• 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: Grand Theft Auto 5 - PlayStation 5 vs Xbox Series X - Graphics/Performance/Features Tested

Fafalada

Fafracer forever
It's inconsequential either way, it's not casting an actual shadow, it's just drawing a dark texture under the car.
It's contact shadows - ie. form of Ambient Occlusion - so it's as 'inconsequential' as the rest of AO.

If you're trying to assert something on 'does it contribute to console wars rhetorics' type of 'inconsequential', then by all means, go nuts.
 

cormack12

Gold Member
Whats the shadow bug - anyone got a timestamp? Been playing on XSX as that's where my buds play, and been thinking it looks a little flat at times, wondering if its because of that
 

DenchDeckard

Gold Member
Whats the shadow bug - anyone got a timestamp? Been playing on XSX as that's where my buds play, and been thinking it looks a little flat at times, wondering if its because of that

its under all the cars, deffo makes the image more flat. Hopefully they patch it with the next update.
 
Last edited:

DaGwaphics

Gold Member
I really doubt GTA V will ever be on gamepass. It’s a cashcow for ten years and it’ll continue being one.

GTA V has literally already been on GP. 🤭

 
Last edited:

adamsapple

Gold Member
It's contact shadows - ie. form of Ambient Occlusion - so it's as 'inconsequential' as the rest of AO.

If you're trying to assert something on 'does it contribute to console wars rhetorics' type of 'inconsequential', then by all means, go nuts.

It isn't.

I'm going to assume you didn't watch the video and are reacting based on the screens, but Tom directly addresses it:

"After a bit of digging it turns out the environmental shadows and AO are identical across the PS5 and SX. What we're actually seeing here under the car on PS5 is instead what appears to be a projected shadow texture, this is a technique used that's separate to the SSAO pass or the typical shadow ,essentially drawing a texture to bake-in shade at these points"


Time stamped:





Whats the shadow bug - anyone got a timestamp? Been playing on XSX as that's where my buds play, and been thinking it looks a little flat at times, wondering if its because of that


See above.
 
Last edited:

adamsapple

Gold Member
It is 1440p 60 RT.

Maybe you misunderstood?

I'm saying the 4K mode would have been a better choice if it was running on 60 FPS without RT.

4K / 60 FPS no RT
1440p/60 FPS with RT

That's the only way I would think of choosing the fidelity mode over RT performance.
 

adamsapple

Gold Member
It isn't what?
Nothing in that video disagreed with what I said.

It isn't a contact shadow. It's just a texture drawn at the bottom of the car, not an actual casted shadow.

The time stamps right there and I also quoted what Tom said.

It's *not* a contact shadow or any form of AO layer.
 
Last edited:
Whats the shadow bug - anyone got a timestamp? Been playing on XSX as that's where my buds play, and been thinking it looks a little flat at times, wondering if its because of that
According to the Digital Foundry article:
"PS5 renders an additional shadow under cars, around foliage, and at characters' feet, whereas right now Series X appears not to - something that happens in all three modes."
 

BeardGawd

Gold Member
It isn't a contact shadow. It's just a texture drawn at the bottom of the car, not an actual casted shadow.

The time stamps right there and I also quoted what Tom said.

It's *not* a contact shadow or any form of AO layer.
Is this a new effect compared to the last gen version?
 

Fafalada

Fafracer forever
It isn't a contact shadow.
:pie_sleeping:💨


It's just a texture drawn at the bottom of the car, not an actual casted shadow.
In lieu in going on a full blown rant about terminology abuse on internet....
Contact shadows are never 'cast'*** in modern runtime implementations - it's either box-filtering some depth-differences inside an SSAO shader, comparing with an AO volume, querying a precomputed radiance transfer, or gasp - projecting a texture.

*** You could always raytrace the thing as well - but that's still not casting anything. Also 'casted' isn't an actual word.

</grammar-terminology nazi rant>
Well what do you know - I did go off on a rant anyway.


The time stamps right there and I also quoted what Tom said.
Yes - he explicitly shows it's contact shadows.

It's *not* a contact shadow or any form of AO layer.
You are arbitrarily associating lighting terms with specific tools used to simulate them. If I apply your logic - shadow-maps aren't actual shadows, because 'real shadows' are absence of light, not projecting depth-textures into the scene, thus the only 'actual shadows' can be done via path-tracing or one of the similar techniques.
 

MasterCornholio

Gold Member
VRR Required again......even for a 9 year old game.

Hopefully they patch that shadow bug thing on the Xbox. Seems like someone just forgot to activate it in the Ini.

Xbox wins on loading times again, just doesn't make sense.

Wish they had added DRS at like 1800P. Also, lack of 16 x AF is just unacceptable.

I wouldn’t say VRR is a requirement to have a good experience with this title.
 
I can guarantee that the time spent typing up a post bitching about the 3 second loading time difference on first boot would exceed the total amount of time saved by said loading time difference.
 

Fafalada

Fafracer forever
Is this a new effect compared to the last gen version?
Probably not - but even if it is, contact shadows were commonly simulated this way in previous gens, it's pretty expensive at scale (if you use it for all dynamic objects in the scene), but tends to be much higher quality than SSAO when it works.
 

adamsapple

Gold Member
:pie_sleeping:💨
In lieu in going on a full blown rant about terminology abuse on internet....
Contact shadows are never 'cast'*** in modern runtime implementations - it's either box-filtering some depth-differences inside an SSAO shader, comparing with an AO volume, querying a precomputed radiance transfer, or gasp - projecting a texture.

*** You could always raytrace the thing as well - but that's still not casting anything. Also 'casted' isn't an actual word.

</grammar-terminology nazi rant>
Well what do you know - I did go off on a rant anyway.

I mean this is how the article describes it verbatim:


It seems that PS5 is rendering an additional projected shadow texture: it's a technique used by Rockstar separate to screen-space ambient occlusion or typical shadows, drawing a texture to bake in shade at specific points

You would think if it was something like omitted contact shadows any of the comparisons so far like DF or VGTech would have made a note of it like they usually do.


Is this a new effect compared to the last gen version?

I don't think it's a new effect, just a baked in dark texture.

See below examples:

Where an actual shadow needs to be casted, cars etc are casting it on Series X as well, it's not like the shadows are completely missing.

It's just that the PS5 has an additional darker texture *always* drawn no matter what, which is why you'll see the shadows under the car is darker in both comparisons, cause it's mixing the baked texture and the actual shadow being cast:




 

BigLee74

Banned
Projected textures are not expensive guys. This isn’t something disabled for performance reasons. This is a missing value in a config, and will probably be fixed.

I want to play this again at some point, but I’ll wait patiently for a sale.
 

adamsapple

Gold Member
Projected textures are not expensive guys. This isn’t something disabled for performance reasons. This is a missing value in a config, and will probably be fixed.

I want to play this again at some point, but I’ll wait patiently for a sale.

Exactly, this is either a bug or oversight, and even if it doesn't get added to the Series versions, not really a big deal.

Same as the minor difference in cube maps between the two, it's inconsequential.
 

Swift_Star

Gold Member
Projected textures are not expensive guys. This isn’t something disabled for performance reasons. This is a missing value in a config, and will probably be fixed.

I want to play this again at some point, but I’ll wait patiently for a sale.
Sale on a game that costs $10 right now?
 

BigLee74

Banned
Exactly, this is either a bug or oversight, and even if it doesn't get added to the Series versions, not really a big deal.

Same as the minor difference in cube maps between the two, it's inconsequential.

I actually think it looks quite bad without it. As somebody said earlier, flat. It’s certainly a worse visual flaw than a slightly lower res cube map in a scene or two.

But I’m sure it will be fixed anyway. Nothing to fret about.
 
Last edited:

Fafalada

Fafracer forever
I mean this is how the article describes it verbatim:
Yes that describes implementation details, which were never in argument. The implemented visual effect is a contact shadow.
And again - contact shadows literally are a form of AO (a subset, to be exact) so additional darkening is what's supposed to happen - it's a result of occluding non-directional light contributions (aka. the 'ambient').

You would think if it was something like omitted contact shadows any of the comparisons so far like DF or VGTech would have made a note of it like they usually do.
DF video literally talks about it, how much more explicit does it need to be?
 

BeardGawd

Gold Member
I mean this is how the article describes it verbatim:




You would think if it was something like omitted contact shadows any of the comparisons so far like DF or VGTech would have made a note of it like they usually do.




I don't think it's a new effect, just a baked in dark texture.

See below examples:

Where an actual shadow needs to be casted, cars etc are casting it on Series X as well, it's not like the shadows are completely missing.

It's just that the PS5 has an additional darker texture *always* drawn no matter what, which is why you'll see the shadows under the car is darker in both comparisons, cause it's mixing the baked texture and the actual shadow being cast:




Well yeah I understand what it's doing. I'm just curious if this was also used in the last gen version or if they coded something new for this version.
 

adamsapple

Gold Member
Well yeah I understand what it's doing. I'm just curious if this was also used in the last gen version or if they coded something new for this version.

I don't think it was in the last gen version going by what screens or videos I can pull up on my phone.

Not for the Xbox, unfortunately. And I’ve already paid for this sucker twice.


AAGH I'm just about on the verge of getting it on the Xbox the umpteenth time. Fucking R*. No shit GTA V sold 100 million plus, suckers like me bought it 4 times lol.
 
Last edited:
After watching the video, i'm surprised that Performance RT mode is locked to 1440p. I was led to believe it was dynamic, not just upscaled. Rockstar should really implement dynamic resolution scaling in their engine. Hell i'd take a generally lower resolution if they could just implement AF so that distant textures aren't a soup. I'm always reminded of Tekken 6 on PS3 running at only 50% res of the 360 version, yet having better image quality due to 2xMSAA and better AF.
 

DenchDeckard

Gold Member
True but to call it a requirement for this game is a bit of a stretch given the numbers.
You are right, it’s requirement for me on all games thanks to the tv I have. Saying that I expect Sony to get it soon so if the game isn’t patched to fix the shadow issue on xbox before the price goes up in June.…..if I even decide to buy it lol.
 

MasterCornholio

Gold Member
You are right, it’s requirement for me on all games thanks to the tv I have. Saying that I expect Sony to get it soon so if the game isn’t patched to fix the shadow issue on xbox before the price goes up in June.…..if I even decide to buy it lol.

I doubt your even going to notice the difference to be fair. Don’t think it really matters where you get the game this time around.
 

Patrick S.

Amiga Forever
Same boat. I'd grab the XSX version if it was $10, but i'll hold off at 20.

I would have pulled the trigger if the regular performance mode had better draw distance and filtering.

I really don't understand the reasoning behind this costing ten bucks more on Xbox. Same as when Cyberpunk next generation launched ten bucks more expensive on Xbox. Does this have to do with expected differences in numbers of units sold on each platform?
 

GloveSlap

Member
I really don't understand the reasoning behind this costing ten bucks more on Xbox. Same as when Cyberpunk next generation launched ten bucks more expensive on Xbox. Does this have to do with expected differences in numbers of units sold on each platform?
I'm pretty sure its just a Sony marketing deal.
 

ManaByte

Gold Member
I'm pretty sure its just a Sony marketing deal.

The XSX version is $20 and is both GTAO and Story.

The PS5 version is $10 for the Story mode and GTAO is free.

Basically the Sony marketing deal (which has been going on for a while with the $1M a month for GTAO for PS+ members) is allowing GTAO to be free.

If GTAO wasn't free on PS5 both versions would be $20 until June when they go up to $40.
 
Last edited:

adamsapple

Gold Member
I really don't understand the reasoning behind this costing ten bucks more on Xbox. Same as when Cyberpunk next generation launched ten bucks more expensive on Xbox. Does this have to do with expected differences in numbers of units sold on each platform?

The MP is free on PS5 so it takes off $10 from the price, on Xbox y ou're basically paying $10 for SP and $10 for MP.

Once the 3 month Sony free MP deal and the current 50% price reduction deal ends, the game will raise to $40 on both platforms.
 

Exanthus

Member
So that other thread claiming series x was in a poor condition was full of it.

They are the same. Yet these threads will still hit 20+ pages.
 
Top Bottom