adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
We shouldn't use one example as a generalization for the entire generation.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Poor optimization or is the Series X/PS5 underpowered? Dying light 2 as reference
- Thread starter Gamer79
- Start date
We shouldn't use one example as a generalization for the entire generation.
YeulEmeralda
Linux User
Was Techland ever considered competent?
ArtHands
Thinks buying more servers can fix a bad patch
Its inevitable, because consoles has a hardware performance limit unlike PC
VFXVeteran
Banned
Because I'm speaking about hardware having much more bandwidth for today's games that reconstruction won't be needed. We should all be looking for more GPU power and best image quality. Even though DLSS is an excellent reconstruction technique, it still has drawbacks. The other reconstruction techniques degrade image quality too much to be viable IMO.
VFXVeteran
Banned
I don't care about what they targeted. I'm telling you that RT uses DX12 and isn't the same as DX11. They are 2 different code paths.
VFXVeteran
Banned
DL2 has better tech than Doom Eternal IMO. iD is still working on their complete realtime RT pipeline. They have been behind the curve for sometime now. Their codebase is extremely optimized because they are more concerned with FPS than graphic features.
Looking better or not is subjective.
Last edited:
VFXVeteran
Banned
It depends. Reflections, the way games uses them, is fairly cheap compared to RT shadows unless they both are only casting 1 ray per pixel and shadows are only being cast from 1 light source. The more appropriate way to cast RT shadows would be significantly more complex than RT reflections (even if the reflections are blurred) *if* reflection recursion is limited to a depth of 1.
Justin9mm
Member
No one is denying the facts that 1080p is technically 2K.Ever since Tom, sold it's site, that Tom's hardware has been riddle with non-sense like this.
Be it in gaming of cinema, 2K is for 1080p.
ethomaz has already done a clear explanation of this.
It's ok to be ignorant of this. The vast amount of knowledge that exists means we are all ignorant of many things.
The issue is to insist in an mistake, despite others with clear knowledge explaining the standard.
The problem is you both being ignorant of accepting that 1440p is commonly referred to as 2K throughout the gaming industry.
ethomaz
was clearly aware what the person meant when they said DL2 is not 2K in performance mode and decided with his reply comment to imply that the person was not technically correct which was uncalled for and not entirely relevant given all parties comprehended what was being said. That's what we call being a jackass.Maybe try resetera to preach your 1080p is 2K propaganda
ethomaz
Banned
DL2 is already 2k in performance mode.No one is denying the facts that 1080p is technically 2K.
The problem is you both being ignorant of accepting that 1440p is commonly referred to as 2K throughout the gaming industry.
Maybe try resetera to preach your 1080p is 2K propaganda
A made up and weird excuse won't become true because you believe it is "right" lol
Last edited:
assurdum
Banned
From what nxg reported it seems their engine is very outdated and doesn't support direct X 12 and async computation properly on console that's why is so heavy.
Last edited:
xrnzaaas
Member
Dying Light 2's development was definitely problematic, the only difference is they've managed to make a more stable working product than CDP with Cyberpunk. I definitely think they can and should work on improving the performance mode either by raising the resolution or offering better image quality in 1080p with sharper textures and less blur.
winjer
Gold Member
No one is denying the facts that 1080p is technically 2K.
The problem is you both being ignorant of accepting that 1440p is commonly referred to as 2K throughout the gaming industry.
Maybe try resetera to preach your 1080p is 2K propaganda
I frequent a few tech forums, which also have a lot of gamers. And no one thinks 1440p is 2K.
Every gamer that knows his basic tech stuff, knows that 1080p is 2K.
Just because some people he re think 1440p is 2k, does not make it the standard.
You have two options now. Continue to spread the wrong information.
Or, you can inform other people of the actual standard.
PeteBull
Member
In terms of gameplay/making insteresting game, sure(altho personaly not my type of game), in terms of industry leading visuals/perfect optimisation- not in the slightest.
Not all devs can be naughty dog, playground games or sucker punch, actually those are exceptions that confirm the rule, most are way below that, especially if we count in multiplatform aspect of games.
YeulEmeralda
Linux User
Falcom released a last gen game that couldn't do 60fps on the PS5.
Nobody judged the PS5 hardware on that because Falcom are a bunch of kusoge clowns.
(disclaimer I love Falcom games and buy them all)
Nobody judged the PS5 hardware on that because Falcom are a bunch of kusoge clowns.
(disclaimer I love Falcom games and buy them all)
Thirty7ven
Banned
Jankland
Falcom engine sucks, have huge performance hit on transparencies.
PeteBull
Member
"runs well" in this particular case means:
stable 30fps with reduced settings(according to DF xbone and ps4 runs at pc lowest setttings) and on top nasty cut to resolution, 864p so 1536x864 pixels
More info in the vid ofc
Remember when back in the day we all laughed at first titanfall running in 792p on xbox one? That game's res is only a smidge above, and yup-it looks like pixelated mess right away on first glance on both base last gen mashines despite optimalisation(optimalisation meaning turning down to lowest possible settings avaiable on pc).
Last edited:
Considering that the PS5 and XSX have around 3x more power than the PS4 Pro and Xbox One X on GPU department and way more on CPU side, i'd expected that it should have ran waay better at 1440p60.
PeteBull
Member
Again no idea why u guys coming up with this 1440p60 mode, both xsx and ps5 got no 1440p60 mode, but 1080p60mode, xss has 1080p30 mode, no 60fps at all.
Ps4pro drops frames in its 1080p30 mode, u cant take it as a baseline, u can take xox as a baseline coz it doesnt drop fps in its 1080p30 mode, both current gen mashines got 1080p60fps mode which clearly means at least 2x gpu/cpu performance vs last gen, in terms of settings- no raytracing in this mode either just like in lastgen consoles and obviously other settings are far from maxed.
Last edited:
VFXVeteran
Banned
You can't do RT without DX12. I'm not sure what they use for the PS5 which probably has it's own DX12-like API for RT.
I'm saying they have 2 codebases. It's not outdated if it can do the latest features. We also can't say it's completely unoptimized because it doesn't perform like 4AGames graphics engine. Basically there is no way to tell what's going on unless we see the code, so I would rather not judge them as incompetent.
Rocco Schiavone
Member
Former Ubisoft dev says that Techland intentionally made AMD FSR look worse in Dying Light 2
Reddit's TheHybred (who is a former Ubisoft developer) said that Techland has intentionally made AMD FSR look worse in Dying Light 2.
www.dsogaming.com
Kokoloko85
Member
Didnt one of the developers say Series S is holding it back?
ethomaz
Banned
Former Ubisoft dev says that Techland intentionally made AMD FSR look worse in Dying Light 2
Reddit's TheHybred (who is a former Ubisoft developer) said that Techland has intentionally made AMD FSR look worse in Dying Light 2.
seems like VRR update came thru for DL2? 80-110 FPS seems pretty good. Dunno if that could push to 1440p stable 60 fps otherwise, though. would need to check PC comparisons for the same GPU models
actually a 5700 XT hits over 60 FPS with high settings (on average?) so I would expect XSX to be able to handle 1440p/60 pretty well especially with VRR enabled.
Last edited:
seems like VRR update came thru for DL2? 80-110 FPS seems pretty good. Dunno if that could push to 1440p stable 60 fps otherwise, though. would need to check PC comparisons for the same GPU models
actually a 5700 XT hits over 60 FPS with high settings (on average?) so I would expect XSX to be able to handle 1440p/60 pretty well especially with VRR enabled.
Based on this, the PS5 and Xbox should hit 1440p60, not 1080p60
even a 6500 xt which I think is similar, if not even more gimped, than a Series S GPU and it practically hits 1440p/30. Wonder if with a bit more love the Series S could hit 1440p/30
Luipadre
Member
PS5 drops frames pretty often in the second area and even tears... that means it cant even hold 60 at 1080p
DarkMage619
$MSFT
Game is on X1 and PS4 yet the XSS is holding the game back huh. Interesting.
dcmk7
Banned
assurdum
Banned
I haven't said the game doesn't support DX12. Just support it badly. You should ask to NXG it's him who said it in his video analysis.
Last edited:
assurdum
Banned
I don't envy people who have to play it at 1080p in a screen without a good upscaling. Thanks God for my Bravia. Though the sharpness seems a bit improved with the last patch? Maybe it's just a placebo effect.
Redneckerz
Banned
But you know that will happen, because that happens every single, damn time.
You can just use GAF search and you will find that people ask the same questions, use the same arguments (''x console is underpowered'', etc) every single generation, with the same answers (''Console potential usually unlocks at the end of the generation'') over and over.
Its like the collective memory has a shelf life of one generation, before the circle starts anew.
Using the same generalizations.
They are more competent than your post.
Last edited:
smart_brazileiro
Banned
I noticed that, too.
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
Now that we know the game/engine has enough head room to run north of 100 FPS almost everywhere with the VRR unlocked mode ..
Can we put this topic to rest ? It's not an issue of the hardware being under powered, it's just the developers putting their priorities in one place and not another.
Can we put this topic to rest ? It's not an issue of the hardware being under powered, it's just the developers putting their priorities in one place and not another.
Swift_Star
Banned
Has the brick wall guy posted again? He was claiming to hell it was the consoles fault.
MisterXDTV
Member
You know that the upscaling is done by the console and not the TV itself right???
Unless you change the HDMI system output to 1080p
Last edited:
Swift_Star
Banned
As shown after you posted this, it was the devs fault. You were wrong.
Feel Like I'm On 42
Member
It's placebo..I thought the same thing at first but 1080p is still shit for thus game
ArtHands
Thinks buying more servers can fix a bad patch
I really , really doubt so. But I understand they have to appease the console fanboys
digital_ghost
I am a closet furry. Don't you judge me.
Broke MS, Sony's and Nintendo's sewers?
I had no idea they were in the poop business. Man I got to keep tabs on these acquisitions.
b0uncyfr0
Member
Looking forward to someone digging into VRR mode.
But essentially VRR mode is out for the series x - people are reporting 80-110 fps which is way smoother than 60.
Close the thread - Yes, they did leave a shitload of performance on the table. It was patched in only a few days after release, they should've had this from the beginning! Also If 1080/120 is attainable, so is 1440p/60.
But essentially VRR mode is out for the series x - people are reporting 80-110 fps which is way smoother than 60.
Close the thread - Yes, they did leave a shitload of performance on the table. It was patched in only a few days after release, they should've had this from the beginning! Also If 1080/120 is attainable, so is 1440p/60.
Last edited:
Cryio
Member
We have these threads every gen because people got used to the discrepancy between early console performance/visuals and PC performance/cost in the PS1/PS2/PS3 era.
During these particular console eras, games would be much more potent on consoles, and PC ports would look worse, run worse or generally require significantly more powerful systems than consoles for the same games.
PS1 era: we had 3D games while 3D acceleration was in its infancy on PC, so performance / visuals were poor. Poor was also performance scaling with framerate, resolution, AA and even Anisotropic filtering.
PS2 era: we started getting Pixel Shader 2.0 this era, where performance on PC was eskewed heavily by the extremely poor PS2.0 performance of GeForce 5 and even GeForce 4 being very poor in comparison to ATI PS2.0 9000 series.
PS3 era: this was the shader era. The irony here was the PS3/X360 were made of GPUs not really well designed for shaders, however PCs GeForce 8 and HD 3000 and above, were really good at pushing shaders compared to GeForce 7 and ATI X1300-1900. Performance on PC also advanced tremendously, especially on the GPU side.
PS4 generation: this was the compute era. Most GPUs in the PS3 era were good at pushing shaders, but weren't good at compute. AMD GPUs were powerhouses since 2011 with GCN1, while Nvidia only reached compute parity with the RTX 2000 Turing GPUs.
We also went from getting new tech and VASTLY faster GPUs every 6-12 months to every 24 months to every 36 months.
PS5 era: we're still in the full compute era, but we now have real time ray tracing on top. People want higher resolution, higher framerates, better visuals AND need new tech features with every console gen. This was feasible in the PS1, 2, 3 and even PS4 era (DirectX11, tessellation, GPU particles, screen space effects). However this time around the economy broke due to crypto, inflation and delayed technological advancement.
If this economy continues, PS6 era will be an even smaller jump than PS5. 8 years after PS5? We'll have 2 to 3 new GPU generations. People will want more reliable 120 fps. People will want more comprehensive ray tracing effects. People will want better visuals wholistically. And the kicker: we barely could do 4K in 2016-2017 on consoles on 8th gen. We barely can do 4K in 2020 on 9th gen. We'll barely be able to do a locked 4K on 10th gen. New consoles will still be 400-600$ for an entire system. But people will expect 8K60 and 8K120 resolutions, alongside all the other features mentioned above. Also, hell, 16xAF.
People are in for a rough awakening with the next console gen.
During these particular console eras, games would be much more potent on consoles, and PC ports would look worse, run worse or generally require significantly more powerful systems than consoles for the same games.
PS1 era: we had 3D games while 3D acceleration was in its infancy on PC, so performance / visuals were poor. Poor was also performance scaling with framerate, resolution, AA and even Anisotropic filtering.
PS2 era: we started getting Pixel Shader 2.0 this era, where performance on PC was eskewed heavily by the extremely poor PS2.0 performance of GeForce 5 and even GeForce 4 being very poor in comparison to ATI PS2.0 9000 series.
PS3 era: this was the shader era. The irony here was the PS3/X360 were made of GPUs not really well designed for shaders, however PCs GeForce 8 and HD 3000 and above, were really good at pushing shaders compared to GeForce 7 and ATI X1300-1900. Performance on PC also advanced tremendously, especially on the GPU side.
PS4 generation: this was the compute era. Most GPUs in the PS3 era were good at pushing shaders, but weren't good at compute. AMD GPUs were powerhouses since 2011 with GCN1, while Nvidia only reached compute parity with the RTX 2000 Turing GPUs.
We also went from getting new tech and VASTLY faster GPUs every 6-12 months to every 24 months to every 36 months.
PS5 era: we're still in the full compute era, but we now have real time ray tracing on top. People want higher resolution, higher framerates, better visuals AND need new tech features with every console gen. This was feasible in the PS1, 2, 3 and even PS4 era (DirectX11, tessellation, GPU particles, screen space effects). However this time around the economy broke due to crypto, inflation and delayed technological advancement.
If this economy continues, PS6 era will be an even smaller jump than PS5. 8 years after PS5? We'll have 2 to 3 new GPU generations. People will want more reliable 120 fps. People will want more comprehensive ray tracing effects. People will want better visuals wholistically. And the kicker: we barely could do 4K in 2016-2017 on consoles on 8th gen. We barely can do 4K in 2020 on 9th gen. We'll barely be able to do a locked 4K on 10th gen. New consoles will still be 400-600$ for an entire system. But people will expect 8K60 and 8K120 resolutions, alongside all the other features mentioned above. Also, hell, 16xAF.
People are in for a rough awakening with the next console gen.
Last edited:
YeulEmeralda
Linux User
Sony is going to set the benchmark on graphics for PS5, just like they did on PS3 and PS4.
ethomaz
Banned
New Horizon game proved again my point.
Do you a want a generation jump in gaming? Stay on 30fps if not get used to last-gen graphics.