Support NeoGAF

[jroc74]

Games awesome. I'm really enjoying it. I'm playing jedi survivor and to me it doesn't drop frames as much as this game but since changing to quality mode on ff xvi I've had no issues.

I genuinely belive this Is up there and could be argued that it is the worst performing AAA release in performance mode and definitely worst performing console exclusive? Am I incorrect here?

Agree the image quality doesn't look as bad as jedi survivor but that game has raytracing and I'm sure the 60 fps mode doesn't drop out of vrr range on xbox.

If I am wrong then just let me know and I'll check it out.

Yes.... please continue moving that goal post.

Redfall seems worse to me IMO.

Its definitely worse....now I wonder do we get a breakdown of what is or isnt AAA...

 

[Mr.Phoenix]

Games awesome. I'm really enjoying it. I'm playing jedi survivor and to me it doesn't drop frames as much as this game but since changing to quality mode on ff xvi I've had no issues.

I genuinely belive this Is up there and could be argued that it is the worst performing AAA release in performance mode and definitely worst performing console exclusive? Am I incorrect here?

Well...subjective I guess. Because to me, SWJS damn right looks messy forme. I could actually notice the reconstruction artifacts when playing it. I am one of those types that can actually pay and ok paying in 30fps, so I am not as sensitive to fps drops as others, but I am more sensitive to IQ drops. This means i noticed the artifacts in SWJS, and the shimmering in HZFW far more than I notice the fact that FF16s framerate fluctuates in performance mode.

So i won't go as far as say you are incorrect, maybe you are just more sensitive to fps stuff than me. But thats kinda the point, these things are subjective. So I take no issue with anyone criticizing anything, I can always respect that it could be that way for them. What I have an issue with, are exaggerated statements that could just be outright misleading. Especially for someone that has not seen or played the game themselves.

 

[DenchDeckard]

This is your earlier post:



So now its moved from AAA game to huge playstation exclusive....

But, please continue.

I'm not changing anything. People saying star wars performs worse. Does it?

And if it did, you're saying there's maybe one or two games that perform as badly.

So it's on par as the worst performing triple A this gen.

The games still great. Do you think the 60fps mode is acceptable?

 

[jroc74]

I'm not changing anything. People saying star wars performs worse. Does it?

And if it did, you're saying there's maybe one or two games that perform as badly.

So it's on par as the worst performing triple A this gen.

The games still great. Do you think the 60fps mode is acceptable?

Again, you are the one that led with this:

Must be the worst performing AAA game this gen?

Since that post you have added:

performance mode
playstation exclusive


¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

[DenchDeckard]

Well...subjective I guess. Because to me, SWJS damn right looks messy forme. I could actually notice the reconstruction artifacts when playing it. I am one of those types that can actually pay and ok paying in 30fps, so I am not as sensitive to fps drops as others, but I am more sensitive to IQ drops. This means i noticed the artifacts in SWJS, and the shimmering in HZFW far more than I notice the fact that FF16s framerate fluctuates in performance mode.

So i won't go as far as say you are incorrect, maybe you are just more sensitive to fps stuff than me. But thats kinda the point, these things are subjective. So I take no issue with anyone criticizing anything, I can always respect that it could be that way for them. What I have an issue with, are exaggerated statements that could just be outright misleading. Especially for someone that has not seen or played the game themselves.

Thanks so much for a great response. It's nice to have a more reasonable discussion.

Basically, yeah. I'm playing star wars on performance and while it's not ideal it's fine. Ffxvi I've had to put it in quality mode which I didn't want to do but the game is so good from an anime crazy story perspective, I don't mind. I love it. I just wish the motion blur was toned down a touch and they patch in fsr 2.0

 

[Solidus_T]

Quality mode remains the best way to play this game

 

[aclar00]

As someone else said in another post said, this game looks like its made across 3 different Playstation generations. At any given time it can look like a PS3, PS4 or PS5 game. Shit's all over the place graphically.

 

[lh032]

i didnt watch the video but i do know the performance mode is pretty trash in this game, i think most of the time it runs between 30fps-40fps.
Luckily my eyes easily adjusted to these fps.

but yea performance mode seems they include it the last minute.

 

[Clear]

As someone else said in another post said, this game looks like its made across 3 different Playstation generations. At any given time it can look like a PS3, PS4 or PS5 game. Shit's all over the place graphically.

That's simply untrue. Some of the "minor" conversation cut-scenes are more rudimentary in terms of animation and camera movement, but the overall quality of presentation is sky high throughout. Quite an achievement given the size of the game.

The truth is that with this game they've tried to replicate the look of previous gen's FF titles offline-rendered cg cinematics throughout. It doesn't always hit the mark, but it does, or gets real close for the majority of the time.

 

[RoboFu]

Starfield has only a 30 fps mode, it doesn't even have a target 60 fps mode like FFXVI does

Ones a slow rpg and ones a fast action beatem up though.

 

[Mr.Phoenix]

Thanks so much for a great response. It's nice to have a more reasonable discussion.

Basically, yeah. I'm playing star wars on performance and while it's not ideal it's fine. Ffxvi I've had to put it in quality mode which I didn't want to do but the game is so good from an anime crazy story perspective, I don't mind. I love it. I just wish the motion blur was toned down a touch and they patch in fsr 2.0

I can see where you are coming from with the motion blur. Personally, I love that effect in games, but I have experienced firsthand, that it's something that should be optional or at the very least adjustable. I am also playing in quality mode, but will play in performance mode in my new game+ playthrough. Hopefully, by then it's been patched.

What's funny is that anyone that sees how against no performance modes in these games, will think I won't touch a game if it doesn't have it. But the truth is that I would sooner play in fidelity mode than play in performance mode. I just can't stand that the option isn't even available in-game. At least, give me the choice to choose how I want to play. And as far as I am concerned, if these consoles can run a game at 30fps at 1440p-4K, then they should be able to run it at 60fps at 720p-1080p.

Ones a slow rpg and ones a fast action beatem up though.

And that should not matter.

The option should be there.

 

[MasterCornholio]

Its definitely worse....now I wonder do we get a breakdown of what is or isnt AAA...

I'd say go with Microsofts definition of the game. They called it AAA so basically the performance in Redfall is a lot worse than the performance in FF16. Redfall doesn't even have a 60FPS mode on consoles if I'm not wrong. To make the comparison fair we would have to compare the 30FPS modes. We all know which one is better from a performance perspective.

 

[avin]

This is all fake console warring, similar to the phony war before WW2 kicked off. Ditches are being dug, lines of argument prepared in readiness for when Starfield arrives and the real warring begins.

avin

 

[adamsapple]

This is all fake console warring, similar to the phony war before WW2 kicked off. Ditches are being dug, lines of argument prepared in readiness for when Starfield arrives and the real warring begins.

avin

 

[Gaiff]

Please, this makes no sense whatsoever. Doesnt matter what ind hardware a game is running on, it's not like they are the same game. I get expectations are different, but again..its not like its the same game running on two different platforms.

Yes, it matters what kind of hardware the game is running on. The Switch can't even output 4K and the IQ of games like Xenoblade Chronicles 3, Bayonetta 3, and TOTK along with their performance has been thrashed time and again. You're always trying to spin this as some kind of nefarious plot to attack Playstation or Xbox and that there's a double standard in place. First it was that false equivalency of DLSS on PC (running a higher base res) vs FSR on consoles. Now we're going to pretend that 1. Nobody complained about TOTK's IQ and performance and 2. The hardware a game is running on doesn't matter. Come on, man. You don't even believe that.

FSR1 on PC was shat on. DLSS1 on PC was shat on. Switch games performance, graphics, and image quality get shat on all the time. This isn't something unique to PS5/SX games, so stop trying to paint this false narrative.

 

[wOs]

Thanks so much for a great response. It's nice to have a more reasonable discussion.

Basically, yeah. I'm playing star wars on performance and while it's not ideal it's fine. Ffxvi I've had to put it in quality mode which I didn't want to do but the game is so good from an anime crazy story perspective, I don't mind. I love it. I just wish the motion blur was toned down a touch and they patch in fsr 2.0

Lol you are asking for a reasonable discussion and started with flame bait. You can have it both ways man.

 

[Mister Wolf]

Yes, it matters what kind of hardware the game is running on. The Switch can't even output 4K and the IQ of games like Xenoblade Chronicles 3, Bayonetta 3, and TOTK along with their performance has been thrashed time and again. You're always trying to spin this as some kind of nefarious plot to attack Playstation or Xbox and that there's a double standard in place. First it was that false equivalency of DLSS on PC (running a higher base res) vs FSR on consoles. Now we're going to pretend that 1. Nobody complained about TOTK's IQ and performance and 2. The hardware a game is running on doesn't matter. Come on, man. You don't even believe that.

FSR1 on PC was shat on. DLSS1 on PC was shat on. Switch games performance, graphics, and image quality get shat on all the time. This isn't something unique to PS5/SX games, so stop trying to paint this false narrative.

I would also like to add low resolution isn't as harshly punished on games using cartoon graphics with low resolution textures that were never striving for realism. It's when games use high resolution textures with fine details on character models and the environments that we start to complain. There is a big difference between Xenoblade 3 and Zelda running at 900p vs Star Wars and FF16 running at 900p. With the latter games the environment turns into vaseline covering the screen. They are too detailed to have that low a resolution.

 

[fart town usa]

It seems like devs hit a wall with these consoles way sooner than i expected them too

In this case it's XVI and not the console, outside of the QTE elements in Eikon fights, the game is run of the mill when it comes to visuals. Yes the environments look great at times but you're also in small non-interactive areas. Nothing about it is impressive considering it's a PS5 exclusive.

Demon's Souls looks infinitely better and that was a launch title.

 

[fart town usa]

As someone else said in another post said, this game looks like its made across 3 different Playstation generations. At any given time it can look like a PS3, PS4 or PS5 game. Shit's all over the place graphically.

It's true. People are delusional when it comes to NPCs.

I'm 100% making a FFXIII & White Knight Chronicles compared to FFXVI video. Not click bait shit, just footage side by side. XVI looks laughably bad at times considering it's a PS5 exclusive.

 

[Umbasaborne]

In this case it's XVI and not the console, outside of the QTE elements in Eikon fights, the game is run of the mill when it comes to visuals. Yes the environments look great at times but you're also in small non-interactive areas. Nothing about it is impressive considering it's a PS5 exclusive.

Demon's Souls looks infinitely better and that was a launch title.

I agree with you 100 percent. It just seems like sony's 1st party teams really knows how to get the most out of the ps5 but other devs are struggling for some reason. You’re right, ffxvi is not a very visuallly impressive game outside of some scripted moments. There is no reason it should have anything less than stellar performance or iq, especially when a cross gen game like horizon forbidden west can look and run so much better

 

[mckmas8808]

An action game at 30fps is unacceptable.

 

[Luipadre]

I just dont get the use of FSR1 instead of 2.

 

[adamsapple]

I just dont get the use of FSR1 instead of 2.

FSR2 needs more resources than FSR1. It's not free. The game is already dropping frames below 50, to low 40s (and even 30s) with FSR1, simply swapping FSR2 would make these drops worse. They need more optimization first.

 

[yamaci17]

It seems like devs hit a wall with these consoles way sooner than i expected them too

its due to anemic low cache CCX latency riddled zen 2 CPU, that I'm sure of. this cpu was already garbaj on desktop, you can ask anyone who knows their shit. it was barely able to push 60 fps %1 lows on some PS4 ports. zen 2 is a horrible cpu uarch. it will be jaguar all over again (yes, even a zen 3 makes zen 2 look like jaguar, considering in some games zen 3 can lead up to %50 due to how weird performance scaling zen 2 can have. it's a gimmick cpu that only performs like it should if the game can have near perfect thread scaling and not stress any particular cores or do not do complex calculations across CCXes.

any random currently sold CPU will destroy Zen 2 in actual cpu stressing moments. cyberpunk's jig jig street with ray tracing is a great example. jedi survivor too. in both games, zen 2 has catastrophic %1 lows compared to zen 3 and even 9th-10th gen Intel CPUs. it simply crumbles under complex loads that require a lot of threads in sync. not every dev can solve the multithreading gracefully. it is a might task all by itself. but at least if your CPU architecture is not flawed, you won't have any perf. penalties if your CPU cores can communicate without any problem across them. Zen 2 is the opposite. if core 2 needs an information from core 6 a lot of the time while rendering in a second, that means it will have a lot of slowdowns due to horrible ccx structure (yes, consoles too have double ccx structure which I heavily criticised since they were announced)

"I agree with you 100 percent. It just seems like sony's 1st party teams really knows how to get the most out of the ps5 but other devs are struggling for some reason. You’re right, ffxvi is not a very visuallly impressive game outside of some scripted moments. There is no reason it should have anything less than stellar performance or iq, especially when a cross gen game like horizon forbidden west can look and run so much better"

No, they don't know shit. they just released / optimized games that were already optimized to hit rock solid 30 FPS, and 40+ FPS even on crap 1.6/2.2 ghz jag cores. once that "goal" is removed from the equation, you will quickly realize the dream of having those rock solid 60 fps modes, those 60+ fps unlocked VRR modes will be gone.

only games that do not follow this pattern is demon's souls and ratched and clank. but for all I know, it is mostly because they felt pressured to optimize to hit 60 FPS because every other game was releasing at 60 FPS due to being in a crossgen period o they'd have to face massive backlash in such an enviroment. but now devs are becoming more bold as we've seen this year, you will also see them "1st party studios" targeting 1200p/30 FPS and then hackjob of a performance mode that have %1 40 FPS lows at 800p average resolution. That, you can be sure of.

ff xvi, forspoken jedi survivor are frontrunner scapegoats. they have just warmed the bed for the upcoming onslaught. once everyone is psychologically wired to think that PS5 is as much as capable as this, 1st party studios will follow the suit.

no dev is stupid. if people can accept ff xvi or jedi survivor's performance for what they are and still generate huge bucks of money, there really is no "incentive" for any 1st party studio to hit that sweet locked 60 fps on their performance modes. there simply isn't. as I said, don't let crossgen period and ps4-optimized titles cloud your judgement.

 

[Bojji]

its due to anemic low cache CCX latency riddled zen 2 CPU, that I'm sure of. this cpu was already garbaj on desktop, you can ask anyone who knows their shit. it was barely able to push 60 fps %1 lows on some PS4 ports. zen 2 is a horrible cpu uarch. it will be jaguar all over again (yes, even a zen 3 makes zen 2 look like jaguar, considering in some games zen 3 can lead up to %50 due to how weird performance scaling zen 2 can have. it's a gimmick cpu that only performs like it should if the game can have near perfect thread scaling and not stress any particular cores or do not do complex calculations across CCXes.

any random currently sold CPU will destroy Zen 2 in actual cpu stressing moments. cyberpunk's jig jig street with ray tracing is a great example. jedi survivor too. in both games, zen 2 has catastrophic %1 lows compared to zen 3 and even 9th-10th gen Intel CPUs. it simply crumbles under complex loads that require a lot of threads in sync. not every dev can solve the multithreading gracefully. it is a might task all by itself. but at least if your CPU architecture is not flawed, you won't have any perf. penalties if your CPU cores can communicate without any problem across them. Zen 2 is the opposite. if core 2 needs an information from core 6 a lot of the time while rendering in a second, that means it will have a lot of slowdowns due to horrible ccx structure (yes, consoles too have double ccx structure which I heavily criticised since they were announced)

"I agree with you 100 percent. It just seems like sony's 1st party teams really knows how to get the most out of the ps5 but other devs are struggling for some reason. You’re right, ffxvi is not a very visuallly impressive game outside of some scripted moments. There is no reason it should have anything less than stellar performance or iq, especially when a cross gen game like horizon forbidden west can look and run so much better"

No, they don't know shit. they just released / optimized games that were already optimized to hit rock solid 30 FPS, and 40+ FPS even on crap 1.6/2.2 ghz jag cores. once that "goal" is removed from the equation, you will quickly realize the dream of having those rock solid 60 fps modes, those 60+ fps unlocked VRR modes will be gone.

only game that does not follow this pattern is demon's souls and ratched and clank. but for all I know, it is mostly because they felt pressured to optimize to hit 60 FPS because every other game was releasing at 60 FPS due to them being crossgen so they'd have to face massive backlash in such an enviroment. but now devs are becoming more bold as we've seen this year, you will also see them "1st party studios" targeting 1200p/30 FPS and then hackjob of a performance mode that have %1 40 FPS lows at 800p average resolution. That, you can be sure of.

I don't think zen 2 arch is that bad on a CONSOLE, developers can carefully optimize tasks to maximize strenghts of this CPU compare to pc where windows handles it.

But... devs have become super fucking lazy so maybe you are right.

 

[Mr.Phoenix]

Yes, it matters what kind of hardware the game is running on. The Switch can't even output 4K and the IQ of games like Xenoblade Chronicles 3, Bayonetta 3, and TOTK along with their performance has been thrashed time and again. You're always trying to spin this as some kind of nefarious plot to attack Playstation or Xbox and that there's a double standard in place. First it was that false equivalency of DLSS on PC (running a higher base res) vs FSR on consoles. Now we're going to pretend that 1. Nobody complained about TOTK's IQ and performance and 2. The hardware a game is running on doesn't matter. Come on, man. You don't even believe that.

FSR1 on PC was shat on. DLSS1 on PC was shat on. Switch games performance, graphics, and image quality get shat on all the time. This isn't something unique to PS5/SX games, so stop trying to paint this false narrative.

I am not going out keep repeating myself. Critique all you want. But don't lie. That's all I am saying. And when people use hyperbole to convey simple things, it tends to come off like that. Eg...someone says, og that performance models are unpayable or look like a PS3 game. That is just not true, and to someone that is using a forum like this to get info on something, that would be misinformation.

I will explain what I mean by hardware does matter. First, I will say that the hardware comparison only should be made when comparing the same game, running on different platforms. Because in that case there is something to measure against. But when talking about a game that exists on only one platform, it doesn't matter because we simply do not o cannot know how else or how much better that game could have run. PS5 720p... is going to be a far better overall quality than Switch 720p. But one can only assume, each is pushing their respective hardware as hard as they can.

its due to anemic low cache CCX latency riddled zen 2 CPU, that I'm sure of. this cpu was already garbaj on desktop, you can ask anyone who knows their shit. it was barely able to push 60 fps %1 lows on some PS4 ports. zen 2 is a horrible cpu uarch. it will be jaguar all over again (yes, even a zen 3 makes zen 2 look like jaguar, considering in some games zen 3 can lead up to %50 due to how weird performance scaling zen 2 can have. it's a gimmick cpu that only performs like it should if the game can have near perfect thread scaling and not stress any particular cores or do not do complex calculations across CCXes.

any random currently sold CPU will destroy Zen 2 in actual cpu stressing moments. cyberpunk's jig jig street with ray tracing is a great example. jedi survivor too. in both games, zen 2 has catastrophic %1 lows compared to zen 3 and even 9th-10th gen Intel CPUs. it simply crumbles under complex loads that require a lot of threads in sync. not every dev can solve the multithreading gracefully. it is a might task all by itself. but at least if your CPU architecture is not flawed, you won't have any perf. penalties if your CPU cores can communicate without any problem across them. Zen 2 is the opposite. if core 2 needs an information from core 6 a lot of the time while rendering in a second, that means it will have a lot of slowdowns due to horrible ccx structure (yes, consoles too have double ccx structure which I heavily criticised since they were announced)

"I agree with you 100 percent. It just seems like sony's 1st party teams really knows how to get the most out of the ps5 but other devs are struggling for some reason. You’re right, ffxvi is not a very visuallly impressive game outside of some scripted moments. There is no reason it should have anything less than stellar performance or iq, especially when a cross gen game like horizon forbidden west can look and run so much better"

No, they don't know shit. they just released / optimized games that were already optimized to hit rock solid 30 FPS, and 40+ FPS even on crap 1.6/2.2 ghz jag cores. once that "goal" is removed from the equation, you will quickly realize the dream of having those rock solid 60 fps modes, those 60+ fps unlocked VRR modes will be gone.

only games that do not follow this pattern is demon's souls and ratched and clank. but for all I know, it is mostly because they felt pressured to optimize to hit 60 FPS because every other game was releasing at 60 FPS due to being in a crossgen period o they'd have to face massive backlash in such an enviroment. but now devs are becoming more bold as we've seen this year, you will also see them "1st party studios" targeting 1200p/30 FPS and then hackjob of a performance mode that have %1 40 FPS lows at 800p average resolution. That, you can be sure of.

ff xvi, forspoken jedi survivor are frontrunner scapegoats. they have just warmed the bed for the upcoming onslaught. once everyone is psychologically wired to think that PS5 is as much as capable as this, 1st party studios will follow the suit.

no dev is stupid. if people can accept ff xvi or jedi survivor's performance for what they are and still generate huge bucks of money, there really is no "incentive" for any 1st party studio to hit that sweet locked 60 fps on their performance modes. there simply isn't. as I said, don't let crossgen period and ps4-optimized titles cloud your judgement.

errrr....

Ok.... I am actually afraid to tell you that the issues we are seeing in FF16, suggest a GPU limitation, not a CPU one.

 

[yamaci17]

I am not going out keep repeating myself. Critique all you want. But don't lie. That's all I am saying. And when people use hyperbole to convey simple things, it tends to come off like that. Eg...someone says, og that performance models are unpayable or look like a PS3 game. That is just not true, and to someone that is using a forum like this to get info on something, that would be misinformation.

I will explain what I mean by hardware does matter. First, I will say that the hardware comparison only should be made when comparing the same game, running on different platforms. Because in that case there is something to measure against. But when talking about a game that exists on only one platform, it doesn't matter because we simply do not o cannot know how else or how much better that game could have run. PS5 720p... is going to be a far better overall quality than Switch 720p. But one can only assume, each is pushing their respective hardware as hard as they can.


errrr....

Ok.... I am actually afraid to tell you that the issues we are seeing in FF16, suggest a GPU limitation, not a CPU one.

to me it still feels like a mixed CPU limitation too. it is probably mixed bag. I'm not saying it performs good on GPU but it also probably horrible on CPU. otherwise it could downscale further and achieve that 60 FPS lock. but it can't. meaning that it still hits CPU limitations around those framerates

 

[dotnotbot]

Ones a slow rpg and ones a fast action beatem up though.

Starfield slow? Combat seems to be mostly shooting and aiming sucks at 30 FPS

 

[FoxMcChief]

30 fps in 2023 is unacceptable. Period.

30 fps is just fine. Period.

 

[NeonGhost]

It’s a shitty game engine issue not a console one

 

[Mr.Phoenix]

to me it still feels like a mixed CPU limitation too. it is probably mixed bag. I'm not saying it performs good on GPU but it also probably horrible on CPU. otherwise it could downscale further and achieve that 60 FPS lock. but it can't. meaning that it still hits CPU limitations around those framerates

No, my guy...

It's obvious that they have fixed targets for the DRS.Do YOu think they want to drop it down to 540p??? Its also obvious that dropping the rez down once in combat and the game locking to 60fps, is a clear indication that this s a GPU issue.

What this game needed was more time. They made this game to be 30fps. And I didn't even do a great job of it at that. This is why at 30fps, its native target rez is 1440p. The 60fps mode feels and seems bolted on. You can't just get a 60fps mode by dropping rez...and that is clearly what their approach here was.

More time and or a better engine.

If anything, what this gen and even ast gen is showing me, is that outside Capcom, a lot of these Japanese devs haven't really got a handle on HD gaming period.

 

[twilo99]

An action game at 30fps is unacceptable.

Any game at 30fps is unacceptable but here we are in 2023 dealing with this horrible number across the whole industry.

 

[Beer Baelly]

 

[FoxMcChief]

It’s a shitty game engine issue not a console one

Game engine seems fine to me. Game is pretty great at what it’s doing. If in the quality mode that is. But I would have chosen quality mode regardless. I always go for the extra resolution and visual bonuses.

 

[SantaC]

will wait for PC version

 

[Celcius]

Is your PS5 stuffed into a media center? I've never seen any console with this error in real life...

 

[adamsapple]

You'd think the huge heatsink would prevent anything like this from ever happening.

Either the console is in a very tight enclosed space, or there is some kind of a memory leak kind of issue happening that's causing this specific game to overheat so many people's PS5s.

 

[Mr Moose]

Is your PS5 stuffed into a media center? I've never seen any console with this error in real life...

That's not his pic, it's taken from here:

How to Stop Your PS5 From Overheating

The PS5 is better at cooling itself than the PS4 was, but you should still follow a few basic steps to avoid heat damage.

www.howtogeek.com

 

[Beer Baelly]

Is your PS5 stuffed into a media center? I've never seen any console with this error in real life...

 

[Die Namek Ability]

You'd think the huge heatsink would prevent anything like this from ever happening.

Either the console is in a very tight enclosed space, or there is some kind of a memory leak kind of issue happening that's causing this specific game to overheat so many people's PS5s.

Stealth FUD post. Your concern is noted.

 

[Rea]

Seriously this game needs PC version, even though the overall graphics and visual effects are so good, the resolution killed them. It's so blurry even on graphics mode and i can feel there are framerates drop more often than not. Especially when using the Tornado skill. The upscaling technique is suck too.

 

[MikeM]

Waits for PC version...

Same man. No way i’m subjecting myself to such a sub par experience.

 

[StereoVsn]

Waits for PC version...

Have you all seen SE's PC gaming quality? FFVIIR took a long time to fix and still stutters as a small example.

 

[Mister Wolf]

Have you all seen SE's PC gaming quality? FFVIIR took a long time to fix and still stutters as a small example.

Modders added in DLSS2, Frame Generation, and Nvidia Reflex into Jedi Survivor. That's how I'm playing it right now. Quality performance will get brute forced into the game regardless of Square.

 

[Represent.]

Quality mode wins again. Basically flawless victories all gen.

Performance modes looking more and more like an afterthought (that’s exactly what they are now)

30 fps in 2023 is unacceptable. Period.

Enjoy your sub 720p games on the beautiful 4K OLED display then.

 

[Celcius]

Same man. No way i’m subjecting myself to such a sub par experience.

I got tired of waiting 1-2 years after console players and having to avoid spoilers the entire time.

 

[NeonGhost]

Quality mode wins again. Basically flawless victories all gen.

Performance modes looking more and more like an afterthought (that’s exactly what they are now)


Enjoy your sub 720p games on the beautiful 4K OLED display then.

Enjoy that horrible motion blur on 30 fps

 

[TehGoomba7s]

Quality mode wins again. Basically flawless victories all gen.

Performance modes looking more and more like an afterthought (that’s exactly what they are now)


Enjoy your sub 720p games on the beautiful 4K OLED display then.

Game could be running at 16K and it’ll still look like shit on an OLED at 30fps.

 

[StereoVsn]

Modders added in DLSS2, Frame Generation, and Nvidia Reflex into Jedi Survivor. That's how I'm playing it right now. Quality performance will get brute forced into the game regardless of Square.

Companies should be fixing their games themselves vs having users relying on modders.

It was same with SE and Nier.

 

[TheKremlinBossMan]

Must be the worst performing AAA game this gen?

Not even close. It's been stated that the 60fps mode was tacked on late, probably in anticipation of more powerful hardware releasing soonish.

Starfield will be out soon

Do not say this..... please. I need this game to be good.

Ones a slow rpg and ones a fast action beatem up though.

Say what now?

This game needs a 60fps mode much more than XVI does which is why I will be getting it on PC day one.

will wait for PC version

I'll double dip as well but let's be honest waiting two years to play a great game is annoying.
Squares' general release schedule is to drop the PC version when DLC comes out.

Game could be running at 16K and it’ll still look like shit on an OLED at 30fps.

Yea looks like absolute shit on my 77" Oled. The shit people say about this game lets me know some of you haven't played it. Meanwhile.

People talking shit about performance while some of us are just enjoying the game. Quality mode is pretty much rock solid all the way through and performance mode does need work outside of combat. I beat the game first on quality mode and did my hard mode playthrough on framerate mode.

Framerate mode did feel better and yes the image quality takes a hit. This is still one of the best looking PS5 games out there and if you actually played it you'd know that.