice the length of TLOU P1's, it manages to have nearly identical file sizes, despite the Kraken compression and the fact that SSDs should make file sizes more manageable by eliminating duplication.

The Xbox 360 didn't had HDD by default and most games were designed to stream from the DVD drive

The 7th gen to 8th gen went from DVD(+HDD as backup) to full HDD

 

[King Dazzar]

To each his own correct, but I don't remember even asking you. If you don't like it don't play it what else do you want me to say.

Just sharing my thoughts and discussing. Wasn't trying to trigger you.

 

[King Dazzar]

Esp because I'm on an OLED so like you said it doesn't matter the game, it's the panning of the camera that makes 30 feel bad

Yeah even playing things like Civ VI, feel much better to me in 60fps. The constant moving of the map etc feels a lot nicer.

They know from the PC and now the console, that ACT III at the least needs improving. So lets hope they can do something with it. Its good to read that large chunks of the game run OK though at 60.

 

[RoadHazard]

Only just 3x time more power in 7 years?
If the PS5 was 25x more powerful than PS4, it would be another story

About 6x more powerful than the original PS4 in terms of GPU FLOPS, but that's not including the more "efficient" FLOPS of RDNA2, so in practice it's more than that. Plus the much more powerful CPU, more/faster memory, SDD + I/O complex, etc.

So it's a good upgrade, but yeah, those massive leaps we used to get every 5-6 years are not possible anymore.

 

[devilNprada]

Just sharing my thoughts and discussing. Wasn't trying to trigger you

Trigger me? You guys are the writing the essays.
All good

Edit: We seem to enjoy the same type of games brother.. But I have to argue portability is the best thing ever happened to CIV games not fps!

 

[King Dazzar]

Trigger me? You guys are the writing the essays.
All good

Edit: We seem to enjoy the same type of games brother.. But I have to argue portability is the best thing ever happened to CIV games not fps!

Cool. When I think back to original Civ and playing it on an Amiga. The end game AI turn used to take quarter of an hour or longer. For me the biggest advancement I think is whenever we got to the stage where the end game AI turns no longer have you going to something else with your time! It was that bad, you'd go and cook dinner or something. Portable Civ sounds good though. I'm spoilt with gaming on an 85" TV these days, so not my thing. But yeah sounds good.

Looking forward to BG3 - I'm going to wait for some patches first though.

 

[Luipadre]

I see 3 issues right now with the ps5 version. Long load times, texture loading issues in cutscenes and framerate issues with tearing. Hopefully they can fix these. They need to vsync the performance mode too and fix the delayed texture loading

 

[dDoc]

Nmd

 

[dDoc]

play on easy mode AND use cheat engine.

Pussy

 

[twilo99]

Why does VRR have a lower limit? Technically if that wasn't the case the low frames will be a non-issue

 

[Lagspike_exe]

Why does VRR have a lower limit? Technically if that wasn't the case the low frames will be a non-issue

PS5 has a poor VRR implementation with a threshold of 48 FPS. If FPS falls below that, judder starts appearing.

 

[twilo99]

PS5 has a poor VRR implementation with a threshold of 48 FPS. If FPS falls below that, judder starts appearing.

I thought that’s a limitation with the standard itself? Is it different on Xbox / PC? I haven’t really looked into it.

If it’s a software thing Sony can potentially improve it with a patch.

 

[Lagspike_exe]

I thought that’s a limitation with the standard itself? Is it different on Xbox / PC? I haven’t really looked into it.

If it’s a software thing Sony can potentially improve it with a patch.

Yeah other platforms can go lower, including Low Framerate Compensation which works at less than 30 FPS. It seems to be an issue with HDMI implementation on the PS5, so the chances they can patch it are slim. I wouldn't be surprised if the Slim revamp fixes this.

 

[King Dazzar]

So my understanding is that Sony can still go lower than 48fps, by using LFC to double frames outside of the 48 to 120fps VRR scope, but it needs to specifically programmed in by the developer. iirc Ratchet and Clank Rift Apart and also Spiderman Miles Morales made use of LFC by doing just that.

 

[Zathalus]

I doubt any optimisation the developers can do will allow this game to reach a stable 60. Considering its drops to the low 20s I doubt a stable 40FPS mode is possible. I hope they do manage to get to a stable 30 though.

 

[Lagspike_exe]

Yeah other platforms can go lower, including Low Framerate Compensation which works at less than 30 FPS. It seems to be an issue with HDMI implementation on the PS5, so the chances they can patch it are slim. I wouldn't be surprised if the Slim revamp fixes this.

That's not really what you consider hardware VRR. What you are describing is essentially a software algorithm to solve the issue.

 

[King Dazzar]

I doubt any optimisation the developers can do will allow this game to reach a stable 60. Considering its drops to the low 20s I doubt a stable 40FPS mode is possible. I hope they do manage to get to a stable 30 though.

Well on twitter they're saying they hope to. But I agree with your take on it. Though any improvements is going to be better than none for else where in the game I guess.

 

[RoadHazard]

PS5 has a poor VRR implementation with a threshold of 48 FPS. If FPS falls below that, judder starts appearing.

That's just the HDMI VRR standard. Why it is like that I don't know.

 

[twilo99]

That's just the HDMI VRR standard. Why it is like that I don't know.

HDMI?

I just checked and apparently the xss VRR covers 30-120 but I don’t think even that would be enough.. we need something that goes down to 10hz lol

 

[Lagspike_exe]

HDMI?

I just checked and apparently the xss VRR covers 30-120 but I don’t think even that would be enough.. we need something that goes down to 10hz lol

What's even the point of doing VRR at 10 FPS? Game is unplayable at 10 FPS no matter what you do.

 

[RoadHazard]

HDMI?

I just checked and apparently the xss VRR covers 30-120 but I don’t think even that would be enough.. we need something that goes down to 10hz lol

The HDMI VRR spec says 48-120hz should be covered, so Sony simply follows that standard.

Pretty sure XSS/X VRR is 40-120. So it covers a little more than PS5.

 

[BlitzerRadic]

Esp because I'm on an OLED so like you said it doesn't matter the game, it's the panning of the camera that makes 30 feel bad

Thats because OLED is a bad choice for a gaming TV.

 

[yamaci17]

The HDMI VRR spec says 48-120hz should be covered, so Sony simply follows that standard.

Pretty sure XSS/X VRR is 40-120. So it covers a little more than PS5.

no xbox simply supports freesync api/spec

freesync has lfc, which allows double or triple refresh rate when framerates are below the range

for example 40 fps on lfc freesync will make the screen refresh at 80 hz instead. same for 36 fps, screen will refresh at 72 hz.

actually lfc engages much earlier at 45-50 fps across moast 120 hz screens. it is better this way. no need to refresh a screen at 50 hz when you can refresh it at 100 hz and sync the visuals all the same

only problem is that sony refuses to support freesync spec. that's about it.

 

[RoadHazard]

no xbox simply supports freesync api/spec

freesync has lfc, which allows double or triple refresh rate when framerates are below the range

for example 40 fps on lfc freesync will make the screen refresh at 80 hz instead. same for 36 fps, screen will refresh at 72 hz.

actually lfc engages much earlier at 45-50 fps across moast 120 hz screens. it is better this way. no need to refresh a screen at 50 hz when you can refresh it at 100 hz and sync the visuals all the same

only problem is that sony refuses to support freesync spec. that's about it.

How does that actually work? Does the system detect that it's been more than X ms since the last refresh and automatically enable LFC?

But yeah, it would be nice if PS5 supported that without developer intervention.

Either way, the actual VRR range on Xbox Series is 40-120 I'm pretty sure.

 

[yamaci17]

How does that actually work? Does the system detect that it's been more than X ms since the last refresh and automatically enable LFC?

But yeah, it would be nice if PS5 supported that without developer intervention.

Either way, the actual VRR range on Xbox Series is 40-120 I'm pretty sure.

yes but that's just refresh rate range. doesn't mean it will work with those boundaries.. it depends on how driver works (i dont know how xbox driver works but I know that they support LFC, which would still cover framerates below 40 FPS)

I can give you an example of how it works on NVIDIA (even the grumpy old jensen GAVE up waay back in 2019 and allowed use of freesync with gtx 1000 and higher)

my screen is rated as 48-144,

with NVIDIA's driver, LFC speficially starts to trigger around 55-56 FPS. if I lock a game to 55 FPS, screen refreshes at 110 hz.so if I lock the game to 50 FPS, screen refreshes at 100 hz. at 60 FPS, screen simply refreshes at 60 hz.
at 40 fps, it refreshes at 80 hz.



you can even see xbox has similar behaviour where it starts frame doubling around 50 FPS. this is the way. because this IS HOW IT SHOULD BE DONE!

you get better screen input lag (due to higher refresh rate), you get better gamma curve (since the screens are mostly calibrated for their native refresh rates, and the closer you are to the native refresh rate, the better the color accuracy and less of a problem gamma shift will be)

frame doubling or tripling is always more preferable and should be the way. and it practically removes the necessity of having "low" refreshrate bounds.

there's no sense of making a screen refresh at 45 hz when the game renders at 45 fps. it is better to let it refresh at double the amount, 90 hz. most screen will have gamma shift problems and input lag problems at such low refreshrates

 

[Cyberpunkd]

Double dipped on PS5 due to local co-op with my wife.

It's basically PC ultra, so I'm totally fine with 30 fps. And given the fact that we are parents of a very active 4yo boy, by the time we reach Act 3 Larian will release not only all patches, but a new game.

Also, gamepad controls are masterfully done and adapted to console. Stay awhile and listen, freaking Diablo 4.

Really, really tempted, especially since I have PS Portal coming in November. I would just like to see the Mac version first.

How are the load times on the PS5? I don't worry much about Act 3 now, since I have kids (multiple ones) and like you by the time I get there all will be patched and optimized.

 

[Lagspike_exe]

Really, really tempted, especially since I have PS Portal coming in November. I would just like to see the Mac version first.

How are the load times on the PS5? I don't worry much about Act 3 now, since I have kids (multiple ones) and like you by the time I get there all will be patched and optimized.

They're the worst loads I ever experienced on PS5. Goes up to like 40-50 seconds in some situations.

 

[Cyberpunkd]

They're the worst loads I ever experienced on PS5. Goes up to like 40-50 seconds in some situations.

Ok, F that. I upgraded SSD in PS4 Pro back in the day because I couldn’t stomach load times there.

 

[ShaiKhulud1989]

How are the load times on the PS5?

They are long, but let me tell ya, they are not fast with gen4 ssd on PC either. So it's hardly a loss. And you will see loading screens like one or two in hours, game operates within huge locations.

 

[Duchess]

I really wish there was a physical release for this game.

 

[Cyberpunkd]

They are long, but let me tell ya, they are not fast with gen4 ssd on PC either. So it's hardly a loss. And you will see loading screens like one or two in hours, game operates within huge locations.

Ok, is there at least still fast resume if it’s the game you are playing?

 

[ShaiKhulud1989]

Ok, is there at least still fast resume if it’s the game you are playing?

ofc

 

[Moridianae]

These devs are very communicative and seem very set on delivering a solid experience. By most of what I see here, it's actually not bad on PS5.

They've stated they plan on doing further optimizations and stuff. Their first two patches were pretty ridiculously huge.


I think they'll be able to do quite a bit and I don't mind waiting a bit. It sucks we have to, but this game seems pretty ambitious.

 

[Eliciel]

really torn betweeen PS5 and PC version...

 

[yamaci17]

really torn betweeen PS5 and PC version...

tbh playing this with a gamepad looks like a chore