@NEStalgia Sometimes i wonder if as many games need to be full open world (as opposed to semi / wide linear like this game) - i have mixed feelings - i loved it in hogwarts (where world size was kept down a bit), but other games seem to suffer too much.
@rusty82
Yes, imo this is exactly how games should be made and looks far better to me than anything from UE5 at the moment. Set framerate, decent resolution, then add the effects/techniques you have gpu/cpu overhead for. I also found it interesting as DF noted that you have both a locked 60 and a 50-60 mode for VRR users.
There are a few concerns i have about this game (main character - which could easily have been remedied with a similar male option), but graphics/performance is refreshing.
Btw in addition the guy who does the IGN performance reviews is good too (and i think he does his own channel as NXgamer - i may be wrong). I dont frequent ign for anything else, but his performance reviews are usually good (though i havent seen his for this game).
@OldGamer999 (Totally agree about Sony Studios who imo usually feel a gen above everyone else, and i would easily add anything else from insomniac, GOWR, and Demon Souls to the games you mention).
Funny you mention Rise of the Ronin - im nearing the point of finishing playing through a game, and have been debating which game to buy next - having read/watched reviews i am now torn between RotR or Stellar blade! Before today i had more or less settled on RotR.
I will be honest I had little interest peaking in this game, but since reading this review and now watching the Digital Foundry review its looking very interesting.
A few of us were commenting yesterday around how many games shoot performance and resolution (as well as image clarity) to bits just to include more and more graphical effects or techniques/engines that end up ruining the game - according to DF (and talking in terms of performance/graphics) this game does the almost opposite, using simple stuff and doing it very well in the most part.
I hope this is appropriate but i have tagged in a few of those commenting yesterday as it seems oddly timely. @Terra_Custodes @NEStalgia @OldGamer999
@NEStalgia Ah - its probably that i reorganised stuff around a fair bit when i 1st turned it on - something i generally do on all devices (then completely forget ive done it). Game close and power options are right at the start for me. Also, even with a 1TB expansion, I dont normally end up with many downloaded games in my library section, and not on the homescreen, though the old folder option would be nice.
Maybe im the odd one, but I always thought the PS5 UI to be pretty good, particularly from a functional point of view, there is a lot of good here. Themes and homescreen folders would be good (much better than just having music for games tile/page when you are on it and devs include it), but PS5 still feels a big improvement over PS4 to me, and allows me to easily access what i want before starting up a game.
@themightyant Never played it - wanted to, but too many performance and other serious issues - but whenever they release a major patch they add a news article to the ps5 product page. This links to a reddit page for that patch. Every time I think about buying I look at this for the most recent patch to see if it has been fixed up sufficiently, and (and i know its reddit) but i come away thinking there are still too many issues being reported by long time players.
@Terra_Custodes I had a similar conversation not long ago, about how developers adding more and more effects and new graphics techniques, or CPU heavy systems, often lowering pixel counts to silly levels, just makes games look worse and worse. 60fps is a must for me (no 60fps, no buy), but I wholeheartedly agree that all these effects and techniques at the expense of clean image quality is a real turn off. To give a 3rd party example hogwarts was one of the best looking games last year imo (i cant think of a 3rd party game that i thought was better), and in performance mode was pretty consistant at launch - with higher framerates now usual since the last patches if you have 120hz VRR and uncap.
RE Skyrim - is this the PS4 version? Does it now run at 4k60 locked on PS5?
40fps modes arent for me (framerate is far too low) , but adding as an option is a good thing as i think they are a far better option to 30fps providing your TV can do 120hz.
To be honest, for some unknown reason I cant remember, I missed the original game, so bought remake hoping it would be similar, just expanded. But I was put off by what I thought were needless complications (which I am told were not there in the original, and that it would have been useful to have played the original).
Between that and the poor press around graphics in performance mode, I just put it to the bottom of my 'to buy' list - I will get it, but probably when they have patched and put it on sale.
@NEStalgia Quite agree with you about so called graohics modes, and i dont think I could put it better
I can see it in movies, but as you say with slower cameras (and shorter length) it doesnt normally trigger me. Though one film did serverly trigger me recently, but I cannot remenber which one, but I had to turn it off - so they do have the ability, but are normally kept in check as you say. Probably would have been fine viewed on a CRT though!
@NEStalgia Not fully sure how noticeable it is in the real world as even a 30th of a second is a really small timeframe, but you do get the odd phenomenon where if something happens really fast with a number looking directly at it, some will see it others wont. I suppose one example is I am pretty good at seeing a magicians sleight of hand, when i watch an act. Maybe we are reading too much into it - but i have known people who say they really cannot tell any real difference in 30 and 60fps, and definitely no difference between 60 and 120fps (and unlike some comments I have read recently, I had no reason to disbelieve them). Never had VR, but I agree with CRT (never had any issue there either), but when I updated from HD to 4k, and more recently a couple of years ago when i moved to an all round better HDMI 2.1 120hz screen, I noticed framerates more, or perhaps more importantly my tolerance for low framerates dropped. Agree about visual effects, but worse for me is at lower than 60fps when i turn in a 3rd or 1st person view I see it as a sort of slideshow. In fact you have to get up to 90fps before it looks smooth to me, but I can tolerate 60fps. The results of the poll show there are many like us though - i just wish some (not all) of those who dont get issues (yet anyway) could understand that 60fps is needed as an option, not a bonus.
I think 70 will go up in the next few years. Honestly, I wouldnt mind, as long as microtransactions disappear, and games release in a complete, optimised state. At least then you can choose if the game is worth it or not, and dont feel like you have purchased on release at full price just to be a beta tester, or just to have them try to scrape more money off you by adding MTX down the line.
(To be clear I am not against proper dlc expansions)
Also in the disgusted category. I cannot see how companies like this, or those that add microtransactions post review, do not see the damage it does their reputation for future games. Good reputation is hard to gain, but very easy to lose.
I understand this is FTP, but in general gaming terms I wouldnt mind a higher entry rate - ie original purchase cost - if only we could get rid of these horrible MTX.
I saw these comments last night but didnt have chance to answer but had a related conversation the other day. I think its both.
People, in my experience, tend to have an upper frame rate limit, that they just cant see above - I have believed for some time that some people can just not see much above 30 (The problem being that some of these people just do not appreciate that others do and the issues it causes). They do appear to be a minority, but not exactly rare.
Im the opposite, like yourself NEStalgia have stated. I can see framerates up to 120 (I dont know how far beyond) and can actually see very small differences - 5fps is easy for me to detect below around 80, then slightly larger differences above this. For example I can easily tell the difference between SM, SMMM, R&C, SM2 all from insomniac, in their unlocked 60+ VRR performance modes, even though they are all really high. Also, even with VRR I can usually easily see dips to 55fps in locked 60 modes of other games. But I am very, very, intolerant of frame rate issues and frame rates much below 60fps.
My partner really cannot see any difference above about 80fps.
One thing I have noticed is that there seems a trend between the highest framerate you can see and the lowest you can tolerate e.g if someone can see much lower than I can, they can tolerate down to much lower than I can.
However, my tolerance like yourselves has seemed to shift with newer TVs. The newer more advanced TV - the higher framerates need to be in order for me to tolerate them. (Whilst I always play in 60+ modes, that hasnt stopped me being curious at times and looking at other modes).
I am also not convinced my tolerance hasnt reduced as I have got older (though I dont exactly consider myself old) - even though I dont think the max framerate I can see has changed much - though I cant be 100% sure.
Im not sure reaction speed has much to do with it but if it is of interest my reaction speed is incredibly high - im not being boastful, its just that my reaction speed has been trained heavily throughout the years.
@koffing You may well be correct, but if a company is developing games for current gen console (PS5 and series X are not that far apart in capability), and want £60+ of console gamers money, then they should be.
If Sony or the industry at whole suddenly limited all game footage / photos to only that running in consistent 60fps+ modes (and a limit on % of footage that was cutscene), for all games that would cost more than say £15 (so we dont negatively affect small budget / indie teams), you would see very quickly how easy well optimised 60fps is to acheive.
@koffing Plenty of good developers have shown it is perfectly plausible to make games on ps5 that look fantastic and run at 60fps - 90fps, providing you design your game around the capabilities of the current consoles.
@koffing I would prefer the option that any features preventing 60fps (no matter what they were) were removed to allow 60fps.
@BaldBelper78 Im only approx 1yr difference and been a gamer since very young, and I have such an intolerance of framerates that are poor or much less than 60, that i no longer buy or pre order until i have seen a framerate review / analysis. If anything my tolerance is dropping with age.
@Th3solution Sorry, i should have said. 1st symptom is an inability to focus on the screen (hard to explain but like you are really tired in the eyes, but you know you arent). Then motion sickness and/or headaches after a while. Talking with people, and reading comments, this seems common-ish in the case of intolerance, but just like when I agreed with you about some people just not being able to see the difference above 30fps, Im sure this will vary person to person.
@Th3solution Its a fair question, which I dont take to be antagonistic given how you have asked it, and I will try to give a coherent answer (just finished watching Wrestlemania as we started watching it a bit late).
To be honest I have had problems with framerates for a long time - since at least 2016. Performance modes on PS4 Pro could help, but there were a couple of years I started playing games much less around then. One thing I will say is that whilst i knew i had an issue with games and i learned performance modes could help, to start with i didnt know that it was framerates that were responsible (I have always been console rather than PC), and wasnt really educated to what they are and how they worked. Through experience and general education which became much more mainstream, I now know a lot more, including the fact I can see even small changes including positive ones (well) beyond 60 - to be clear I think I have seen them for years, but didnt have the knowledge or experience to know/enumerate what I was seeing. I suspect what I have said is true (or true in part) for a lot of people.
Over the years I have become more intolerant to framerates much lower than 60, or frame pacing/uneven/fast changing framerates. VRR helps a bit at sub 60 but it isnt a magic wand (unless its in allowing above 60fps).
The main reasons (for my increased intolerance) I think are: How newer TVs work. Age Having had 3 good years of playing games at 60 or higher.
The only game I have bought recently with issues was jedi survivor and i had to leave it until after the patch removing ray tracing, even then i could still see some issues - since then I now look for demos or analysis / detailed enough reviews before I buy/pre-order unless its released by the better Sony studios. Literally, I dont care how good a game is by other metrics - if framerates arent good enough it might as well be a 0 out of 10.
@Th3solution I dont think there is anything wrong with you - some people are unable to tell any real difference, others can tell the difference (and maybe dont like 30fps) but are able to adapt after a while, perhaps dependant on the game type. Others like myself are able to see small differences and cant tolerate anything much below 60fps, and cant adapt - I generally can tell the fps of a game within about 5fps until about 80fps, and can still tell there is a difference up until 120fps.
The only people there is something wrong with is those that try to tell you, you are wrong, or those that say 30fps is good enough for everyone (as you say 60% ish of people have indicated 60fps is a must) and developers who think this are alienating part of their audience.
I get fed up with people who think 30fps is playable by everyone - it isnt, or who think others cant tell the difference just because they cant, and some people need to learn this. However others need to learn that some people cannot tell any real difference. People are different, and that is perfectly normal.
@Fatewalker
Yeah, its not something I have looked into too much yet (and I assume that all new decent PCs will connect just fine to an HDMI 2.1 4k TV??), but as we start to see trade off on framerates again on console my interest is increasing.
I will say that Sony has completely had my vote over a lot of years because of their exclusives - but as we start to see less, and PC versions come sooner....
I also thought given the games Sony have launched this generation so far - most of which (with 120hz VRR) have had framerates well, well in excess of 60 - that the PRO would look more like it had been built for higher framerates - though, this may be a bit unfair until we know a bit more about it and the new hardware upscaler which I keep forgetting the name of. They may have made a big mistake here because from polls, comments, talking to people I know, the main reason people are interested in PRO is higher framerates or increased fidelity at already high framerates... time will tell.
In answer to just one of your well put points, I certainly do watch digital foundry reports with envy at the now normal options available to PC to optimise games - e.g. reduce shadow quality to get extra xfps, turn off ray tracing, turn off this that and the other blurring option, and of course the option to turn off frame cap and use 120hz VRR. Lol I dont even need a frame counter to see the difference, I can see it.
Why on earth we cant have this on console I will never know - have preset quality and framerate modes fine - then allow us to tweak as we want. It might have solved Jedi survivor earlier where PC got the option to turn off ray tracing but console had to wait 6 months!
@Fatewalker I may have already agreed with you on a similar comment on another thread, but I cant disagree with a lot of what you have said. I will either get PRO, or move completely to PC (and probably never touch console again) within the next year or so (obviously depending on when PRO launches!). Developers need to make sure games are designed to run at 60fps on PRO and higher(ish) end PC, ideally base PS5 with a loss to fidelity - I would actually support a system where Sony limits game footage to only that running at 60fps. Other than what is possible at 60fps, I really wouldnt care if fidelity stood still for the rest of the generation.
@Jeaz @Resurrected-X460
I quite agree that to some 30fps is good enough and i know there are people that genuinely cant tell the difference. You also have people who prefer 60 but can manage 30 (sometimes with a caveat to the type of game).
However my own experience and clearly a lot of others, looking at this poll and the comments and having spoken to friends, find 30fps to be intolerable.
Ive said it before and im sure i will say it again - a game could have the best gameplay imaginable, the best ever, and be amazing in every other regard, be 4k with incredible fidelity, but to me and clearly others, it will be unplayable (and i do mean unplayable) if its framerate is not 60fps. I would not buy this game. I would much rather buy a decent but average game with 60fps that i could play and enjoy.
@NoCode23 Yes, motion blur is headache inducing too, particularly over long gaming sessions - same as blurring elements at distance outside of cutscenes (your eyes, providing you have no sight issues, in real life will focus in on elements in the distance as you look around so its not even realistic). I think some developers use them as crutches for poor framerates - thankfully better developers give you the option to remove, but all developers need to learn to add these options before launch.
"I can't tell the difference - why do people go on about framerates - a good game is still good at 30fps - last gen had a lot of 30fps games" are very poor arguments.. (for those who cant tolerate low/poor framerates) its not that far from "i can walk up a kerb - why do people go on about no dropped kerbs close by - we didnt always have dropped kerbs". Not as serious in the grand scheme of things, obviously, but the same quality of argument.
@Mortal Ray tracing does virtually nothing for me - its nice enough when insomniac do it at circa 80fps, but truth be told most other games i just dont notice it that much at all, and dont really miss it. Wheras a game running much less than 60fps or with bad frame pacing etc I cannot tolerate.
Resolution is a more interesting question - with the most technically gifted studios I can not really see much difference between performance and quality modes from the point of resolution only (i do look just for curiosity sake, or to take the odd picture). GOWR, or anything from insomniac - I can barely tell the resolution is different (and at my last eyesight test my sight was near perfect), geometry levels look more different to me. However as games get less technically advanced I can see a bigger and bigger difference from the resolution change - generally the poorer the game is to start with, the bigger difference I can see.
Still it wouldnt change my buying of a game - no/poor 60fps is an automatic no buy, and Im hoping that for PS6 we get rid of this antiquated problem and move to 60fps for quality and 120fps for performance, with 90fps balanced.
No (or poor) 60fps is the biggest dealbreaker for me. No 60fps = no buy. Cant tolerate lower frame rates. A few months ago, i played a game in quality 30fps mode just to see if i would adapt to it, and after about 3-4hrs i gave up. I felt sick and had a headache. Played in 60fps the next day and all was good again. I just wish some people would understand how badly it affects some people - its not even a choice.
Not interested at all in live service games, or to be fair most MS games (0 interest in starfield) - i may pick up Hi Fi Rush when I have cleared a bit of my backlog, depending on how a few games in the near future review.
By principle of how much I think game pass is bad for the video games industry as a whole, particularly the type of game it forces, I would have to think long and hard about what price i was willing to pay for a game MS released day 1 on GP.
@LifeGirl @Loamy I have found over the years that usually i find female characters so immersion breaking for myself (male), that it normally knocks a game down a few points when im choosing whether to buy a game or not. Given that the opposite will also be true, I am 100% behind adding both male and female to all games wherever possible (eg Hogwarts, Elden ring, AC Valhalla), ie where you are not using an established character. However, I agree, given the unusually small number of events where you see or hear the character, i am not sure it would make a huge difference for this game and the level of publicity talk for the feature may just be a little OTT...
@MattBoothDev It is indeed an odd state of affairs that graphic fidelity seems to be on a downward trend along with framerates in some cases. It may well be a case of too many effects etc being added. Apart from SM2 of course, hogwarts was the game I thought looked the most pleasing on the eye last year. Not perfect, but high framerate and looked 'clean'.
@BAMozzy I fully get what you are saying in your comments above - I just wish developers would temper their ambition (in terms of what they want to include) with their own ability level, and not overload CPUs to the extent that more or less locked 60fps is not possible in their game (even with RT off).
@MattBoothDev Quite agree with you, 30fps should have died out at the start of the generation - though to be fair it sort of did, until more recent examples of poor optimisation, or excessive ambition.
It would be great if Sony actually enforced 60fps for PRO, but sadly I think they will stop a step below actual enforcement (though I think they are considering it given how strong feelings actually are) - if they dont, though, I know a lot of people, most of whom have had playstations a long while, who may just leave for PC if things get any worse than they are now.
Gonna sound like a broken record but all I want is framerate increases - min 60fps (it would be nice to see better developers targetting 80-90fps like some Sony games have over the last few years using uncapped/VRR/120hz).
Other than that it would be nice to see upscaling give a less 'muddy' blurry look. They can keep raytracing and other graphical effects that make minimal difference in a lot of games - i couldnt even notice RT was missing in jedi survivor when i turned it off. The only games RT has ever really been noticeable to me in is insomniac games.
I do fear though that the pro will mean a lot of developers targetting it and what that means for optimisation on base ps5.
@OldGamer999
I really like Sony TVs, but it should be said I dont use OLED, and a couple of years ago got a good deal on a then top of the range LED with array backlight, with most importantly full HDMI 2.1 (120hz at full 4k (i say this because the year before a few tvs were about that only did some weird half 4k at 120hz), and VRR).
Quite agree though that its quirky to say the least that only 2 of the ports are 2.1 - I only use the 1 for PS5, but I can see others easily needing 3/4.
I just think (and this is speculation based on various articles ive previously read) that at the moment they are basically saying 48fps dips are quite low enough with a target of 60fps.
[Bit off topic but hopefully the mods wont delete, given how the conversation started]
Happy for someone who knows their stuff to correct me, but i believe the only real effect of the lower bandwidth hdmi in this case, is a slight (to me completely unnoticeable) downgrade in colour mode, when using a 120hz window on the TV.
My PS5/TV note on games that run in excess of 60fps eg most Sony games, hogwarts (which actually runs at greater than 75fps most of the time now since a patch late last year), that the TV is using YUV422 colour mode when in 120hz VRR mode.
Low framerate compensation to the best of my knowledge, uses 2 or 3 tv refresh cycles per console frame. The misconception being that 48fps is required for VRR to work - this is incorrect - 48 tv refresh cycles are required, therefore allowing framerates lower than 48 only where multiple refresh cycles are run per frame.
If 2 cycles per frame, 120hz and VRR are required, and a max framerate of 60 is possible if LFC is running.
If 3 cycles per frame, you effectively have the 40fps mode Sony adds frequently, which requires 120hz and 40fps is your maximum (VRR can still be used to handle drops).
Therefore, LFC should be completely possible if either -
1) added at software level
Or 2) at hardware level.
Why dont Sony add it - not sure - but from everything i have heard it is because Sony doesnt want framerates less than 60 to be targetted (im sure i read 90 would be ideal as VR2 needs this). I know this is a little at odds with them adding 40fps modes but im only relaying what ive read previously.
@ShogunRok Thank you for this - its great to see articles covering performance increases to big games. I hope you are able to continue with them.
Its sadly no where near playable to me yet, but maybe a nearly locked 60fps with no dips outside VRR window is within reach based on your findings against capcoms 'expectation management', if so I will buy then.
@get2sammyb On your point of development costs. Reading a number of technical reviews, the most interesting part of the Pro seems to be the new hardware based upscaler (PSSR) - with a number of other upgrades like the RAM pool being to facilitate it, and which may improve frame rates far more significantly than the CPU boost (particularly for GPU limited games). I have wondered if the PSSR is designed in a way so that it signifcantly reduces optimisation required by devs, and therefore reduces dev costs when targetting Pro. 'Smoothing out' optimisation could indeed be a priority for Pro. Though this may actually create a horrible knock on for base PS5 games, where some devs may release even more unoptimised than they do now.
In any event, like many others, I am on the fence until I see what the Pro will do for framerates overall - higher fidelity in 60fps+ modes would be nice, but my first care is that it will help games achieve 60 or higher.
To be fair I loved skyrim back when it 1st released, but bethesda have fallen so far in my opinion, that my only real interest in this article was to read the comments to see if others felt the same, or if I was being odd in not caring about ES6 or what console its released on.
Once they optimise frame rate, i will probably get this - it will only depend on how long this takes them, and whether I see any articles to say they now have it fixed.
@OldGamer999 I read an interesting comment somewhere (cannot remember where) which proposed that Sony are holding off all big 1st party major releases of the big budget adventure type until after Pro is released so they can use them to show off the system. Makes sense, even if im not sure what they could have had ready earlier.
@SgtTruth And to be fair, I would absolutely be fine playing games with the graphics of AC Valhalla, Hogwarts (to give 3rd party examples), and all the others we could list, for the rest of the generation.
I may be in the minority, but that minority is increasing slowly - you only need see the traction Digital Foundry and others are gaining, not to mention things like the 'NPC cull' stories, to see how important it is becoming. I also see people leaving console (for good) for PC for the reason of being able to optimise for frame rate - something I have considered.
And I do know people who vote with their wallets for the reason of 60fps, and I find it a bit silly that developers risk alienating a part of the audience, or negative articles like this, when they could design their games to meet 60fps, and a higher fidelity, more bells and whistles (maybe including more NPCs) 30fps (that does actually run at 30fps). Though I admit while its very nice, im not expecting a 120fps target for many games going forwards.
I do however agree 100% with you over the lure of pretty graphics vs gameplay.
I havent really seen too much of Ronin as as soon as i read it had frame rate dips, i sort of lost interest (for now) but did see that it was far closer than DD2 so will wait for a few patches then make a decision.
Thats where I am with PS5 Pro really - i want to see how the CPU/GPU boosts and new upscaling tech improves frame rates (if it had a better boosted CPU i would have been in day 1), before making a decision.
@SgtTruth Sorry, but 60fps should be bare minimum.
So many games in the last few years have managed 60fps just fine, with a number far exceeding it, and a couple of examples (insomniac) adding in ray tracing and still managing 70-90fps. What i am trying to say is this should be the minimum standard now.
I expect a well optimised 60fps performance option and wont buy without it, but not PC level graphics, and ray tracing (unless its insomniac) is a definite non expectation. Sadly, if DD2 is 'next gen', give me 'cross gen' back.
And I am being 100% honest when I say that framerate performance of 60 or very close is the first thing I look for before reading up on how good a game is, and quite a large proportion of the people i know are similar, though i am the first to admit that some people are just not as affected as others.
@BacklogBrad RE the NPC 'cull' - yes ive read about this a lot - it is funny, but also goes to show how important it is to some people.
@Ravix Your last paragraph is true in a less extreme version, to some. I would genuinely buy and play a '7' game (maybe '6' at a push depending on the negatives) which held some interest to me if it had a smooth 60fps framerate and looked decent enough, but would not buy the 'best game ever made' with amazing graphics if it was 30fps only or not smooth.
You are so right, it would be a shame, as it is literally unplayable at the moment to some of us.
Im not sure i hold out too much hope that this can be optimised to an acceptable level given that it doesnt appear to have been designed for console CPUs, but if they get it to Min 55fps with VRR working well, then I will buy at whatever sale price is going on.
Maybe they will - Jedi Survivor was in a similar state and they managed it, but I think this one may sadly now be a forget and ignore.
@KilloWertz
Well done optimisation is certainly key and often done post launch (which is sad considering buying at launch will normally cost more) - although I will say I am always pleased when stable, smooth games at launch are improved further post launch.
However, as we and others have commented on, I think developers really need to take a hard look as to whether they are capable of doing what they want to do at acceptable performance - 'reality before ambition' so to say.
As you say a large number of games run very well at 60+fps, so it is not the hardware, but what the developer is trying to do given their capability.
Jedi Survivor last year is the last game i will ever pre order before reviews which detail performance are out (with the exception of a few choice 1st party studios), as i was too badly stung when the developers 'sacrificed all to the god of ray tracing'. 6ish months after launch they removed the RT and the game runs well - it certainly looked like the resolution also went up as well, and the loss of RT made no real negative difference to me.
I just fear that until review scores start being adjusted accordingly, that this will get much much worse - "why do we need to optimise / why do we need the game to run properly, DD2 got 9s and look at it".
And to those who dont see it as a big issue, on current TVs much less than 60fps is literally unplayable to me (just cut scenes at 30 is sometimes okish), my eyes/brain do not adjust, and I really would enjoy an ok/average game running at 60, rather than the 'best game ever' that ran at 30fps. You only need to see the (admittedly funny) NPC murder sprees being planned in this game to see it is a big issue to a growing number of people.
Sorry, but im very disappointed with the score(s) for this game. No (decent) 60fps and the dubious microtransactions added after reviews / late in review process, should have dropped the score far (far) lower than 9.
In regards fps, if PS5 Pro can promise 60+ then fantastic, if not I may just bite the bullet in a yr or 2 and learn how to build a PC.
Unfortunately i feel this is only the tip of the iceberg and these mid-high review scores will only embolden developers/publishers to carry on with these ridiculous practices....
Edit - in saying this though, no disrespect to reviewers like @ShogunRok (who has been very clear in the text of their review) - I just think that lack of decent 60fps modes / serious performance issues, which makes this game unplayable to me and many others, and dubious microtransactions, will continue to get worse (much worse) until big score drops force developers/publishers to take notice - after all, when you see 'accolade' trailers all you see are scores and possibly a tiny positive quote.
@ShogunRok 1st time posting, long time reader. I dont consider that a framerate snob. 60fps should be bare minimum these days (particularly with some developers PS5 games averaging well over this if you have the tv to support it). I know its not as simple as just reduce pixel count for higher fps, but it is as simple as do not design a game which cant lock to 60fps. Framerate is very important to some, and i am glad you detail it in most/all your reviews these days - thank you, because i can only tolerate down to about 50-55fps average as long as its smooth and VRR works well, anything less and it doesnt matter how good a game is, it becomes literally unplayable for me, so unfortunately this game is a hard no.
Comments 398
Re: Stellar Blade (PS5) - A Stellar PS5 Debut Destined to Become a Fan Favourite
@NEStalgia
Sometimes i wonder if as many games need to be full open world (as opposed to semi / wide linear like this game) - i have mixed feelings - i loved it in hogwarts (where world size was kept down a bit), but other games seem to suffer too much.
Re: Stellar Blade (PS5) - A Stellar PS5 Debut Destined to Become a Fan Favourite
@rusty82
Yes, imo this is exactly how games should be made and looks far better to me than anything from UE5 at the moment. Set framerate, decent resolution, then add the effects/techniques you have gpu/cpu overhead for. I also found it interesting as DF noted that you have both a locked 60 and a 50-60 mode for VRR users.
There are a few concerns i have about this game (main character - which could easily have been remedied with a similar male option), but graphics/performance is refreshing.
Btw in addition the guy who does the IGN performance reviews is good too (and i think he does his own channel as NXgamer - i may be wrong). I dont frequent ign for anything else, but his performance reviews are usually good (though i havent seen his for this game).
Re: Stellar Blade (PS5) - A Stellar PS5 Debut Destined to Become a Fan Favourite
@Terra_Custodes
Cant disagree on the main character front, and really wish they had choice of male/female.
Re: Stellar Blade (PS5) - A Stellar PS5 Debut Destined to Become a Fan Favourite
@OldGamer999
(Totally agree about Sony Studios who imo usually feel a gen above everyone else, and i would easily add anything else from insomniac, GOWR, and Demon Souls to the games you mention).
Funny you mention Rise of the Ronin - im nearing the point of finishing playing through a game, and have been debating which game to buy next - having read/watched reviews i am now torn between RotR or Stellar blade! Before today i had more or less settled on RotR.
Re: Stellar Blade (PS5) - A Stellar PS5 Debut Destined to Become a Fan Favourite
I will be honest I had little interest peaking in this game, but since reading this review and now watching the Digital Foundry review its looking very interesting.
A few of us were commenting yesterday around how many games shoot performance and resolution (as well as image clarity) to bits just to include more and more graphical effects or techniques/engines that end up ruining the game - according to DF (and talking in terms of performance/graphics) this game does the almost opposite, using simple stuff and doing it very well in the most part.
I hope this is appropriate but i have tagged in a few of those commenting yesterday as it seems oddly timely.
@Terra_Custodes @NEStalgia @OldGamer999
Re: New PS5 Firmware Update Adds Community Game Help Feature, Here Are All the Patch Notes
@NEStalgia
Ah - its probably that i reorganised stuff around a fair bit when i 1st turned it on - something i generally do on all devices (then completely forget ive done it). Game close and power options are right at the start for me.
Also, even with a 1TB expansion, I dont normally end up with many downloaded games in my library section, and not on the homescreen, though the old folder option would be nice.
Re: New PS5 Firmware Update Adds Community Game Help Feature, Here Are All the Patch Notes
Maybe im the odd one, but I always thought the PS5 UI to be pretty good, particularly from a functional point of view, there is a lot of good here.
Themes and homescreen folders would be good (much better than just having music for games tile/page when you are on it and devs include it), but PS5 still feels a big improvement over PS4 to me, and allows me to easily access what i want before starting up a game.
Re: Next Free Lords of the Fallen Update Turns the PS5 Game into a Roguelite
@themightyant
Never played it - wanted to, but too many performance and other serious issues - but whenever they release a major patch they add a news article to the ps5 product page. This links to a reddit page for that patch. Every time I think about buying I look at this for the most recent patch to see if it has been fixed up sufficiently, and (and i know its reddit) but i come away thinking there are still too many issues being reported by long time players.
Re: Avatar Game Gets a Rare 40FPS Mode in New PS5 Patch
@Terra_Custodes
I had a similar conversation not long ago, about how developers adding more and more effects and new graphics techniques, or CPU heavy systems, often lowering pixel counts to silly levels, just makes games look worse and worse.
60fps is a must for me (no 60fps, no buy), but I wholeheartedly agree that all these effects and techniques at the expense of clean image quality is a real turn off.
To give a 3rd party example hogwarts was one of the best looking games last year imo (i cant think of a 3rd party game that i thought was better), and in performance mode was pretty consistant at launch - with higher framerates now usual since the last patches if you have 120hz VRR and uncap.
RE Skyrim - is this the PS4 version? Does it now run at 4k60 locked on PS5?
Re: Avatar Game Gets a Rare 40FPS Mode in New PS5 Patch
40fps modes arent for me (framerate is far too low) , but adding as an option is a good thing as i think they are a far better option to 30fps providing your TV can do 120hz.
Re: Final Fantasy 7 Rebirth Has Sold Around 2 Million Copies, PS5 Player Data Suggests
To be honest, for some unknown reason I cant remember, I missed the original game, so bought remake hoping it would be similar, just expanded. But I was put off by what I thought were needless complications (which I am told were not there in the original, and that it would have been useful to have played the original).
Between that and the poor press around graphics in performance mode, I just put it to the bottom of my 'to buy' list - I will get it, but probably when they have patched and put it on sale.
Re: Most PS5 Players Say 60fps Is a Must
@NEStalgia
Quite agree with you about so called graohics modes, and i dont think I could put it better
I can see it in movies, but as you say with slower cameras (and shorter length) it doesnt normally trigger me. Though one film did serverly trigger me recently, but I cannot remenber which one, but I had to turn it off - so they do have the ability, but are normally kept in check as you say. Probably would have been fine viewed on a CRT though!
Re: Most PS5 Players Say 60fps Is a Must
@NEStalgia
Not fully sure how noticeable it is in the real world as even a 30th of a second is a really small timeframe, but you do get the odd phenomenon where if something happens really fast with a number looking directly at it, some will see it others wont. I suppose one example is I am pretty good at seeing a magicians sleight of hand, when i watch an act.
Maybe we are reading too much into it - but i have known people who say they really cannot tell any real difference in 30 and 60fps, and definitely no difference between 60 and 120fps (and unlike some comments I have read recently, I had no reason to disbelieve them).
Never had VR, but I agree with CRT (never had any issue there either), but when I updated from HD to 4k, and more recently a couple of years ago when i moved to an all round better HDMI 2.1 120hz screen, I noticed framerates more, or perhaps more importantly my tolerance for low framerates dropped.
Agree about visual effects, but worse for me is at lower than 60fps when i turn in a 3rd or 1st person view I see it as a sort of slideshow. In fact you have to get up to 90fps before it looks smooth to me, but I can tolerate 60fps.
The results of the poll show there are many like us though - i just wish some (not all) of those who dont get issues (yet anyway) could understand that 60fps is needed as an option, not a bonus.
Re: $70 Games Are Just a Phase, Believes Saber Interactive CEO
I think 70 will go up in the next few years.
Honestly, I wouldnt mind, as long as microtransactions disappear, and games release in a complete, optimised state.
At least then you can choose if the game is worth it or not, and dont feel like you have purchased on release at full price just to be a beta tester, or just to have them try to scrape more money off you by adding MTX down the line.
(To be clear I am not against proper dlc expansions)
Re: Players of PS5, PS4 Racer Disney Speedstorm Are Seething with Road Rage
Also in the disgusted category.
I cannot see how companies like this, or those that add microtransactions post review, do not see the damage it does their reputation for future games.
Good reputation is hard to gain, but very easy to lose.
I understand this is FTP, but in general gaming terms I wouldnt mind a higher entry rate - ie original purchase cost - if only we could get rid of these horrible MTX.
Re: Most PS5 Players Say 60fps Is a Must
@NEStalgia @thefourfoldroot1
I saw these comments last night but didnt have chance to answer but had a related conversation the other day.
I think its both.
People, in my experience, tend to have an upper frame rate limit, that they just cant see above - I have believed for some time that some people can just not see much above 30 (The problem being that some of these people just do not appreciate that others do and the issues it causes). They do appear to be a minority, but not exactly rare.
Im the opposite, like yourself NEStalgia have stated. I can see framerates up to 120 (I dont know how far beyond) and can actually see very small differences - 5fps is easy for me to detect below around 80, then slightly larger differences above this.
For example I can easily tell the difference between SM, SMMM, R&C, SM2 all from insomniac, in their unlocked 60+ VRR performance modes, even though they are all really high.
Also, even with VRR I can usually easily see dips to 55fps in locked 60 modes of other games.
But I am very, very, intolerant of frame rate issues and frame rates much below 60fps.
My partner really cannot see any difference above about 80fps.
One thing I have noticed is that there seems a trend between the highest framerate you can see and the lowest you can tolerate e.g if someone can see much lower than I can, they can tolerate down to much lower than I can.
However, my tolerance like yourselves has seemed to shift with newer TVs. The newer more advanced TV - the higher framerates need to be in order for me to tolerate them.
(Whilst I always play in 60+ modes, that hasnt stopped me being curious at times and looking at other modes).
I am also not convinced my tolerance hasnt reduced as I have got older (though I dont exactly consider myself old) - even though I dont think the max framerate I can see has changed much - though I cant be 100% sure.
Im not sure reaction speed has much to do with it but if it is of interest my reaction speed is incredibly high - im not being boastful, its just that my reaction speed has been trained heavily throughout the years.
Re: Most PS5 Players Say 60fps Is a Must
@koffing
You may well be correct, but if a company is developing games for current gen console (PS5 and series X are not that far apart in capability), and want £60+ of console gamers money, then they should be.
Re: Most PS5 Players Say 60fps Is a Must
If Sony or the industry at whole suddenly limited all game footage / photos to only that running in consistent 60fps+ modes (and a limit on % of footage that was cutscene), for all games that would cost more than say £15 (so we dont negatively affect small budget / indie teams), you would see very quickly how easy well optimised 60fps is to acheive.
Re: Most PS5 Players Say 60fps Is a Must
@koffing
Plenty of good developers have shown it is perfectly plausible to make games on ps5 that look fantastic and run at 60fps - 90fps, providing you design your game around the capabilities of the current consoles.
Re: Most PS5 Players Say 60fps Is a Must
@koffing
I would prefer the option that any features preventing 60fps (no matter what they were) were removed to allow 60fps.
@BaldBelper78
Im only approx 1yr difference and been a gamer since very young, and I have such an intolerance of framerates that are poor or much less than 60, that i no longer buy or pre order until i have seen a framerate review / analysis. If anything my tolerance is dropping with age.
Re: Poll: How Much Do You Care About 60fps on PS5?
@Th3solution
Sorry, i should have said. 1st symptom is an inability to focus on the screen (hard to explain but like you are really tired in the eyes, but you know you arent). Then motion sickness and/or headaches after a while. Talking with people, and reading comments, this seems common-ish in the case of intolerance, but just like when I agreed with you about some people just not being able to see the difference above 30fps, Im sure this will vary person to person.
Re: Poll: How Much Do You Care About 60fps on PS5?
@Th3solution
Its a fair question, which I dont take to be antagonistic given how you have asked it, and I will try to give a coherent answer (just finished watching Wrestlemania as we started watching it a bit late).
To be honest I have had problems with framerates for a long time - since at least 2016. Performance modes on PS4 Pro could help, but there were a couple of years I started playing games much less around then.
One thing I will say is that whilst i knew i had an issue with games and i learned performance modes could help, to start with i didnt know that it was framerates that were responsible (I have always been console rather than PC), and wasnt really educated to what they are and how they worked.
Through experience and general education which became much more mainstream, I now know a lot more, including the fact I can see even small changes including positive ones (well) beyond 60 - to be clear I think I have seen them for years, but didnt have the knowledge or experience to know/enumerate what I was seeing.
I suspect what I have said is true (or true in part) for a lot of people.
Over the years I have become more intolerant to framerates much lower than 60, or frame pacing/uneven/fast changing framerates. VRR helps a bit at sub 60 but it isnt a magic wand (unless its in allowing above 60fps).
The main reasons (for my increased intolerance) I think are:
How newer TVs work.
Age
Having had 3 good years of playing games at 60 or higher.
The only game I have bought recently with issues was jedi survivor and i had to leave it until after the patch removing ray tracing, even then i could still see some issues - since then I now look for demos or analysis / detailed enough reviews before I buy/pre-order unless its released by the better Sony studios. Literally, I dont care how good a game is by other metrics - if framerates arent good enough it might as well be a 0 out of 10.
I hope that helps.
Re: Poll: How Much Do You Care About 60fps on PS5?
@Th3solution
I dont think there is anything wrong with you - some people are unable to tell any real difference, others can tell the difference (and maybe dont like 30fps) but are able to adapt after a while, perhaps dependant on the game type. Others like myself are able to see small differences and cant tolerate anything much below 60fps, and cant adapt - I generally can tell the fps of a game within about 5fps until about 80fps, and can still tell there is a difference up until 120fps.
The only people there is something wrong with is those that try to tell you, you are wrong, or those that say 30fps is good enough for everyone (as you say 60% ish of people have indicated 60fps is a must) and developers who think this are alienating part of their audience.
I get fed up with people who think 30fps is playable by everyone - it isnt, or who think others cant tell the difference just because they cant, and some people need to learn this.
However others need to learn that some people cannot tell any real difference.
People are different, and that is perfectly normal.
Re: Poll: How Much Do You Care About 60fps on PS5?
@Fatewalker
Yeah, its not something I have looked into too much yet (and I assume that all new decent PCs will connect just fine to an HDMI 2.1 4k TV??), but as we start to see trade off on framerates again on console my interest is increasing.
I will say that Sony has completely had my vote over a lot of years because of their exclusives - but as we start to see less, and PC versions come sooner....
I also thought given the games Sony have launched this generation so far - most of which (with 120hz VRR) have had framerates well, well in excess of 60 - that the PRO would look more like it had been built for higher framerates - though, this may be a bit unfair until we know a bit more about it and the new hardware upscaler which I keep forgetting the name of. They may have made a big mistake here because from polls, comments, talking to people I know, the main reason people are interested in PRO is higher framerates or increased fidelity at already high framerates... time will tell.
In answer to just one of your well put points, I certainly do watch digital foundry reports with envy at the now normal options available to PC to optimise games - e.g. reduce shadow quality to get extra xfps, turn off ray tracing, turn off this that and the other blurring option, and of course the option to turn off frame cap and use 120hz VRR. Lol I dont even need a frame counter to see the difference, I can see it.
Why on earth we cant have this on console I will never know - have preset quality and framerate modes fine - then allow us to tweak as we want. It might have solved Jedi survivor earlier where PC got the option to turn off ray tracing but console had to wait 6 months!
Re: Poll: How Much Do You Care About 60fps on PS5?
@Fatewalker
I may have already agreed with you on a similar comment on another thread, but I cant disagree with a lot of what you have said.
I will either get PRO, or move completely to PC (and probably never touch console again) within the next year or so (obviously depending on when PRO launches!).
Developers need to make sure games are designed to run at 60fps on PRO and higher(ish) end PC, ideally base PS5 with a loss to fidelity - I would actually support a system where Sony limits game footage to only that running at 60fps.
Other than what is possible at 60fps, I really wouldnt care if fidelity stood still for the rest of the generation.
Re: Poll: How Much Do You Care About 60fps on PS5?
@Jeaz @Resurrected-X460
I quite agree that to some 30fps is good enough and i know there are people that genuinely cant tell the difference. You also have people who prefer 60 but can manage 30 (sometimes with a caveat to the type of game).
However my own experience and clearly a lot of others, looking at this poll and the comments and having spoken to friends, find 30fps to be intolerable.
Ive said it before and im sure i will say it again - a game could have the best gameplay imaginable, the best ever, and be amazing in every other regard, be 4k with incredible fidelity, but to me and clearly others, it will be unplayable (and i do mean unplayable) if its framerate is not 60fps. I would not buy this game. I would much rather buy a decent but average game with 60fps that i could play and enjoy.
Re: Poll: How Much Do You Care About 60fps on PS5?
@NoCode23
Yes, motion blur is headache inducing too, particularly over long gaming sessions - same as blurring elements at distance outside of cutscenes (your eyes, providing you have no sight issues, in real life will focus in on elements in the distance as you look around so its not even realistic).
I think some developers use them as crutches for poor framerates - thankfully better developers give you the option to remove, but all developers need to learn to add these options before launch.
Re: Poll: How Much Do You Care About 60fps on PS5?
"I can't tell the difference - why do people go on about framerates - a good game is still good at 30fps - last gen had a lot of 30fps games" are very poor arguments..
(for those who cant tolerate low/poor framerates) its not that far from "i can walk up a kerb - why do people go on about no dropped kerbs close by - we didnt always have dropped kerbs".
Not as serious in the grand scheme of things, obviously, but the same quality of argument.
Re: Poll: How Much Do You Care About 60fps on PS5?
@Mortal
Ray tracing does virtually nothing for me - its nice enough when insomniac do it at circa 80fps, but truth be told most other games i just dont notice it that much at all, and dont really miss it. Wheras a game running much less than 60fps or with bad frame pacing etc I cannot tolerate.
Resolution is a more interesting question - with the most technically gifted studios I can not really see much difference between performance and quality modes from the point of resolution only (i do look just for curiosity sake, or to take the odd picture). GOWR, or anything from insomniac - I can barely tell the resolution is different (and at my last eyesight test my sight was near perfect), geometry levels look more different to me. However as games get less technically advanced I can see a bigger and bigger difference from the resolution change - generally the poorer the game is to start with, the bigger difference I can see.
Still it wouldnt change my buying of a game - no/poor 60fps is an automatic no buy, and Im hoping that for PS6 we get rid of this antiquated problem and move to 60fps for quality and 120fps for performance, with 90fps balanced.
Re: Poll: How Much Do You Care About 60fps on PS5?
No (or poor) 60fps is the biggest dealbreaker for me. No 60fps = no buy.
Cant tolerate lower frame rates. A few months ago, i played a game in quality 30fps mode just to see if i would adapt to it, and after about 3-4hrs i gave up. I felt sick and had a headache. Played in 60fps the next day and all was good again.
I just wish some people would understand how badly it affects some people - its not even a choice.
Re: Sea of Thieves Reportedly a 'Key Test' for More Xbox Games on PS5
Not interested at all in live service games, or to be fair most MS games (0 interest in starfield) - i may pick up Hi Fi Rush when I have cleared a bit of my backlog, depending on how a few games in the near future review.
By principle of how much I think game pass is bad for the video games industry as a whole, particularly the type of game it forces, I would have to think long and hard about what price i was willing to pay for a game MS released day 1 on GP.
Re: System Shock Remake Will Launch at Its Very Best on PS5, PS4
@LifeGirl @Loamy
I have found over the years that usually i find female characters so immersion breaking for myself (male), that it normally knocks a game down a few points when im choosing whether to buy a game or not. Given that the opposite will also be true, I am 100% behind adding both male and female to all games wherever possible (eg Hogwarts, Elden ring, AC Valhalla), ie where you are not using an established character.
However, I agree, given the unusually small number of events where you see or hear the character, i am not sure it would make a huge difference for this game and the level of publicity talk for the feature may just be a little OTT...
Re: Rumour: PS5 Pro's 'Enhanced' Label Covers Resolution, Frame Rate, Ray Tracing Upgrades
@MattBoothDev
It is indeed an odd state of affairs that graphic fidelity seems to be on a downward trend along with framerates in some cases. It may well be a case of too many effects etc being added. Apart from SM2 of course, hogwarts was the game I thought looked the most pleasing on the eye last year. Not perfect, but high framerate and looked 'clean'.
@BAMozzy
I fully get what you are saying in your comments above - I just wish developers would temper their ambition (in terms of what they want to include) with their own ability level, and not overload CPUs to the extent that more or less locked 60fps is not possible in their game (even with RT off).
Re: Rumour: PS5 Pro's 'Enhanced' Label Covers Resolution, Frame Rate, Ray Tracing Upgrades
@MattBoothDev
Quite agree with you, 30fps should have died out at the start of the generation - though to be fair it sort of did, until more recent examples of poor optimisation, or excessive ambition.
It would be great if Sony actually enforced 60fps for PRO, but sadly I think they will stop a step below actual enforcement (though I think they are considering it given how strong feelings actually are) - if they dont, though, I know a lot of people, most of whom have had playstations a long while, who may just leave for PC if things get any worse than they are now.
Re: Rumour: PS5 Pro's 'Enhanced' Label Covers Resolution, Frame Rate, Ray Tracing Upgrades
Gonna sound like a broken record but all I want is framerate increases - min 60fps (it would be nice to see better developers targetting 80-90fps like some Sony games have over the last few years using uncapped/VRR/120hz).
Other than that it would be nice to see upscaling give a less 'muddy' blurry look.
They can keep raytracing and other graphical effects that make minimal difference in a lot of games - i couldnt even notice RT was missing in jedi survivor when i turned it off. The only games RT has ever really been noticeable to me in is insomniac games.
I do fear though that the pro will mean a lot of developers targetting it and what that means for optimisation on base ps5.
Re: Hands On: Dragon's Dogma 2 Update Improves Frame Rate on PS5 at the Cost of Ray Tracing
@OldGamer999
I really like Sony TVs, but it should be said I dont use OLED, and a couple of years ago got a good deal on a then top of the range LED with array backlight, with most importantly full HDMI 2.1 (120hz at full 4k (i say this because the year before a few tvs were about that only did some weird half 4k at 120hz), and VRR).
Quite agree though that its quirky to say the least that only 2 of the ports are 2.1 - I only use the 1 for PS5, but I can see others easily needing 3/4.
I just think (and this is speculation based on various articles ive previously read) that at the moment they are basically saying 48fps dips are quite low enough with a target of 60fps.
[Bit off topic but hopefully the mods wont delete, given how the conversation started]
Re: Hands On: Dragon's Dogma 2 Update Improves Frame Rate on PS5 at the Cost of Ray Tracing
@OldGamer999 @zebric21
Happy for someone who knows their stuff to correct me, but i believe the only real effect of the lower bandwidth hdmi in this case, is a slight (to me completely unnoticeable) downgrade in colour mode, when using a 120hz window on the TV.
My PS5/TV note on games that run in excess of 60fps eg most Sony games, hogwarts (which actually runs at greater than 75fps most of the time now since a patch late last year), that the TV is using YUV422 colour mode when in 120hz VRR mode.
Low framerate compensation to the best of my knowledge, uses 2 or 3 tv refresh cycles per console frame. The misconception being that 48fps is required for VRR to work - this is incorrect - 48 tv refresh cycles are required, therefore allowing framerates lower than 48 only where multiple refresh cycles are run per frame.
If 2 cycles per frame, 120hz and VRR are required, and a max framerate of 60 is possible if LFC is running.
If 3 cycles per frame, you effectively have the 40fps mode Sony adds frequently, which requires 120hz and 40fps is your maximum (VRR can still be used to handle drops).
Therefore, LFC should be completely possible if either -
1) added at software level
Or 2) at hardware level.
Why dont Sony add it - not sure - but from everything i have heard it is because Sony doesnt want framerates less than 60 to be targetted (im sure i read 90 would be ideal as VR2 needs this). I know this is a little at odds with them adding 40fps modes but im only relaying what ive read previously.
Re: Hands On: Dragon's Dogma 2 Update Improves Frame Rate on PS5 at the Cost of Ray Tracing
@ShogunRok
Thank you for this - its great to see articles covering performance increases to big games. I hope you are able to continue with them.
Its sadly no where near playable to me yet, but maybe a nearly locked 60fps with no dips outside VRR window is within reach based on your findings against capcoms 'expectation management', if so I will buy then.
Re: Talking Point: How Do You Feel About the PS5 Pro?
@get2sammyb
On your point of development costs.
Reading a number of technical reviews, the most interesting part of the Pro seems to be the new hardware based upscaler (PSSR) - with a number of other upgrades like the RAM pool being to facilitate it, and which may improve frame rates far more significantly than the CPU boost (particularly for GPU limited games).
I have wondered if the PSSR is designed in a way so that it signifcantly reduces optimisation required by devs, and therefore reduces dev costs when targetting Pro. 'Smoothing out' optimisation could indeed be a priority for Pro.
Though this may actually create a horrible knock on for base PS5 games, where some devs may release even more unoptimised than they do now.
In any event, like many others, I am on the fence until I see what the Pro will do for framerates overall - higher fidelity in 60fps+ modes would be nice, but my first care is that it will help games achieve 60 or higher.
Re: The Elder Scrolls Celebrates 30th Anniversary, Gives a Small Update on TES 6
To be fair I loved skyrim back when it 1st released, but bethesda have fallen so far in my opinion, that my only real interest in this article was to read the comments to see if others felt the same, or if I was being odd in not caring about ES6 or what console its released on.
Re: Poll: Are You Playing Rise of the Ronin?
Once they optimise frame rate, i will probably get this - it will only depend on how long this takes them, and whether I see any articles to say they now have it fixed.
@OldGamer999
I read an interesting comment somewhere (cannot remember where) which proposed that Sony are holding off all big 1st party major releases of the big budget adventure type until after Pro is released so they can use them to show off the system. Makes sense, even if im not sure what they could have had ready earlier.
Re: Capcom Simply Must Improve Dragon's Dogma 2 PS5 Performance, Concludes Digital Foundry
@SgtTruth
And to be fair, I would absolutely be fine playing games with the graphics of AC Valhalla, Hogwarts (to give 3rd party examples), and all the others we could list, for the rest of the generation.
I may be in the minority, but that minority is increasing slowly - you only need see the traction Digital Foundry and others are gaining, not to mention things like the 'NPC cull' stories, to see how important it is becoming. I also see people leaving console (for good) for PC for the reason of being able to optimise for frame rate - something I have considered.
And I do know people who vote with their wallets for the reason of 60fps, and I find it a bit silly that developers risk alienating a part of the audience, or negative articles like this, when they could design their games to meet 60fps, and a higher fidelity, more bells and whistles (maybe including more NPCs) 30fps (that does actually run at 30fps). Though I admit while its very nice, im not expecting a 120fps target for many games going forwards.
I do however agree 100% with you over the lure of pretty graphics vs gameplay.
I havent really seen too much of Ronin as as soon as i read it had frame rate dips, i sort of lost interest (for now) but did see that it was far closer than DD2 so will wait for a few patches then make a decision.
Thats where I am with PS5 Pro really - i want to see how the CPU/GPU boosts and new upscaling tech improves frame rates (if it had a better boosted CPU i would have been in day 1), before making a decision.
Re: Capcom Simply Must Improve Dragon's Dogma 2 PS5 Performance, Concludes Digital Foundry
@SgtTruth
Sorry, but 60fps should be bare minimum.
So many games in the last few years have managed 60fps just fine, with a number far exceeding it, and a couple of examples (insomniac) adding in ray tracing and still managing 70-90fps. What i am trying to say is this should be the minimum standard now.
I expect a well optimised 60fps performance option and wont buy without it, but not PC level graphics, and ray tracing (unless its insomniac) is a definite non expectation. Sadly, if DD2 is 'next gen', give me 'cross gen' back.
And I am being 100% honest when I say that framerate performance of 60 or very close is the first thing I look for before reading up on how good a game is, and quite a large proportion of the people i know are similar, though i am the first to admit that some people are just not as affected as others.
@BacklogBrad RE the NPC 'cull' - yes ive read about this a lot - it is funny, but also goes to show how important it is to some people.
Re: Capcom Simply Must Improve Dragon's Dogma 2 PS5 Performance, Concludes Digital Foundry
@Ravix
Your last paragraph is true in a less extreme version, to some.
I would genuinely buy and play a '7' game (maybe '6' at a push depending on the negatives) which held some interest to me if it had a smooth 60fps framerate and looked decent enough, but would not buy the 'best game ever made' with amazing graphics if it was 30fps only or not smooth.
Re: Capcom Simply Must Improve Dragon's Dogma 2 PS5 Performance, Concludes Digital Foundry
You are so right, it would be a shame, as it is literally unplayable at the moment to some of us.
Im not sure i hold out too much hope that this can be optimised to an acceptable level given that it doesnt appear to have been designed for console CPUs, but if they get it to Min 55fps with VRR working well, then I will buy at whatever sale price is going on.
Maybe they will - Jedi Survivor was in a similar state and they managed it, but I think this one may sadly now be a forget and ignore.
Re: Dragon's Dogma 2 (PS5) - The Apex of RPG Adventuring
@KilloWertz
Well done optimisation is certainly key and often done post launch (which is sad considering buying at launch will normally cost more) - although I will say I am always pleased when stable, smooth games at launch are improved further post launch.
However, as we and others have commented on, I think developers really need to take a hard look as to whether they are capable of doing what they want to do at acceptable performance - 'reality before ambition' so to say.
As you say a large number of games run very well at 60+fps, so it is not the hardware, but what the developer is trying to do given their capability.
Jedi Survivor last year is the last game i will ever pre order before reviews which detail performance are out (with the exception of a few choice 1st party studios), as i was too badly stung when the developers 'sacrificed all to the god of ray tracing'. 6ish months after launch they removed the RT and the game runs well - it certainly looked like the resolution also went up as well, and the loss of RT made no real negative difference to me.
I just fear that until review scores start being adjusted accordingly, that this will get much much worse - "why do we need to optimise / why do we need the game to run properly, DD2 got 9s and look at it".
And to those who dont see it as a big issue, on current TVs much less than 60fps is literally unplayable to me (just cut scenes at 30 is sometimes okish), my eyes/brain do not adjust, and I really would enjoy an ok/average game running at 60, rather than the 'best game ever' that ran at 30fps. You only need to see the (admittedly funny) NPC murder sprees being planned in this game to see it is a big issue to a growing number of people.
Re: Dragon's Dogma 2 (PS5) - The Apex of RPG Adventuring
Sorry, but im very disappointed with the score(s) for this game. No (decent) 60fps and the dubious microtransactions added after reviews / late in review process, should have dropped the score far (far) lower than 9.
In regards fps, if PS5 Pro can promise 60+ then fantastic, if not I may just bite the bullet in a yr or 2 and learn how to build a PC.
Unfortunately i feel this is only the tip of the iceberg and these mid-high review scores will only embolden developers/publishers to carry on with these ridiculous practices....
Edit - in saying this though, no disrespect to reviewers like @ShogunRok (who has been very clear in the text of their review) - I just think that lack of decent 60fps modes / serious performance issues, which makes this game unplayable to me and many others, and dubious microtransactions, will continue to get worse (much worse) until big score drops force developers/publishers to take notice - after all, when you see 'accolade' trailers all you see are scores and possibly a tiny positive quote.
Re: Dragon's Dogma 2 (PS5) - This Could Be the Apex of RPG Adventuring
@ShogunRok
1st time posting, long time reader.
I dont consider that a framerate snob. 60fps should be bare minimum these days (particularly with some developers PS5 games averaging well over this if you have the tv to support it).
I know its not as simple as just reduce pixel count for higher fps, but it is as simple as do not design a game which cant lock to 60fps.
Framerate is very important to some, and i am glad you detail it in most/all your reviews these days - thank you, because i can only tolerate down to about 50-55fps average as long as its smooth and VRR works well, anything less and it doesnt matter how good a game is, it becomes literally unplayable for me, so unfortunately this game is a hard no.