• 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: Tiny Tina's Wonderlands: PS5 vs Xbox Series X/S Tested - A Tech Evolution Over Borderlands 3?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Arioco

Member


- PS5 and Series X offer two graphic modes, a 4K@60 fps mode (resolution) and a 1080p@120 fps mode (performance). Seroes S has no graphic toggle at all.

- In Resolution mode the resolution is dynamic for all three consoles. PS5 and Series X are 1800p-2160p, Series S is 960p-1440p.

- Settings are the same on PS5 and Series X. Series S has lower grass density and lower quality shadows.

- Performance Mode drops rez to fixed 1080p, which locks the performance to perfect 60 fps and even allows for a 120 fps mode.

- As for performance, all three platforms hit 60 fps a majority of the time in Resolution mode. It's not perfect, but runs generally well. Series S shows similar performance, but it seems to drops more often.

- Split screen in Resolution mode causes more drops under 60 fps, which can be solved by selecting 1080p instead, which gives a perfect locked 60 fps.

- The 120 fps mode sticks closely to the target, but the drops accur when the action kicks off, so we get a range of 90-120fps. Direct comparison is difficult but Tom believes the average might be higher on Series X, since it's rare see it drop to the 90s range, and of course it supports VRR to save the day.

- Loading times: the game load faster on PSS vs Series X and S (8 seconds vs 11 seconds, nothing crazy).
 
Last edited:

Leyasu

Gold Member
The time for diplomacy is over. Now they fght

excited war GIF by Bud Light
 

Kacho

Gold Member
- As for performance, all three platforms hit 60 fps a majority of the time in Resolution mode. It's not perfect, but runs generally well.
Nice result for resolution mode. The clips I've seen are all using performance mode so I'll need to hunt down some resolution mode footage to see for myself.
 

Vognerful

Member
if it is a shorter package than borderlands 3, I might get into it. I never had the energy for BL3 if it was something like 60+ hours
 

Topher

Gold Member
No article.

Who saw this coming? As a self-contained spin-off to the Borderlands series, Tiny Tina's Wonderlands takes one of the more charming characters from its universe and invites us on a dungeons and dragons-style detour. The idea is undeniably cute. Think of Borderlands' FPS mechanics as seen through the lens of a table-top Dungeons and Dragons campaign, and you're on the righty track. But at its core, we’re still looking at an extension of the same Unreal Engine technology that’s at the foundation of Borderlands 3.

In terms of its tech, Tiny Tina's Wonderlands has a few extra twists. Unlike the open-world roaming in mainline Borderlands, here we navigate between key areas using a table-top style world map. It's oddly akin to an old-school JRPG world maps as you guide a super-deformed version of your character between missions. A few tricks in the Unreal engine suite help sell the idea, too: a heavy depth of field creates a lovely tilt shift photography effect - another reminder that you're a tiny figurine on a table-top. You'll see bottle caps and pins dotted around, and all round it's a pleasant departure from the typical open-world Borderlands approach. No need for vehicles here, either. As a result, missions are also more focused in design. More linear, too; once you enter an area, you have some lateral movement within a map to explore - but these are often more contained experiences, like themed fairground rides.

PS5 and Series X offer two graphics modes: a 4K, 60 frames per second resolution mode (with a dynamic 1800p to 2160p window) alongside a lower resolution performance mode - which unlocks 120fps support on these consoles with the appropriate display attached. Series S has just the one mode targeting 60fps, scaling all the way from 960p to 1440p – meaning a significant reduction in clarity. Graphics features are evenly matched between the higher end machines, though for Series S, grass density and shadow quality are pared back by comparison. On the face of it, there’s the sense that Series S is overly cut back once again, but viewed in isolation, the experience still pays off – and performance trumps higher-end settings in a title like this one.

In comparing the resolution modes on PS5 and Seriex X, frame-rates are generally acceptable using 60fps as a target. On each console you'll spot occasional, jarring lurches into the high 50s - just as alpha effects fill the screen or even while turning the camera rapidly. It’s hardly the worst-case scenario, but these drops do stick out in the heat of the action. This goes for PS5 and Series X in equal measure. Perhaps predictably, Series S is essentially less stable overall in its performance profile. Frame-rates are acceptable overall, but drops into the 50-60fps range are more common and long-lasting than the premium consoles.

Shifting the focus to the Series X/PS5-exclusive performance mode, there’s an interesting wrinkle here in that this option actually offers two different experiences, depending on your connected display. The target resolutions drops to a locked 1080p, which enables an essentially consistent 60fps on a 60Hz screen. Consider this is a ‘nuclear’ option in ensuring a silky smooth, consistent experience all day long. It’s actually very useful for the split-screen option, which is traditionally more taxing for both CPU and GPU, and so lowering resolution to 1080p gives PS5 and Seriex X the overhead to deliver consistency at 60fps.

The nature of the performance mode changes if the console is hooked up to a 120Hz screen. As long as 120Hz is also selected on the console's front-end, the frame-rate becomes unlocked using the performance mode on PS5 and Series X. In practise though? Expect a 80-120fps range in general on PlayStation 5 and a slightly higher 90-120fps range on Xbox Series X. This kind of output still shows noticeable judder, but this is where variable refresh rate (VRR) support makes a big difference. That is in single-player mode though – and yes, factoring in split-screen, the performance window opens up significantly depending on the intensity of a shootout.

A final word on loading times: Series X may have an advantage at 120Hz due to its higher overall frame-rates and VRR support, but much like Borderlands 3, PS5 has leads in loading speeds. Going from the table-top map to the Queen's Gate area takes PS5 eight seconds to load, up against the circa 11 seconds on both Xbox consoles. All three deliver relatively short loading speeds overall, though once again PS5 just edges out the Xbox consoles.

Ultimately, Tiny Tina's Wonderlands is a surprising twist on the Borderlands concept. Gearbox takes its chance to inject humour into a new fantasy setting, the world map is a charming, and the Dungeons and Dragons-style upgrades separate it from Borderlands' usual approach – but let’s be clear, this is still a Borderlands game at its heart. That extends to its tech credentials and performance profile too even at 120fps. The lack of options for Series S remains a bit of a sore point and I wish we'd seen another option to salvage performance, even if it did mean lowering the resolution, or more visual settings. As for Series X vs PlayStation 5? Both version come highly recommended – just make sure to tap into the performance mode to get the best out of split-screen play.

 

ANDS

Thought gaf was racist. Now knows better, honorary gaffer 2022
Essentially the same performance as BL3 on the current gen consoles, and so the question should have been asked (and never will be): what did the "next-generation upgrade" actually pay for?
 

Captiosus

Gold Member
On Series X in Resolution mode, the frame rate is absolute shit in some areas. Mount Craw is one major example off the top of my head. During fights against packs of elemental goblins with the occasional wyverns flying overhead, the frame rates would drop sub-30 or would suffer from repeat hitching. It was bad enough that I put it on Performance mode, but on a 4k display that made it look like everything was a blurry mess.

if it is a shorter package than borderlands 3, I might get into it. I never had the energy for BL3 if it was something like 60+ hours

It's much shorter. I finished the campaign including all of the collectibles (minus 60 of the dice, I just can't be bothered) in 23 hours. If I went back to hunt down the remaining dice, I'd probably add another 3-4 hours to that total. If you ignore all of the collectibles and only do the quests and side-quests, it's a 15-16 hour game. I personally don't find end game all that intriguing when there are myriad better looter-shooter end games available. It's a revamp on the old horde mode formula and feels dated from the start. I think it's worth playing through at least once, but not at the current price tag.
 

adamsapple

Gold Member
In practise though? Expect a 80-120fps range in general on PlayStation 5 and a slightly higher 90-120fps range on Xbox Series X. This kind of output still shows noticeable judder, but this is where variable refresh rate (VRR) support makes a big difference. That is in single-player mode though – and yes, factoring in split-screen, the performance window opens up significantly depending on the intensity of a shootout.

Damn VRR is a crutch... wait a second.
 
Man I can't believe how bad this looks.

Just play Bl3 on ps5 at 4k60 locked. Turn off character dialog :p put on some music and have fun.

I actually enjoy bl3 but the story/characters are insufferable.
 

DenchDeckard

Gold Member
Another one!

VRR takes it once again and good to see the actual differences of the consoles show their expected strengths. Xbox delivering higher more consistent performance thanks to its power advantage and ps5 delivering faster load times thanks to its faster ssd.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom