S0ULZB0URNE
Member
Sounds exactly like Bethesda, which From is not.
-
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.
[DF] Elden Ring Beta: PS5/ Xbox Series X/S First Look - Quality vs Performance Modes Tested
- Thread starter 3liteDragon
- Start date
- Analysis
RoadHazard
Gold Member
They fixed the worst framerate drops in BotW, or at least significantly smoothed them out. So yes?
Excellent video from DF as usual. I hope that FROM locks that framerate in quality mode (I'd be fine with a 40FPS overworld) and gives options on turning blur on or off. Otherwise it'll be PC for me (in which case I hope we get native support for a wide range of controller options).
. . .also a really good ELDEN RING preview video overall that isn't weighed down by an overly excited fan base.
I'm sure this will be the most ridiculous statement I read on the internet today. I'm sure of it!
. . .also a really good ELDEN RING preview video overall that isn't weighed down by an overly excited fan base.
I'm sure this will be the most ridiculous statement I read on the internet today. I'm sure of it!
TrueLegend
Member
But thats not the FACT. The fact is that this is beta. And it looks top class as far as consoles go. On PC there are few open worlds that look better but on console, this is the second-best. Next gen means great animations, that is the most important part, that takes time, details in the environment, destruction, deformation that takes time. Not just cranking the texture resolution and tesselation which demon's souls does. It's great remake...probably second best after RE2 but the fact is that it is a remake of From Software's indie title.
The facts bro, the facts. The fact is that the last from software title on console ran at 1080p30 or other great looking console titles ran at 45-60 at best. But now you get both 1440p and 60 and you are judging games on graphics. In one year everyone's standard has suddenly skyrocketed. In your standard of fact if this is average looking every other game in existence except the few next gen ony titles must be dogshit. So no thats not the FACT.
01011001
Banned
Sekiro and Dark Souls 3 run very well on PC. I didn't have the best PC at the time but was easily able to play Sekrio at 1440p60 at max settings
RoadHazard
Gold Member
There are so many errors in this post I don't even know how to answer it. This game does not look "top class" on a technical level (it's very average). Demon's Souls is not an "indie" (it was made together with and published by Sony). Etc.
Sorry, but you're simply delusional.
Last edited:
The SSD special sauce has potential for cool stuff, but.. this ain't it chief. This is just the SSD having much faster raw speeds in comparison to Xbox obviously making loading assets take shorter. FROM isn't doing anything special here with the I/O stack on PS5. I mean it is a nice little QOL buff to have a faster SSD and ~half the time to load into areas/respawn, but.. we're talking a few seconds not minutes. Bluepoint made respawning and loading in faster in DeS Remake lolCerny bet about the SSD is starting to pay off in those big multiplat games. Having the loading cut in about half in a From Software game is a big plus.
It should have it next month.
Last edited:
RoadHazard
Gold Member
Yeah, if this game was built to truly take advantage of the PS5 I/O stuff it would load in 1-2 seconds rather than 6 when respawning or fast traveling. Just a fade-out-fade-in, with no loading screen, which is what we're seeing in all "proper" PS5 games.
Last edited:
TrueLegend
Member
Hell compared to their current capacity Dark Souls can be indie but I will let it be AA. Sony does not just make AAA games. It finances all types of production. Also, I have heard the same rambling again and again 'you are wrong bro and this is fact' Where are your arguments? Or do you think graphics fidelity is magic voodoo. On what metric is this average?
Shadows
AO
AA
Geometry
Bloom
Volumetric Fog
Volumetric lighting
Character Models
Animations
What? Just harping bro I am right doesn't cut it.
Last edited:
Hey, so long as it is better than BLOODBORNE at release (I actually don't know if they ever improved that).
Lol I still haven't finished Bloodborne though I'm like 85% done and after playing DeS idk if I can handle the hdd
RoadHazard
Gold Member
Sony (or any big publisher) funding a game means that it is by definition not indie.
Oh, this game has geometry and bloom? Well, consider me convinced then, no PS4 open world games have that.
No, but none of those things look especially impressive in this game. Horizon looks SO much better in pretty much every conceivable way, as does Ghost of Tsushima IMO. And those games run flawlessly.
Lysandros
Member
Yes Tom, we understand, "that's not clear why PS5 is outperforming XSX in those scenes", very very mysterious indeed, very very baffling indeed... Act just a little bit more surprised for the crowds when PS5 performs better, will you? Honestly either you have absolutely not a single clue about respective specs of those machines or you are paid to act 'surprised'. May i humbly suggest theatre as a more fitting carreer choice to you?
Last edited:
Arioco
Member
Banjo64
cumsessed
DeS is a PS3 game in scope and mechanics. The remaster is visually stunning. One of the best games I’ve ever seen. However, please don’t be under any illusions that Elden Ring is far greater in scope in pretty much every way.
cragarmi
Member
RE Village also had a significant difference in load time. So it's not an isolated case." Cerny SSD starting to pay of".... ？？？
It can be the first time that such a difference has been seen, and cases where XSeries has even had an advantage are not rare within a great equality in this section across a year .....
But some only need a case out of line (and being a beta Network) to declare that it is a trend
Last edited:
TrueLegend
Member
It seems you don't know how to debate. Stop making strawmen argument. I didnt say other game look shit I said Elden Ring looks better so dont make proxy topic and hijack the premise. Tell me how Elden Ring is average. Tell me that. I didn't say other PS4 games dont have bloom and geometry. I said and let me phrase for you clearly "What graphical fidelity Elden Ring lacks that makes it average or what level of implementation of any of the graphical features it lacks to be called average?" I don't see you giving any specifics. You are the one saying it's average so its on you to first substantiate your disposition.
RoadHazard
Gold Member
Just look at it and then look at those other games. Elden Ring looks much worse technically (art is another thing), and runs like shit. None of the available modes on PS5/XSX have acceptable performance. It's that simple.
And it's not like this is news. From's games have NEVER performed well considering how they look. Not a single one.
Lysandros
Member
RE: Village gap was much larger in favor of PS5.
TrueLegend
Member
Yeah Enough of this trust me bro and strawmen arguments. Dark Souls on PC was shit and Sekiro ran bad on AMD GPU but thats it. Dark Souls II, Sekiro on most PCs, Dark Souls III, Bloodborne were great. Not that I wanna debate on proxy topics because I never talked about performance because its beta version and framedrops are already on video of this topic. We are talking graphical fidelity here and you clearly cant elaborate your disposition.
Last edited:
Great Hair
Banned
Welcome darksoulsdeaths.com - BlueHost.com
Bluehost - Top rated web hosting provider - Free 1 click installs For blogs, shopping carts, and more. Get a free domain name, real NON-outsourced 24/7 support, and superior speed. web hosting provider php hosting cheap web hosting, Web hosting, domain names, front page hosting, email hosting...
darksoulsdeaths.com
4500 deaths
12 seconds after every death = 54,000 seconds loading
+fast travel, about 100 times? = 55,200 seconds or
15 hours 20 min on XSX (pvp matches, loading not incl.)
only 6h+ on PS5 ...
Last edited:
RoadHazard
Gold Member
All those games ran worse than they should have on consoles, compared to other similar or (significantly) better looking games on the same hardware. The same is true for Elden Ring.
What I'm saying here isn't controversial. It's an accepted fact by pretty much everyone except you.
Last edited:
Lysandros
Member
If i heard correctly from the video motion blur is also disabled on XSX.
RoadHazard
Gold Member
It says "XBS" (not XBSS), which I believe means both Series consoles.
SenjutsuSage
Banned
Lysandros
Member
Yes, indeed. Must be it then.
RoadHazard
Gold Member
Nah, this game is built for last-gen HDD performance, so it's not like it's streaming in data in a way that would affect performance from moment to moment like that.
j0hnnix
Member
Ty! Looks like I'll keep to my trend of getting souls games on PS.
Bonfires Down
Member
Frame pacing 
Honestly think I would just run the PS4 Pro version and not worry about performance.
Honestly think I would just run the PS4 Pro version and not worry about performance.
Lysandros
Member
It can certainly be a 'contributor' among other things, PS5 doesn't lacks advantages in GPU and bandwidth side also.
Great Hair
Banned
ethomaz
Banned
Art style is subjective.
Said that technically Demon’s Souls Remake is ahead and it is not even close.
8BiTw0LF
Banned
But in Wired's new Cerny vid, he states it's an automated process. Devs doesn't have to do anything but feed the code to the system and it handles it automatically. Sounds like it's easy to optimize for.
Last edited:
ethomaz
Banned
I won’t even say From games on PC all have frame pacing issues… take some time to modders fix that on PC… still way better than consoles that never got fixed.
Last edited:
Sosokrates
Report me if I continue to console war
Not true, its shown its advantages many times.
Though because the consoles are so close in power, dev environment and legacy stuff will have just a big of an impact as the small hardware differences.
Im getting less bothered by visuals in games, dont get me wrong I love the state of the art in real time visuals but thats almost like a seperate interest. When it comes to playing games the graphics can still be enjoyable for me even on the switch.
Hell, last night I played about 30mins of control on my xsx via the cloud. And even though it looks 720p, it loaded very quickly and was a rock solid 30fps and I still appreciated the excellent graphics of control, the chracters model still looked excellent and the environment did to.
jm89
Member
TrueLegend
Member
Typical "Everyone" trope, have you taken consensus and "Just You" alienation. This isn't school. Welcome to reality. Your idea of everyone is your idea only. And again you keep sinking to the proxy topics. Now you have deviated fidelity to performance which as I already stated is not what I was talking and I already predicted this is what you will do with your strawmen arguments. Dude how obvious you can be. In field of debate we have categorized people like you. You cant substantiate you just harp and you just change topics. So yeah I am done here.
The fuck is average deaths per playthrough at 4500 vs total deaths per player at 750Welcome darksoulsdeaths.com - BlueHost.com
Bluehost - Top rated web hosting provider - Free 1 click installs For blogs, shopping carts, and more. Get a free domain name, real NON-outsourced 24/7 support, and superior speed. web hosting provider php hosting cheap web hosting, Web hosting, domain names, front page hosting, email hosting...darksoulsdeaths.com
4500 deaths
12 seconds after every death = 54,000 seconds loading
+fast travel, about 100 times? = 55,200 seconds or
15 hours 20 min on XSX (pvp matches, loading not incl.)
only 6h+ on PS5 ...
Md Ray
Member
Yeah, if I were a console-only gamer, I'd go with the PS5 version as it's clearly the superior version of them all. VRR will just make it extra superior.So higher resolution and higher framarate for PS5 plus much better load times and an option to play at 60fps locked in ps4 pro mode.
Full House for PS5 here.
Looks like Cerny delivered the tools guys.
Draugoth
Gold Member
TL;DW:
Quality modes:
-PS5 and Series X are Native 4K, Series S is 1440p.
-PS5: Runs around 45fps, never drops below 30.
-Series X: Runs around 40fps and is generally around 5-6fps lower than PS5 in like-for like scenes.
-S: Just slightly above 30fps most of the time.
Performance modes:
-Performance modes on the current-gen consoles feature worse shadow quality but other settings (foliage density and draw, effects, textures, ambient occlusion) are equal to the Quality mode! Only other difference is that Series X|S lose motion blur in performance mode whereas PS5 keeps it in all modes.
-PS5: Targets native 4K but is generally 1512p to 1800p. Runs at 45 to 60fps depending on the scenario.
-Series X: Targets native 4K but is generally 1512p to 1800p. Mostly 1512p though, often a lower resolution than PS5 in like-for-like scenes.
-Series X generally runs worse than PS5. Just walking through the grass sees Series X struggling to reach 60fps. PS5 has a 10fps lead sometimes. However there are outliers which favour Series X; rapid traversal on horse back for example. Riding one particular path via horse gives Series X a 10fps advantage of its own. For the bulk of gameplay though, PS5 has better framerates.
-Series S: Same settings as Series X and targets 1440p but seems to actually be around 1008p. Runs between 40-60fps but is generally around 50fps
Loading times:
-PS5 trumps all versions, with loading times that are around half that of Series X|S in all situations.
Notes:
Quality modes:
-PS5 and Series X are Native 4K, Series S is 1440p.
-PS5: Runs around 45fps, never drops below 30.
-Series X: Runs around 40fps and is generally around 5-6fps lower than PS5 in like-for like scenes.
-S: Just slightly above 30fps most of the time.
Performance modes:
-Performance modes on the current-gen consoles feature worse shadow quality but other settings (foliage density and draw, effects, textures, ambient occlusion) are equal to the Quality mode! Only other difference is that Series X|S lose motion blur in performance mode whereas PS5 keeps it in all modes.
-PS5: Targets native 4K but is generally 1512p to 1800p. Runs at 45 to 60fps depending on the scenario.
-Series X: Targets native 4K but is generally 1512p to 1800p. Mostly 1512p though, often a lower resolution than PS5 in like-for-like scenes.
-Series X generally runs worse than PS5. Just walking through the grass sees Series X struggling to reach 60fps. PS5 has a 10fps lead sometimes. However there are outliers which favour Series X; rapid traversal on horse back for example. Riding one particular path via horse gives Series X a 10fps advantage of its own. For the bulk of gameplay though, PS5 has better framerates.
-Series S: Same settings as Series X and targets 1440p but seems to actually be around 1008p. Runs between 40-60fps but is generally around 50fps
Loading times:
-PS5 trumps all versions, with loading times that are around half that of Series X|S in all situations.
Notes:
- No ray-tracing in beta but it will be an option at launch.
- Running PS4 Pro version on PS5 gets you Checkerboarded 1800p and lower settings but you get a practically locked 60fps!
- DF are unsure whether the missing motion blur in performance mode on Series X|S is a bug or on purpose to help performance.
ethomaz
Banned
It still too high… PS5 games all have loading times below 4s… 2s max is ideal.Cerny bet about the SSD is starting to pay off in those big multiplat games. Having the loading cut in about half in a From Software game is a big plus.
FrankWza
Member
We’ll see If that December update happens.
RoadHazard
Gold Member
I haven't "deviated". What I've been saying all along is that with this level of fidelity the performance should be better than it is, but also that it's unsurprising that it's not given From's past output.
But I agree that this discussion isn't going anywhere.
Last edited:
