Cyberpunkd
Gold Member
That is my impression as well, the city, the neons, the buildings looks incredible, especially at night. The character models and animations are hot rubbish.
Last edited:
-
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: Cyberpunk 2077 Next-Gen Patch: The Digital Foundry Verdict
- Thread starter Arioco
- Start date
smart_brazileiro
Banned
I have to disagree here. Whereas HDR was fucked before it is very much viable now. (PS5) I switched between modes in areas where it previously looked real bad with HDR on and there isn't much difference anymore besides the expected HDR enhancements. I played with HDR off before but have it on this time.
Silent Viper
Banned
And here im playing on max with full RT option at 60fps thanks to DLSS.
RT mode on console is absolute joke. 60fps way to gom
RT mode on console is absolute joke. 60fps way to gom
VFXVeteran
Banned
I'm saying it as a whole with RT on and several other non-RT games (i.e. HFW) @ 60fps. No one and I mean NO company rewrites their graphics engines for new hardware. It's never going to happen. A lighting equation is always going to be the mathematical equation to solve the rendering equation. We can surely add to or modify the graphics engine but there will be code reuse all over. And that's my point. Graphics engines don't need to be rewritten to take advantage of consoles when their bandwidth-limited in the first place. Developers don't have low-level assembly language routines anymore. That is long gone. Optimizations now are lowering the number of rendering pixels and/or FPS. Consoles would not have been able to run CP2077 with full RT at any good FPS if the PC (which the game was designed around) can't do it at a reasonable FPS without DLSS. I don't understand why the Sony crowd thinks their hardware is greater than what it actually is. It's a 2080 at best and we already know how that GPU performs under most scenarios. They are simply bottlenecked GPUs for things that the developers would like to implement this generation. Period.
Last edited:
Venom Snake
Gold Member
I love those Honda Vs KIA type comparaison while I drive my Ferrari
Both game run well so good for the players
When i think of a Ferrari, i am reminded of a holiday in San Marino, glamurous women wearing designer glasses for 30,000 euros apiece, diamond signet rings and beautiful yachts nearby. How does your gaming pc compare? Did it come with a free breakfast?
assurdum
Banned
You won't see anything drastically different of what you seen until now. PS5 has a big chunk of GE circuit enough bigger compared the XSX, a lot of people really understimate how helpful is the GE in an GPU in the long run
Last edited:
assurdum
Banned
Sony crowd? Lol. Have you missed completely what Xbox crowd think of their hardware, genuine question.
Last edited:
Tchu-Espresso
likes mayo on everthing and can't dance
Yeah HDR is left on now since they fixed it.
VFXVeteran
Banned
No. Can you give me links? I don't see several threads based solely on 1 game like I do the Sony gamers, therefore I don't see this happening in practice.
assurdum
Banned
Jesus what a sided person are you. Go to read some post history for the fuck sake, I can't believe you just blame Sony fans for stuff like this. The forum was full of people who laughed at not native 4k Ubisoft games reveal on ps5 and when the others (as me) tried to argue that would have been the same on XSX, they laughed again because the 12 TF beast.
Last edited:
VFXVeteran
Banned
That's not what I'm talking about. The console warring between power this and power that is immature and I don't pay attention to that. I'm talking about what the hardware *should* do with relation to graphics features. I always hear the Sony crowd talking about how a game underperforms because it's not written specifically for a next-gen console assuming that a developer would get enormous amounts of gains had that been the case. I don't see Xbox gamers declaring "unoptimized, this game would run like CG if the graphics engine was rewritten for the next-gen console." Xbox gamers wouldn't say that because all of their exclusives are developed on PC first. If the PC can't do it, then surely the XSX won't.
Last edited:
assurdum
Banned
Go back to read The Medium thread then. Or the more recent thread about the game which run 8k on ps5 and 6k in XSX. What changes if xsx fan has absurd expectations Vs the ps5 hardware and it's not the pc. Don't make them better or less fanboy
Last edited:
VFXVeteran
Banned
Everything you are talking about is in the vein of a console war. I've never seen an Xbox owner think their hardware is better than anything out including a PC based off of how well a game looks.
assurdum
Banned
Implicitly they did it dude. They expected XSX games runs native 4k when was not on ps5 many times. What kind of specs they think it has?
ToTTenTranz
Banned
You've never seen the "VRS and fUlL rDnA2 will make the Series S run better than the PS5" posts?
smart_brazileiro
Banned
It's all about dem tools, right?
PaintTinJr
Member
Most companies use a middleware provided engine and customise it in a way that re-integrating those customizations to the next version of the engine allows them to get the best of both worlds, without rewriting an entire engine. This is very obvious from how few companies are vocal about the benefits of writing their own engine compared to licensing. And even then, the small number of AA studios like Rebellion and Hello games that do write their own, still tend to make their own engines compatible with middleware libraries. So your rewriting question would be moot.
As for the RT pipeline in Cyberpunk 2077 on PC, is it still lighting highly faceted geometry like some of the screenshots I've seen. Lighting and modelling are inseparable in the "next-gen" engine argument IMHO. Otherwise a next-gen engine rendering a single triangle with RT could claim next-gen visuals. Modelling stresses lighting models in performance, so without everything in Cyberpunk being "beyond polygons" like UE5 nanite+lumen, IMHO it is still last-gen.
You did a great job of covering the rendering in Demon's Souls in your old thread - I'm only just properly playing the game now, at three demons vanquished - and it too is still a last-gen engine IMHO. It looks amazing because of how good the original modelling and normal mapping and texturing and lighting of the original game on PS3 hold up at enhanced settings - probably Sony's PhyreEngine - and look pretty flawless at close and mid-range, but comparing to UE5 Land of the Ancient in drone mode or the PS5 UE5 demo is like day and night difference IMO. Seeing faceted items in Cyberpunk screenshots with RT isn't a next-gen lighting stress test for me.
ChiefDada
Gold Member
Last edited:
enigmatic enthusiast
Member
why does the bolded part of statement bother me more than anything else in this thread? Lol, I bet this guy thinks a lightyear is a measure of time... I kid, I kid of course. Back to arguing about dumb stuff. I look to grab the new Bravia X95K when it hits $1,000; wonder if I'll already have a PS VR2 by then.
VFXVeteran
Banned
I agree to disagree here. Increasing modeling throughput will only make everything else slower. With a limited bandwidth for the consoles, it would really be unplayable.
While modeling is a great enhancement to getting close to CG visuals, it's the lighting of those triangles that become saturated with work. We could easily increase polygon count like Nanite but we'd have to reduce complexity on the backend. I'm sure these consoles can run any game with 2x the polygons if the lighting was a constant color.. however, this isn't going to further the cause.
We just disagree with what constitutes 'next-gen'. By your definition, if no company has a nanite-like system then it's considered last gen. I'm on the other end of the spectrum. If a game doesn't implement lighting properly, then it's considered last-gen. While I agree modeling plays a good role in geometry silhouette edges, I do think that a game can be considered next-gen with lower poly counts but a robust RT lighting pipeline.
VFXVeteran
Banned
This says nothing to align with your argument. Again, you guys are thinking that developers right now don't know how to code to an API that's been available for years (PS4). To me that's an insult really. If you look at the PS exclusives that are currently out now they still have to reduce pixel count and RT features. The proof is what you are playing today (i.e. DS, R&C, etc..)
Low-level in this context is not writing assembly language function calls. Vulkan's API would be considered 'low-level' but it's not moving bits - it's just allowing more control over the memory management of the GPU driver. And btw, that job description describes part of what I've been doing for years.
Last edited:
TGO
Hype Train conductor. Works harder than it steams.
Interesting
Looks washed out for me and incapable of deep blacks.
Pretty much like it was before.
SlimySnake
Flashless at the Golden Globes
Uncharted 4 is 120 fps.
Lysandros
Member
50% of the time thinking in light years works all the time. Can't blame the guy.
ChiefDada
Gold Member
You said no company is redesigning engines specifically for new consoles and I showed you proof of PlayStation hiring exclusively for this task. Now you want to engage in non sequitur by falsely claiming I believe game developers can't code for PS4 API. It's evident you're being purposefully difficult, I'm just confused as to why you choose to behave this way. What do you gain from this silliness?
DenchDeckard
Moderated wildly
does this apply to the series x version? Is he basically saying there’s VRS and you can not notice it. That’s crazy if true. What a great feature.
MasterCornholio
Member
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
If the Series version has VRS, it probably helped claw back the massive performance gains it got between patch 1.25 and 1.5.
MasterCornholio
Member
SlimySnake
Flashless at the Golden Globes
Didnt DF say that it was using VRS.
Maybe the reason why it matches PS5 performance is because it is using VRS.
MasterCornholio
Member
That would be weird though.
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
SX version before this patch was erratic as fuck, now its mostly 60 FPS with only a few minor dips in stress areas.
Before it would wildly swing between 40 and 60 just driving down a road.
MasterCornholio
Member
SX version before this patch was erratic as fuck, now its mostly 60 FPS with only a few minor dips in stress areas.
Before it would wildly swing between 40 and 60 just driving down a road.
Ahhh ok. So it brought it in line with the PS5 version where frame rate is concerned.
Lysandros
Member
It is indeed using hardware VRS according Vgtech analysis, so the gain from it must be included in its current performance profile. Meaning that it would perform worse without it.
Lysandros
Member
Not quite.
MidGenRefresh
*Refreshes biennially
Played 5 minutes of the free trail on PS5. It's still one generation behind PC version.
ToTTenTranz
Banned
VFXVeteran
Banned
I said companies are not rewriting their entire graphics engine for a console. Let's get it straight here. Even the job description doesn't say redesign. I know what goes into designing functions for graphics engines and adding features. That's not the same as rewriting it from scratch. Code is reused and new features are added. The description even says multiple generations which proves cross generation code will be used.
Last edited:
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
The fact that he cuts off the video right when Tom is about to say that it isn't representative of most of the game lol is pretty amazing and telling lol.
Werewolfgrandma
Banned
A little example of the extreme variables in framerate analysis in this game.
practically identical run thru and huge difference in performance measured.
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
A little example of the extreme variables in framerate analysis in this game.
practically identical run thru and huge difference in performance measured.
It can also swing the other way in the same locations during combat etc moment to moment. It's a big open world game with a lot of processes running in the background, small variances like this are to be expected.
Last edited:
ChiefDada
Gold Member
Whoever claimed the entire graphics engine would be rewritten from scratch? Not me.
You are again attempting to split hairs with specific terminology, assuming that you can get one over with people in this forum since they do not have tech background. But that doesn't work when make statements so ridiculous that even laymen can see through the BS. Case in point:
Sony wants to hire a Senior Software Engineer for Playstation 5 Rendering API so that he/she can reduce pixel rendering and framerates. Got it.
Werewolfgrandma
Banned
Go back to my pictures and look at the graph for Xbox to Xbox and ps5 to ps5. Same platform, same scene, totally different results from DF to vgtech.It can also swing the other way in the same locations during combat etc moment to moment. It's a big open world game with a lot of processes running in the background, small variances like this are to be expected.
Last edited:
PaintTinJr
Member
I only used nanite+lumen to highlight that the lighting being a better approximate simulation of real lighting as you would have it, doesn't provide a better simulation of real-life when the modelling - I've seen in Cyberpunk screenshots - is using as little as 200-1000 polygons for curved surfaces that needed at least 2.5K minimum to reduce the facets in the curves to noise - by being no more than a few pixels in length. I wasn't trying to say those faceted models in Cyberpunk needed to be at nanite level for the whole game to be considered next-gen, but if you measure a game by its weakest graphics part, then UE5 is far more next-gen than Cyberpunk with RT on PC - at the moment by the modelling issues I've seen.
And it is a catch 22 situation, the more polygons, the more the lighting taxes the engine performance, so the low polygon meshes might be a compromise for performance.
Last edited:
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
Exactly my point. DF, NXGamer and VGTech also all found completely different dynamic resolution thresholds.
A game like this, which already came in a flaming hot state and needed a years worth of patches to run in an acceptable state in the first place, a game like this isn't really indicative of either consoles peak performance and flip flops in frame rate and DRS should be expected.