• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

AC Valhalla PS5 version runs at upscaled 4K

DForce

NaughtyDog Defense Force
You lost me on that reply.

They've.*

To clarify, people have made a lot of mistakes by jumping the gun. I still believe that if it's not Native 4K, Assassins Creed will be slightly under 4K on the PS5 and the difference will not be really noticeable.

People are comparing this to the PS4 Pro/XB1X when the GPU gap was large and PS4 Pro couldn't run those higher resolution textures. These two factors alone makes a big difference in image quality.
 

SkylineRKR

Member
I think we'll see mid-gen upgrades again. The difference between PC high end cards and the new consoles is huge, and the consoles aren't out yet. GPU side is making steps.
 

TTOOLL

Member
After years of tech understanding/engineering/architecture analyses. I like to think I understand things at a deep level.

From what I have seen from public showings, and also some behind the scenes stuff. I feel the XSX will be around 35% more capable.

I can see XSX being native 4k(2160P), and PS5 being dynamic 4K(1440-1800P). Might be able to just stretch x2048 with some optimisations or slightly lower settings in play.

Will the difference be noticeable? I don't think it will for this game. However, when newer games come forward with raytracing, I can imagine a more noticeable difference between the two platforms.

Should you care? No. You should know what you are getting when you purchase each system at this point.
A next gen beast that is incredible value, or a decent next gen machine, with an incredible controller.

Like fine milk.
 

Redlight

Member
Can anyone here, hand on heart say that there's a difference between upscaled 4k and native 4k, while playing a game and not pausing to pixel count?

I prefer FauxK to 4K, with 60fps, no RT and all of the physics, destruction etc, dialled up to 11
Me too. That said, if one console is 60fps at true 4k while the other is 60fps and upscaled then there is a clear power difference at play. That difference doesn't have to be used on res, it may be the case that FX will be better on the more powerful hardware.
 

Sejanus

Member
After years of tech understanding/engineering/architecture analyses. I like to think I understand things at a deep level.

From what I have seen from public showings, and also some behind the scenes stuff. I feel the XSX will be around 35% more capable.

I can see XSX being native 4k(2160P), and PS5 being dynamic 4K(1440-1800P). Might be able to just stretch x2048 with some optimisations or slightly lower settings in play.

Will the difference be noticeable? I don't think it will for this game. However, when newer games come forward with raytracing, I can imagine a more noticeable difference between the two platforms.

Should you care? No. You should know what you are getting when you purchase each system at this point.
A next gen beast that is incredible value, or a decent next gen machine, with an incredible controller.
35% only in phil Spencer dreams
Max 20%
Same res but with better rt for xsx
Or more stable fps
Nothing else
 
They've.*

To clarify, people have made a lot of mistakes by jumping the gun. I still believe that if it's not Native 4K, Assassins Creed will be slightly under 4K on the PS5 and the difference will not be really noticeable.

People are comparing this to the PS4 Pro/XB1X when the GPU gap was large and PS4 Pro couldn't run those higher resolution textures. These two factors alone makes a big difference in image quality.
Ok. My point was that people should wait until the games come out or there is official confirmation.
My examples were where people ran with rumours as truth and got smacked in the face when it turned out not to be true.
 
Last edited:

MarkMe2525

Gold Member
Even if this is true; does it really matter? There are reasons to own a console other than the resolution the games are running at.
 

MarkMe2525

Gold Member
I bet GAFgold it doesn't even keep 60 fps consistently with the dynamic resolution... on both next-gen consoles.

60 fps AC is a pipe dream without too much hit to IQ via settings or res reduction, the Ubi team(s) just suck at CPU optimisation for some reason and then they add too much physics interaction and too many NPCs on top of it sucking.

Thinking must be "Oh we can't do much to keep 60fps even when we cut down the scale of the IQ and the NPC/physics count so lets just put in what we want from an immersion perspective because the framerate is already small-fucked so know cares if its medium-fucked".

I really hope it has a lock to 30 option so I can just enjoy the IQ. I don't play AC games for framerate because going above 1080p (+ optimised settings) usually means drops below 60 so I gave up a few years back.

The new GPUs should solve this issue... but only for this AC... not the next-gen one. Then we'll be back in the AC:Unity situation again I'm betting although hopefully will be above 30 fps on launch day on consoles this time lol.
I believe this will be the case as well for most 3rd party open world games. This is why I made sure my new tv had freesync. Valhalla might pump out a steady framerate though as it was made to run on jaguar. I think it will fair pretty well.
 

Nemesisuuu

Member
Isn't it Watch Dogs Legion on XSX ? Looks like the countryside around London.

I heard it will be upscaled from 1440p on XSX unfortunately.
You obviously didn't read spoiler since you had to bring Xbox up. My comment is about that if it's dynamic and little below 4k, who cares, it's gonna look good, it's not like 480p or something.

I find it funny that people get riled up about this when almost all AAA games today look great graphics wise.
 

Rien

Jelly Belly
giphy.gif

good morning who is she?
 

KRYPT83

Member
I think that even the XSX is upscaled too it will be a situation similar seen in XBX vs PS4 Pro where the XSX will have a higher and better resolution and assets.
Console Wars are serious business. If your console of choice performs slightly better than the opposition - imagine what wonders that'll do for your self esteem!
What made it serious biz was sony shitting on xbox 1080p vz 900p and sharing games remember. Now Sony is getting shit on from the go
 

Concern

Member
Its looking likely that these consoles will turn out to be 1440p upscaled boxes and the pro versions will end up being the "native" 4k ones.

Pretty shitty tbh. Before we could even get solid 1080p/60fps games, everyone started chasing 4k. I think the same will happen with 4k, devs will eventually chase 8k and 4k will become the new 1080p.

Performance > Resolution always at least for me.
 

assurdum

Banned
And people still believe AC Valhalla will be native 4k in serie X because a site has reported to have heard things by Ubisoft. Sure, how not.
 
Last edited:

MilkyJoe

Member
Based on what's been reported, it seems there are optimizations in place for the XSX to have native 4K for ACV.

Ok. So they are trying to say series X uses graphic setting different to the ps5? Because optimization aren't magical things

Maybe it's the extra 2+ rdna tflops?
 

geordiemp

Member
After years of tech understanding/engineering/architecture analyses. I like to think I understand things at a deep level.

From what I have seen from public showings, and also some behind the scenes stuff. I feel the XSX will be around 35% more capable.

I can see XSX being native 4k(2160P), and PS5 being dynamic 4K(1440-1800P). Might be able to just stretch x2048 with some optimisations or slightly lower settings in play.

Will the difference be noticeable? I don't think it will for this game. However, when newer games come forward with raytracing, I can imagine a more noticeable difference between the two platforms.

Should you care? No. You should know what you are getting when you purchase each system at this point.
A next gen beast that is incredible value, or a decent next gen machine, with an incredible controller.

This will age well lol.
 
Last edited:

Chukhopops

Member
AC:V has no RT implementation and seems to be running on an engine very close to Oddyssey.

Why is it compared to WD which uses RT and a different engine? That makes no sense whatsoever if you’ve watched gameplay of both games.
 

geordiemp

Member
AC:V has no RT implementation and seems to be running on an engine very close to Oddyssey.

Why is it compared to WD which uses RT and a different engine? That makes no sense whatsoever if you’ve watched gameplay of both games.

Its because Ubisoft have made video saying games are 4K when they are 1440p.

Ubisoft class upscaled 1440p as 4k in all marketing and videos for consoles. They also did this last gen

Its ubisoft. Water is wet, so any info from a journalist reporting something might be 4K is meaningless for all consoles..
 
Last edited:
I believe this will be the case as well for most 3rd party open world games. This is why I made sure my new tv had freesync. Valhalla might pump out a steady framerate though as it was made to run on jaguar. I think it will fair pretty well.

It is a game built on the AnvilNext2.0 Engine, which is the AC Engine since Unity. So it should run just fine on the current Gen and better on next Gen. How much better? Not too much, since i would assume most of the work put into optimization went into current Gen machines as they have by far the bigger installed base and are the platform that will rake in the money. Hence no RT, no haptic feedback, no alternative modes (performance vs resolution, take mm for example). Maybe slightly better done on the SeX since MS has the lead platform/PR partnership (however the correct term is) for this game. KNowing Ubisoft though they will be very cautious not to piss off anybody on any platform for any release with making one platform look significantly better than the other or having much more/better features. Except for PC of course but that isn´t in Question, that whoever aims for the best performance AND resolution goes that route and doesn´t use a console.


What made it serious biz was sony shitting on xbox 1080p vz 900p and sharing games remember. Now Sony is getting shit on from the go

Excuse me if i maybe missed a beat but isn´t the narrative that 2020 Sony is a different Sony opposed to the 2013 Sony? Arrogant Sony vs consumer friendly Sony. Damn it´s so hard to find consistency these days....
 

RoboFu

One of the green rats
In all seriousness I’d rather most games be 1440 this gen and not go for the resource hogging native 4K. And I think that will be the case even more so that RT is a thing now .
 

Woo-Fu

Banned
Isn't upscaling practically an industry standard now? There's always going to be something better to spend your horsepower on than rendering at 4k.
 
Native 4k 60 in odyssey puts high end pcs to its knees what makes u think 500 dollar boxes will be able to do even with all the optimizations in the world I can bet in busy scenes Valhalla will be sub 4k , and let's pray to God its stable 60
 

_SAKY_

Member
Its looking likely that these consoles will turn out to be 1440p upscaled boxes and the pro versions will end up being the "native" 4k ones.

Pretty shitty tbh. Before we could even get solid 1080p/60fps games, everyone started chasing 4k. I think the same will happen with 4k, devs will eventually chase 8k and 4k will become the new 1080p.

Performance > Resolution always at least for me.
And this has been the problem since 360 and PS3 days
 

assurdum

Banned
Technically yes. There is a difference. between sustained and variable that fanboys are pretending isn't the case.
Please delight us. Because most of fanboy talk about tech stuff which barely know, sustained and variable means nothing in the true performance
 
Last edited:

thelastword

Banned
So this is a thread where we analyze Ubisoft employees words for a faceoff win.....I mean we don't even wait for the game and solid numbers anymore......What is bringing this desperation?
 
Top Bottom