Support NeoGAF

[valkyre]

Yet another Pro title that performs worse than OG PS4... and it seems the number of games performing worse gets larger and larger.

This is not acceptable IMO. Buying a Pro should mean better IQ and perfromance. 100% of the times. Its ridiculous to even suggest that these 2 things arent guarranteed.

 

[oti]

yikes

 

[FStubbs]

This is nuts. We're seriously talking about adjusting graphics settings on a console.

 

[Kinyou]

Yet another Pro title that performs worse than OG PS4... and it seems the number of games performing worse gets larger and larger.

This is not acceptable IMO. Buying a Pro should mean better IQ and perfromance. 100% of the times. Its ridiculous to even suggest that these 2 things arent guarranteed.

What other games are there? I've only heard from Deus ex but havent seen a direct comparison.

 

[Yopis]

Surely if non-patched games run the same as PS4 base versions on the Pro, it must be an easy fix?

Have to say, I was going to buy one at the weekend, but will hold off for a bit I think.

Over one game? Some of the others have better performance.If you run the native.4k mode it's solid 30fps. To each their own though.

 

[Mrbob]

The framerate drops below 50 fps (to between 49 and 50 fps), on this image. Perhaps it rounds up to 50 fps, but it is still below the reference line that represents 50 fps. My message was in response to it only being a 1-2 fps drop, which appears false.

Naw, look at the graph below. PS4 Pro consistently under performing in terms of frame rate. Although I'm almost more offended that someone turned on that awful motion blur for the PS4 Pro version. So bad. But seriously this needs to be fixed. I am not in favor of down sampling at a higher resolution if the performance is going to be worse.

 

[Gren]

Hmm, I guess a vanilla PS4 could still be in the cards for me after all. My bare minimum for the Pro was equal or better framerate. The graphical bells & whistles were just bonuses & the 4K features irrevelant to me (for the forseeable future).

 

[EmiPrime]

It's really sad to see fanboy culture so hugely on display in this thread.

Is that really necessary?

 

[Copper]

This isn't like on PC where you get screen tearing or juttering. The game is still very smooth at 1800p.

 

[Mashing]

Yet another Pro title that performs worse than OG PS4... and it seems the number of games performing worse gets larger and larger.

This is not acceptable IMO. Buying a Pro should mean better IQ and perfromance. 100% of the times. Its ridiculous to even suggest that these 2 things arent guarranteed.

R.E.L.A.X. These things can be fixed with a patch.

 

[Gestault]

...? Did you look at the line graph? The pro is consistently below the regular PS4 (we really need a shorthand for this). In the video, when the game buckles under load, the Pro nearly always drops more frames.

Sorry that wasn't clearer, I was referring to this post by dracula_x being insincere.

 

[renzolama]

Over one game? Some of the others have better performance.If you run the native.4k mode it's solid 30fps. To each their own though.

To be fair, I think that IW, TF2, and BF1 all perform slightly better at higher resolutions on Pro? I don't have numbers in front of me, so that might not be 100% accurate for all three titles.

 

[cleveridea]

Is it really noticeable though 53 vs 60 fps?

Genuine question, not being sarcastic or anything.

I do agree though that it would be good to have the choice of AA or not like pretty much all PC games have

 

[Dee Dah Dave]

I thought Sony mandated better performance on the Pro version?

Not a great start when even their own devs aren't doing it.

Mind this doesn't surprise me, nearly all games these days have shoddy performance. It's pathetic that graphics continue to take precedence over solid framerates, which should be the most important aspect.

 

[Afro]

Is it really noticeable though 53 vs 60 fps?

Genuine question, not being sarcastic or anything.

I do agree though that it would be good to have the choice of AA or not like pretty much all PC games have

Some people claim to not even notice the difference between 30 and 60 so it's subjective. I'm personally hyper sensitive to stutter/frame drops of any sort.

 

[Mutagenic]

Is it really noticeable though 53 vs 60 fps?

Genuine question, not being sarcastic or anything.

I do agree though that it would be good to have the choice of AA or not like pretty much all PC games have

Of course, especially when it fluctuates.

 

[Marmelade]

Is it really noticeable though 53 vs 60 fps?

Genuine question, not being sarcastic or anything.

I do agree though that it would be good to have the choice of AA or not like pretty much all PC games have

Any variance from a locked framerate is noticeable.
And TLOU remastered wasn't locked either on vanilla PS4, even if more consistent than the Pro version at the moment

 

[pretty done]

Sad to see the CPU bottleneck the superior GPU

Well at least you know how to spell the words, even if you don't know what they mean.

 

[zoukka]

Is it really noticeable though 53 vs 60 fps?

Genuine question, not being sarcastic or anything.

I do agree though that it would be good to have the choice of AA or not like pretty much all PC games have

It's noticeable. If the framerates were constant, then less so, but they are dips in framerate which are the worst.

 

[jett]

The apologism and "who cares, it's only <x> fps" is very disconcerting for the future of PS4 Pro development. They're already favoring visual effects over performance, which was a major disappointment for 1080p gamers, and now they're being told that not only is it okay if the PS4 Pro version doesn't run faster than the base, it's actually fine if it runs even slower. 1-2 fps becomes 3-5 fps becomes 10-15 fps, that's the nature of business-driven software development; they'll try to save cost wherever consumers will let them get away with it, it's basic profit economics. This is a big deal. If you want to accept lower fps for better IQ that's obviously your valid opinion, but to dismiss people that are upset about it is bad for the consumer base as a whole.

Agreed. The attitude shown here by so many is pretty disheartening.

The bare minimum should be what Sony once stated in the leaked documents, games must absolutely not run worse than on the base PS4, period.

Sorry that wasn't clearer, I was referring to this post by dracula_x being insincere.

Oh okay, my mistake.

Is that really necessary?

Did I say something wrong?

 

[Maddanth]

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=224087628&postcount=79

Ok well that's def more then 1 or 2. Hope over next few months shit will get better. That would be really something for the base ps4 to have a higher frame rate, higher resolution or not it's crazy .

 

[Shai-Tan]

The graphics in the Pro is only slightly more powerful than a GTX 970. If you want games in 1800p then there's a good chance they either compromise frame rate in some way or tone down some aspect of the image quality. I think it's a valid criticism that there isn't an old vanilla mode in some games. Taking into consideration the relative power of the GPU internal rendering of 1440p may even be a bit much in new games without graphics options scaled back for 30fps. It's nowhere near as powerful as the latest PC GPU so there will be compromises, usually at the expense of frame rate for image quality unless developers try to satisfy both people who like ideal frame rate and people who want best image quality through options.

 

[golem]

Also, I dont want to say UC4 looks terrible, but compared to other 4k Pro games its a blurry mess. Hopefully Naughty Dog will fix these issues.

 

[Shai-Tan]

Also, I dont want to say UC4 looks terrible, but compared to other 4k Pro games its a blurry mess. Hopefully Naughty Dog will fix these issues.

It runs in 1440p with some extra AA

 

[SEGAvangelist]

Also, I dont want to say UC4 looks terrible, but compared to other 4k Pro games its a blurry mess. Hopefully Naughty Dog will fix these issues.

Eh... I think it looks great, but I'm using HDR which is impressive in this game.

 

[EmiPrime]

Did I say something wrong?

Given such an insult lowers the tone and quality of the discourse, yes you did. Plenty of us gave TLOU a spin on our Pros before this video came out and were very impressed and that despite the dips it still plays much better than the locked 30fps mode and the 1800p resolution is really impressive. That doesn't make us "fanboys".

 

[dogen]

Shoulda gone with 1620p or something. Still 2.25x 1080p.

 

[Arklite]

Also, I dont want to say UC4 looks terrible, but compared to other 4k Pro games its a blurry mess. Hopefully Naughty Dog will fix these issues.

Seems ND went for a minimal approach with the Pro. Odd to see a third party like Crystal Dynamics make a drastically better optimization with TR than a first party title.

 

[thelastword]

How is Ryse or The Witcher 3 even relevant here?

Consistency in judging performance....As a matter of fact. 30fps with dips is way worse than 60fps with dips any day of the week.

If you can't see the difference between Ryse and Witcher 3 running on OG consoles, and a patched remaster of a 2013 game running on a mid-gen upgrade to a console then ... you aren't as clued in as you'd like us to believe. Their reactions aren't selective, they're perfectly in context, considering the subject matter.

No I can see the difference, one is highly playable when it dips and the other is much less so, almost a slideshow in the teens, much more impactful to controller response and visual acuity.


I do understand the standard for the Pro is higher and I agree with DF wholeheartedly in that regard, but lets not pretend this game is rendering at 1080p like the PS4 either. I disagree with their conclusions...One of them is that the Pro's resolution is too high for the framerate and that the game should be rendered at 1440p. Let's not fool ourselves, why must we blame the hardware everytime we see some framerate issues? It's a generic conclusion that are most times wrong. It's either a baseless conclusion on the Jaguar CPU and now the PRO.


Look at Square, they are delivering a nice pro patch with FFXV, but there's still more they want to do, more optimization they can't squeeze in and that's a game which is in development. I think Naughty did some quick pro patches here, but I think they intend to do more. Look at their 1440p with dips in UC4, both the resolution and framerate is below what we would have liked from them, but we know what we have here is only a temporary patch as they get something more substantial deployed. They are tied up in lots of patches and projects as we speak....

However if all people value is a steady framerate that doesn't flinch, you can play at 4k or supersample that at 1080p with the best shadows for now. The IQ and consistency should look and feel incredible for those who prefer that.

As an additional note, the shimmering TLOUR on PS4Pro being gone is also exactly what Sony said would happen, the SSAA is reducing the aliasing artifiacts/shimmer/jaggies.

I was talking about the 1800p version against the 1080p ps4 version, the shimmer is pretty much night and day. Of course it's completely removed at 4k downsampled.


Again I want to reiterate that I appreciate Tom asking for a more consistent 60fps in the remaster on Pro. I just totally disagree with his reasons why the game is performing with the dips it has.

 

[antibolo]

Man it's way too early to panic about those things.

 

[Stealthcobra]

Such a bullshit thread... In a game thats not action oriented at all... Where your sneaking around.. Walking.. I fail to see how this matters at all.

 

[Oemenia]

Teh bias confirmed.

What happened to the 40% dick-waving that used to come up in every DF thread?

 

[Pachinko]

I think the Last of us gets an underhanded pass on the "pro must preform to the same level" thing because it's running 5.7 million pixels versus 2.1 million pixels. That's nearly 3 times as many pixels being drawn.

Given the slight performance issue though , maybe they just need to do a simple expansion on detail settings, offer it in the same way as Infamous now does - you can lock to 30 fps or leave fps unlocked (and it runs substantially better on the pro) OR use whatever hires super sampling option they've implemented (this cuts performance down considerably) to increase overall image quality.

In TLOU:R though, given that the frame drops look to be peaking at a 20% drop(from that 60 target), it might be better to lower the super sampling quality for the high framerate mode. Maybe even play it safe, drop it down 2560X1440 (the midway point between 1080p and 4K) , this will still give some pretty phenomenal results for image quality and it should leave the game locked at 60 fps (unless there's another bottleneck happening) , heck, maybe the higher quality shadows could even be turned on then ? So just simply set this option as "performance". It can only be played at 60 fps / 1440p.

Next have "quality" , this locks the framerate to 30fps , maxes out whatever detail settings are in place and runs the game at 4K , super sampling down to 1080p if required.

There's no reason to include an "original" setting, no one bought a ps4 pro for that , if you wanted to play the game that way, leave it unpatched. Or stick with a regular PS4.

I imagine the coming months will bring many growing pains as developers work out the kinks for various games. Hopefully oddball issues such as world of final fantasy don't become the norm.

 

[ViolentP]

Such a bullshit thread... In a game thats not action oriented at all... Where your sneaking around.. Walking.. I fail to see how this matters at all.

I don't think it's bullshit at all. The overall experience of the game will likely not be affected by the drops. People should however be informed as to how a potential investment performs before making a decision.

 

[golem]

As an additional note, the shimmering TLOUR on PS4Pro being gone is also exactly what Sony said would happen, the SSAA is reducing the aliasing artifiacts/shimmer/jaggies.

In the opening city scene I see shimmering in 4K mode on fences and stuff, a little disappointing.

 

[Kenzodielocke]

What's the resolution they could drop to between 1440p and 1800p?

 

[zoukka]

It's just a clear indication of where the bottleneck lies. In the CPU and in the resolution that's way too high and will result in poor performance.

 

[Gitaroo]

The should have done checkerboard 2160, better IQ and less taxing than 1800 native.

 

[EmiPrime]

Next have "quality" , this locks the framerate to 30fps , maxes out whatever detail settings are in place and runs the game at 4K , super sampling down to 1080p if required.

You can do exactly that already with TLOU on PS4 Pro.

 

[pretty done]

It's just a clear indication of where the bottleneck lies. In the CPU and in the resolution that's way too high and will result in poor performance.

How is the CPU the bottleneck when it ran at 60 on a regular PS4? ND can just drop the res to 1440p and I imagine it will be a locked 60 everywhere.

 

[Arklite]

Teh bias confirmed.

What happened to the 40% dick-waving that used to come up in every DF thread?

I mean, the game is still running at a higher 1800p at far over 30fps. More of a blemish than a technical travesty, though ND really should optimize.

 

[Clear]

Just curious if there are any devs lurking in this thread? If so, what do you think about complaints such as these?

Its laughable.

The overwhelming majority of buyers will be simply unaware or uninterested in such minutia, and as such its kinda irrelevant outside of circles that obsess over such details.

Also from a practical standpoint, there's a perfectly reasonable argument to be made that a benefit available 100% of the time (resolution) is a better thing to focus on than minor fluctuations in frame-rate that manifest periodically.

 

[Jacob4815]

3/5 frames drop (occasionally) with a super cleaner image and perfect IQ... it runs worse... okay...

 

[Fisty]

Just launched yesterday guys, give ND a chance to patch it.

Still can't believe I played this game at 720p 24fps lol

 

[scitek]

Boy that thread title isn't accurate at all...

 

[Nachtfalke]

Its laughable.

The overwhelming majority of buyers will be simply unaware or uninterested in such minutia, and as such its kinda irrelevant outside of circles that obsess over such details.

Also from a practical standpoint, there's a perfectly reasonable argument to be made that a benefit available 100% of the time (resolution) is a better thing to focus on than minor fluctuations in frame-rate that manifest periodically.

There is already a native 4k mode for those who wants the best possible IQ. Wouldn't it hurt to lower the resolution a bit just to get locked 60fps for the second mode? I don't think so.

Native 4k with locked 30fps and something lower than 1800p and locked 60fps seems to be a better choice for everyone.

And as mentioned before, it shouldn't be the case that Pro buyers can play the game only at a lower framerate, despite two available options.

 

[valkyre]

3/5 frames drop (occasionally) with a super cleaner image and perfect IQ... it runs worse... okay...

I thought Pro was targeting hardcore buyers who are expecting a certain standard of quality and performance.

And that standard was set by Sony when they explicitly stated that Pro will run games at higher graphics/resolution and better performance.

 

[psychotron]

Boy that thread title isn't accurate at all...

Poorly worded, yes. Not necessarily inaccurate though. If you set your PS4 Pro to 1080p and load up the game, it performs worse than the base PS4. The misleading part is that this is still rendering at 1800p. I've acknowledged it in my OP. Please forgive me.

 

[geordiemp]

I think most Ps4 pro games should be like Tomb Raider, we need options

1. 4K checkerboard at 30

2. Subsampling to 1080p from whatever and a locked 30 - could be same as 1.

3. 1080p and concentrating on 60 FPS, add whatever LOD / super sampling but primary is 60 FPS.

Some people prefer smooth 60 FPS, if its possible devs should allow this option at 1440p or whatever does the trick.

 

[Cr1ptkeeper]

Seems ND went for a minimal approach with the Pro. Odd to see a third party like Crystal Dynamics make a drastically better optimization with TR than a first party title.

I think this has to do with the way first party games are programmed compared to multiplatform games.
I'm not a programmer or a tech savy guy but I think in a first party game the resources the game needs are specifically allocated to the CPU, GPU and memory.
For example, the texture for these cars are programmed to be handled by that part of the memory and that part of the GPU.
So, if everything is set in stone it's much harder to quickly optimize for better hardware, it requires a lot of more work.

In a multiplatform game everything is much more general. They let the hardware figure out the workload for most of the time. So for them it's easier to gain benifits from beefier hardware but the hardware isn't used optimal like in a first party game.

Like I said, that's what I think, I didn't research this.