Mr Moose
Member
That's a no then. Thanks.
-
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.
Digital Foundry: RoboCop Rogue City - DF Tech Review - Unreal Engine 5 Shines on PS5/Xbox Series X/S
- Thread starter adamsapple
- Start date
Vick
Member
But that's assuming the PS5 version being at least 10fps below 60fps constantly, and that is not the case at all.
Entire Chapters, including other iterations of Downtown like daytime visits or the last one set during nightime when there's absolute chaos at every corner, flames, fighting gangs and ED-209 wreaking havoc games goes from absolutely rock solid 60fps to extremely stable, not less than 55fps at max and just for few moments.
The first Downtown visit, the one in the video, felt the worse in the entire game along with the Arms Race Chapter.
Not dismissing the more stable general performance on Series X, just adding a fact.
Would it really be that suprising after today?
Remember
HeisenbergFX4
once shared proof verified by Mods of Microsoft bribing Digital Foundry staff (except for John, who is supposedly "the least likely to be swayed").
Last edited:
From what we have seen today?
I think you have missed many other occasions where DF has not been infallible in appreciating cleary differences in favor of Xbox... Nobody is infallible and even less so when we are talking about a team of up to 6 different people making comparisons that, like it or not, are usually the most detailed of the existing ones.
Remember
Back to the same. Your response implies that DF, Jonh specifically, withheld information from the conversations. Imagine if this were like this, his reputation in front of the Epic devs with whom he spoke
The reality is that, like it or not, if there is one thing certain it is the reputation that DF has among developers and its influence even among them. If another reality existed, then you can be sure that this reputation would be held by others and that is not the case.
Vick
Member
Maybe I did, I don't really follow their comparisons and can't even recall the last Thread about it I took part in.
But in this comparison they 100% hid pretty substantial differences, intentionally or not. And I'm on the former camp because the angles chose for the night comparisons are beyond convenient to say the least.
The only "reality" we got is verified proof of Microsoft bribing DF staff in the past.Back to the same. Your response implies that DF, Jonh specifically, withheld information from the conversations. Imagine if this were like this, his reputation in front of the Epic devs with whom he spoke
The reality is that, like it or not, if there is one thing certain it is the reputation that DF has among developers and its influence even among them. If another reality existed, then you can be sure that this reputation would be held by others and that is not the case.
What do you think this would result into?
Last edited:
SKYF@ll
Member
Most games, including Fortnite and RoboCop, look similar on the TV screen (PS5 & XSX), but there are some differences in detailed graphic settings.
DF is not a developer, so it is impossible to pinpoint all the differences.
We have our own eyes and brains, so let's use our own consoles to analyze it more accurately.
DF is not a developer, so it is impossible to pinpoint all the differences.
We have our own eyes and brains, so let's use our own consoles to analyze it more accurately.
From what we have seen today?
I think you have missed many other occasions where DF has not been infallible in appreciating cleary differences in favor of Xbox... Nobody is infallible and even less so when we are talking about a team of up to 6 different people making comparisons that, like it or not, are usually the most detailed of the existing ones.
Back to the same. Your response implies that DF, Jonh specifically, withheld information from the conversations. Imagine if this were like this, his reputation in front of the Epic devs with whom he spoke
The reality is that, like it or not, if there is one thing certain it is the reputation that DF has among developers and its influence even among them. If another reality existed, then you can be sure that this reputation would be held by others and that is not the case.
When, as in this case, you see that he highlights specific differences that are much more difficult to discern when he could have been omitted... it is difficult to believe that there was an intention to omit the clearest one.
I don't think anyone could risk their reputation for something like that, especially when it would have been easy to point out everything as part of the same bug (which, on the other hand, seems to be the case if you see Low on PC).
If there was verified proof of bribery then DF would have already disappeared....
The reality is that DF has worked with Sony and its differents Studios, with MS and its different Studios and with numerous 3rd Studios. That it has an intact reputation among them and that it even exerts positive influence on them.... That reputation and influence has a base of years and even decades.
Vick
Member
Man, whatever honestly at this point.When, as in this case, you see that he highlights specific differences that are much more difficult to discern when he could have been omitted... it is difficult to believe that there was an intention to omit the clearest one.
I don't think anyone could risk their reputation for something like that, especially when it would have been easy to point out everything as part of the same bug (which, on the other hand, seems to be the case if you see Low on PC).
If there was verified proof of bribery then DF would have already disappeared....
The reality is that DF has worked with Sony and its differents Studios, with MS and its different Studios and with numerous 3rd Studios. That it has an intact reputation among them and that it even exerts positive influence on them.... That reputation and influence has a base of years and even decades.
I'd say between your post dismissing Fortnite photo evidence and the now complete denial of factual situations happened on this Forum, including GAF Mods words, you appear to be prone to ignore reality in favor of comfortable illusions. I won't stop you.
I suppose your idea is that it is better to think that DF's reputation is a farce, that they are a bribable mafia and that all the people of Neogaf are blameless.... No?? I won't stop you
PS.Better not to go into those matters because we could go into many very questionable black stories and it is not the place, time or situation for it...
Vergil1992
Member
I think the issue can be summarized as follows.
It is obvious that PS5 has better image quality in quality mode. 1440p vs 1080p, a simply huge gap for two fairly even consoles, but there is an important fact here: the XSX version runs at 1080p in both performance mode and quality mode, and the difference (in graphical settings) seems to be the same as on PS5 in its two modes. It doesn't make sense (although this sounds like it happened with another game, any ideas?). As things stand, quality vs performance on Xbox is like choosing practically the same visual quality in both modes but one runs at 30fps and the other at 60fps. To deny that there is a problem here is to put on a blindfold.
If these problems only affected performance mode (in XSX), we could reason that they are cuts to increase performance. This is not the case because the quality mode is also affected. There are reasons to think this is a bug:
- It is impossible to reproduce that problem with the lowest PC settings. And anyone can see that the game on XSX looks better (generally) than on PC on low.
- As I mentioned, it makes no sense that in quality mode, in addition to being rendered at a much lower resolution, it also has visual cuts. We would be talking about the PS5 performing about twice as much as an XSX. And I think anyone who uses common sense knows that's unlikely.
- XSX in performance mode is more stable (by a considerable difference) than PS5, 10fps or more. In performance mode they are rendered at the same resolution, with the only differences noted in this thread, but those differences are ALSO in quality mode (mode in which there is a difference of 1080p vs 1440p). If the game were scaling correctly, it would be normal for there to be equal internal resolution in quality mode. If the differences that we have seen in this thread (and DF has pointed out, the asphalt is the most visible) were only in the performance mode, perhaps it would have been a degradation in XSX to gain performance and match the performance of PS5, but at the same time being present in both modes (and in XSS), points to it being a bug. You have to reason a little: it is impossible for the PS5 to be running at a 70% higher resolution in one mode (which in itself is impossible with each one's hardware), to have "better visual settings" (according to the images from this thread), and then in performance mode the resolution is equivalent, the visual differences are maintained and XSX has a big advantage in performance despite having equilibred the resolution.
My opinion? This is the typical case, in XSX it has greater performance but less polish, it is even possible that it shares settings with XSS, or it is simply a bug. It will end up being solved with one of the patches, in XSX it will continue to work at a more stable framerate. Because absolutely everything points to it being a bug. You only have to look at the appearance of the asphalt to realize that "something is wrong." There is simply some bug with the lod/textures and the graphic settings are all the same. And I think actually even those who imply hardware "problems" in XSX or that PS5 has some secret sauce to have better visual quality, know that what I'm saying is much more logical and they will most likely fix it. but if the performance difference remains the same, XSX would be the better version.
It is obvious that PS5 has better image quality in quality mode. 1440p vs 1080p, a simply huge gap for two fairly even consoles, but there is an important fact here: the XSX version runs at 1080p in both performance mode and quality mode, and the difference (in graphical settings) seems to be the same as on PS5 in its two modes. It doesn't make sense (although this sounds like it happened with another game, any ideas?). As things stand, quality vs performance on Xbox is like choosing practically the same visual quality in both modes but one runs at 30fps and the other at 60fps. To deny that there is a problem here is to put on a blindfold.
If these problems only affected performance mode (in XSX), we could reason that they are cuts to increase performance. This is not the case because the quality mode is also affected. There are reasons to think this is a bug:
- It is impossible to reproduce that problem with the lowest PC settings. And anyone can see that the game on XSX looks better (generally) than on PC on low.
- As I mentioned, it makes no sense that in quality mode, in addition to being rendered at a much lower resolution, it also has visual cuts. We would be talking about the PS5 performing about twice as much as an XSX. And I think anyone who uses common sense knows that's unlikely.
- XSX in performance mode is more stable (by a considerable difference) than PS5, 10fps or more. In performance mode they are rendered at the same resolution, with the only differences noted in this thread, but those differences are ALSO in quality mode (mode in which there is a difference of 1080p vs 1440p). If the game were scaling correctly, it would be normal for there to be equal internal resolution in quality mode. If the differences that we have seen in this thread (and DF has pointed out, the asphalt is the most visible) were only in the performance mode, perhaps it would have been a degradation in XSX to gain performance and match the performance of PS5, but at the same time being present in both modes (and in XSS), points to it being a bug. You have to reason a little: it is impossible for the PS5 to be running at a 70% higher resolution in one mode (which in itself is impossible with each one's hardware), to have "better visual settings" (according to the images from this thread), and then in performance mode the resolution is equivalent, the visual differences are maintained and XSX has a big advantage in performance despite having equilibred the resolution.
My opinion? This is the typical case, in XSX it has greater performance but less polish, it is even possible that it shares settings with XSS, or it is simply a bug. It will end up being solved with one of the patches, in XSX it will continue to work at a more stable framerate. Because absolutely everything points to it being a bug. You only have to look at the appearance of the asphalt to realize that "something is wrong." There is simply some bug with the lod/textures and the graphic settings are all the same. And I think actually even those who imply hardware "problems" in XSX or that PS5 has some secret sauce to have better visual quality, know that what I'm saying is much more logical and they will most likely fix it. but if the performance difference remains the same, XSX would be the better version.
Last edited:
JusticeForAll
Gold Member
Awesome game. One of my favourites of this already packed year!
terintamel
Member
I was able to reproduce the road texture quality issue that the XSX has on my PC. I changed the MaterialQualityLevel value in the GameUserSettings.ini to 0 from 1. As you can see below the default XSX settings has that set to 0 but the PS5 and PC (even on lowest preset) have it set to 1.
[XSX_Performance DeviceProfile]
DeviceType=XSX
BaseProfileName=XSX_Anaconda
+CVars=t.maxfps=60
+CVars=nvn.syncinterval=1
+CVars=rhi.syncinterval=1
+CVars=r.GTSyncType=1
+CVars=r.DynamicRes.OperationMode=2
+CVars=r.DynamicRes.FrameTimeBudget=16.66
+CVars=r.DynamicRes.MinScreenPercentage=75
+CVars=r.DynamicRes.MaxScreenPercentage=100
+CVars=sg.ReflectionQuality=2
+CVars=sg.PostProcessQuality=2
+CVars=sg.ShadowQuality=1
+CVars=sg.FoliageQuality=2
+CVars=sg.ViewDistanceQuality=2
+CVars=sg.EffectsQuality=2
+CVars=r.MaterialQualityLevel=0 (PS5 set to 1)
+CVars=Anaconda.BackbufferResX=1920
+CVars=Anaconda.BackbufferResY=1080
+CVars=r.separateTranslucencyScreenPercentage=50
+CVars=sg.globalilluminantionquality=2
[PS5_Performance DeviceProfile]
DeviceType=PS5
BaseProfileName=PS5
+CVars=t.maxfps=60
+CVars=nvn.syncinterval=1
+CVars=rhi.syncinterval=1
+CVars=r.GTSyncType=1
+CVars=r.MaterialQualityLevel=1
+CVars=r.DynamicRes.OperationMode=2
+CVars=r.DynamicRes.FrameTimeBudget=16.66
+CVars=r.DynamicRes.MinScreenPercentage=60
+CVars=r.DynamicRes.MaxScreenPercentage=100
+CVars=sg.ReflectionQuality=2
+CVars=sg.PostProcessQuality=2
+CVars=sg.ShadingQuality=2
+CVars=sg.GlobalIlluminationQuality=2
+CVars=sg.ShadowQuality=1
+CVars=sg.FoliageQuality=2
+CVars=sg.ViewDistanceQuality=2
+CVars=r.separateTranslucencyScreenPercentage=50
+CVars=sg.EffectsQuality=2
+CVars=PS5.DefaultBackBufferWidth=1920
+CVars=PS5.DefaultBackBufferHeight=1080
+CVars=r.EmitterSpawnRateScale=0.7
+CVars=sg.globalilluminantionquality=2
PC High preset with MaterialQuality set to 0
PC High setting with MaterialQuality set to 1
[XSX_Performance DeviceProfile]
DeviceType=XSX
BaseProfileName=XSX_Anaconda
+CVars=t.maxfps=60
+CVars=nvn.syncinterval=1
+CVars=rhi.syncinterval=1
+CVars=r.GTSyncType=1
+CVars=r.DynamicRes.OperationMode=2
+CVars=r.DynamicRes.FrameTimeBudget=16.66
+CVars=r.DynamicRes.MinScreenPercentage=75
+CVars=r.DynamicRes.MaxScreenPercentage=100
+CVars=sg.ReflectionQuality=2
+CVars=sg.PostProcessQuality=2
+CVars=sg.ShadowQuality=1
+CVars=sg.FoliageQuality=2
+CVars=sg.ViewDistanceQuality=2
+CVars=sg.EffectsQuality=2
+CVars=r.MaterialQualityLevel=0 (PS5 set to 1)
+CVars=Anaconda.BackbufferResX=1920
+CVars=Anaconda.BackbufferResY=1080
+CVars=r.separateTranslucencyScreenPercentage=50
+CVars=sg.globalilluminantionquality=2
[PS5_Performance DeviceProfile]
DeviceType=PS5
BaseProfileName=PS5
+CVars=t.maxfps=60
+CVars=nvn.syncinterval=1
+CVars=rhi.syncinterval=1
+CVars=r.GTSyncType=1
+CVars=r.MaterialQualityLevel=1
+CVars=r.DynamicRes.OperationMode=2
+CVars=r.DynamicRes.FrameTimeBudget=16.66
+CVars=r.DynamicRes.MinScreenPercentage=60
+CVars=r.DynamicRes.MaxScreenPercentage=100
+CVars=sg.ReflectionQuality=2
+CVars=sg.PostProcessQuality=2
+CVars=sg.ShadingQuality=2
+CVars=sg.GlobalIlluminationQuality=2
+CVars=sg.ShadowQuality=1
+CVars=sg.FoliageQuality=2
+CVars=sg.ViewDistanceQuality=2
+CVars=r.separateTranslucencyScreenPercentage=50
+CVars=sg.EffectsQuality=2
+CVars=PS5.DefaultBackBufferWidth=1920
+CVars=PS5.DefaultBackBufferHeight=1080
+CVars=r.EmitterSpawnRateScale=0.7
+CVars=sg.globalilluminantionquality=2
PC High preset with MaterialQuality set to 0
PC High setting with MaterialQuality set to 1
Last edited:
SKYF@ll
Member
DF"PS5 is mostly the same, with a fairly stable quality mode and a more difficult run of play in the performance mode. "
Xbox Series X's frame rate is high(10fps) only in certain scenes.
Both consoles require several updates to become stable.(+ XSX has resolution and IQ issues.)
Benchmarking before the quality and resolution are updated to be equivalent is worthless.
Is there a performance impact on pc? because the ps5 has a lower dynamic res threshold than the xbx looking at those settings.
Bojji
Member
I was able to reproduce the road texture quality issue that the XSX has on my PC. I changed the MaterialQualityLevel value in the GameUserSettings.ini to 0 from 1. As you can see below the default XSX settings has that set to 0 but the PS5 and PC (even on lowest preset) have it set to 1.
[XSX_Performance DeviceProfile]
DeviceType=XSX
BaseProfileName=XSX_Anaconda
+CVars=t.maxfps=60
+CVars=nvn.syncinterval=1
+CVars=rhi.syncinterval=1
+CVars=r.GTSyncType=1
+CVars=r.DynamicRes.OperationMode=2
+CVars=r.DynamicRes.FrameTimeBudget=16.66
+CVars=r.DynamicRes.MinScreenPercentage=75
+CVars=r.DynamicRes.MaxScreenPercentage=100
+CVars=sg.ReflectionQuality=2
+CVars=sg.PostProcessQuality=2
+CVars=sg.ShadowQuality=1
+CVars=sg.FoliageQuality=2
+CVars=sg.ViewDistanceQuality=2
+CVars=sg.EffectsQuality=2
+CVars=r.MaterialQualityLevel=0 (PS5 set to 1)
+CVars=Anaconda.BackbufferResX=1920
+CVars=Anaconda.BackbufferResY=1080
+CVars=r.separateTranslucencyScreenPercentage=50
+CVars=sg.globalilluminantionquality=2
[PS5_Performance DeviceProfile]
DeviceType=PS5
BaseProfileName=PS5
+CVars=t.maxfps=60
+CVars=nvn.syncinterval=1
+CVars=rhi.syncinterval=1
+CVars=r.GTSyncType=1
+CVars=r.MaterialQualityLevel=1
+CVars=r.DynamicRes.OperationMode=2
+CVars=r.DynamicRes.FrameTimeBudget=16.66
+CVars=r.DynamicRes.MinScreenPercentage=60
+CVars=r.DynamicRes.MaxScreenPercentage=100
+CVars=sg.ReflectionQuality=2
+CVars=sg.PostProcessQuality=2
+CVars=sg.ShadingQuality=2
+CVars=sg.GlobalIlluminationQuality=2
+CVars=sg.ShadowQuality=1
+CVars=sg.FoliageQuality=2
+CVars=sg.ViewDistanceQuality=2
+CVars=r.separateTranslucencyScreenPercentage=50
+CVars=sg.EffectsQuality=2
+CVars=PS5.DefaultBackBufferWidth=1920
+CVars=PS5.DefaultBackBufferHeight=1080
+CVars=r.EmitterSpawnRateScale=0.7
+CVars=sg.globalilluminantionquality=2
PC High preset with MaterialQuality set to 0
PC High setting with MaterialQuality set to 1
Check out if there is performance difference.
DenchDeckard
Moderated wildly
Great Post, a lot of sense being written right here.
Vick
Member
The distant buildings are also impacted by this as they now look like the Xbox version.I was able to reproduce the road texture quality issue that the XSX has on my PC. I changed the MaterialQualityLevel value in the GameUserSettings.ini to 0 from 1. As you can see below the default XSX settings has that set to 0 but the PS5 and PC (even on lowest preset) have it set to 1.
[XSX_Performance DeviceProfile]
DeviceType=XSX
BaseProfileName=XSX_Anaconda
+CVars=t.maxfps=60
+CVars=nvn.syncinterval=1
+CVars=rhi.syncinterval=1
+CVars=r.GTSyncType=1
+CVars=r.DynamicRes.OperationMode=2
+CVars=r.DynamicRes.FrameTimeBudget=16.66
+CVars=r.DynamicRes.MinScreenPercentage=75
+CVars=r.DynamicRes.MaxScreenPercentage=100
+CVars=sg.ReflectionQuality=2
+CVars=sg.PostProcessQuality=2
+CVars=sg.ShadowQuality=1
+CVars=sg.FoliageQuality=2
+CVars=sg.ViewDistanceQuality=2
+CVars=sg.EffectsQuality=2
+CVars=r.MaterialQualityLevel=0 (PS5 set to 1)
+CVars=Anaconda.BackbufferResX=1920
+CVars=Anaconda.BackbufferResY=1080
+CVars=r.separateTranslucencyScreenPercentage=50
+CVars=sg.globalilluminantionquality=2
[PS5_Performance DeviceProfile]
DeviceType=PS5
BaseProfileName=PS5
+CVars=t.maxfps=60
+CVars=nvn.syncinterval=1
+CVars=rhi.syncinterval=1
+CVars=r.GTSyncType=1
+CVars=r.MaterialQualityLevel=1
+CVars=r.DynamicRes.OperationMode=2
+CVars=r.DynamicRes.FrameTimeBudget=16.66
+CVars=r.DynamicRes.MinScreenPercentage=60
+CVars=r.DynamicRes.MaxScreenPercentage=100
+CVars=sg.ReflectionQuality=2
+CVars=sg.PostProcessQuality=2
+CVars=sg.ShadingQuality=2
+CVars=sg.GlobalIlluminationQuality=2
+CVars=sg.ShadowQuality=1
+CVars=sg.FoliageQuality=2
+CVars=sg.ViewDistanceQuality=2
+CVars=r.separateTranslucencyScreenPercentage=50
+CVars=sg.EffectsQuality=2
+CVars=PS5.DefaultBackBufferWidth=1920
+CVars=PS5.DefaultBackBufferHeight=1080
+CVars=r.EmitterSpawnRateScale=0.7
+CVars=sg.globalilluminantionquality=2
PC High preset with MaterialQuality set to 0
PC High setting with MaterialQuality set to 1
That appears to be exactly what they did.
He doesn't care. I already pointed out to him PS5 Performance runs locked 60fps for huge portions of the game, including other iterations of the same open city level.DF"PS5 is mostly the same, with a fairly stable quality mode and a more difficult run of play in the performance mode. "
Xbox Series X's frame rate is high(10fps) only in certain scenes.
Both consoles require several updates to become stable.(+ XSX has resolution and IQ issues.)
Benchmarking before the quality and resolution are updated to be equivalent is worthless.
SKYF@ll
Member
"MaterialQuality set to 0" looks the same as you pointed out in the Xbox Series X version.
If it is 0, the image quality will look extremely poor, so I hope this will be improved.
SKYF@ll
Member
We can also confirm that the PS5 version has "MaterialQuality set to 1" even in performance mode.Both.
PC:
PS5 (Quality):
Xbox Series X (Quality):
PS5 (Performance):
Wrong. Both higher resolution and graphic settings as it matches the PC max settings. Those you see are additional wet shaders reflecting/showing bounce light.
All three versions present in this GIF, Xbox being the outlier.
Someone has to call DF out because this is inexcusable.
I mean it's their goddamn job, in the past they spent hours dissecting the most imperceptible differences on X4 zoom and fail to notice something like this? In the later/last levels the city skyline is over present and goes on for miles and miles on PS5 in both modes, would be interesting to see comparisons of those.
If someone could upload an image of the Xbox Series X version's performance mode, we would be able to see the graphics settings. . .
Open Surprise"The game is shaper + better textures on PS5 - more so in Quality mode but even in performance"
Both performance modes have a resolution of 1080p, so I think a fairer comparison can be made.
Great contribution. Good job.I was able to reproduce the road texture quality issue that the XSX has on my PC. I changed the MaterialQualityLevel value in the GameUserSettings.ini to 0 from 1. As you can see below the default XSX settings has that set to 0 but the PS5 and PC (even on lowest preset) have it set to 1.
[XSX_Performance DeviceProfile]
DeviceType=XSX
BaseProfileName=XSX_Anaconda
+CVars=t.maxfps=60
+CVars=nvn.syncinterval=1
+CVars=rhi.syncinterval=1
+CVars=r.GTSyncType=1
+CVars=r.DynamicRes.OperationMode=2
+CVars=r.DynamicRes.FrameTimeBudget=16.66
+CVars=r.DynamicRes.MinScreenPercentage=75
+CVars=r.DynamicRes.MaxScreenPercentage=100
+CVars=sg.ReflectionQuality=2
+CVars=sg.PostProcessQuality=2
+CVars=sg.ShadowQuality=1
+CVars=sg.FoliageQuality=2
+CVars=sg.ViewDistanceQuality=2
+CVars=sg.EffectsQuality=2
+CVars=r.MaterialQualityLevel=0 (PS5 set to 1)
+CVars=Anaconda.BackbufferResX=1920
+CVars=Anaconda.BackbufferResY=1080
+CVars=r.separateTranslucencyScreenPercentage=50
+CVars=sg.globalilluminantionquality=2
[PS5_Performance DeviceProfile]
DeviceType=PS5
BaseProfileName=PS5
+CVars=t.maxfps=60
+CVars=nvn.syncinterval=1
+CVars=rhi.syncinterval=1
+CVars=r.GTSyncType=1
+CVars=r.MaterialQualityLevel=1
+CVars=r.DynamicRes.OperationMode=2
+CVars=r.DynamicRes.FrameTimeBudget=16.66
+CVars=r.DynamicRes.MinScreenPercentage=60
+CVars=r.DynamicRes.MaxScreenPercentage=100
+CVars=sg.ReflectionQuality=2
+CVars=sg.PostProcessQuality=2
+CVars=sg.ShadingQuality=2
+CVars=sg.GlobalIlluminationQuality=2
+CVars=sg.ShadowQuality=1
+CVars=sg.FoliageQuality=2
+CVars=sg.ViewDistanceQuality=2
+CVars=r.separateTranslucencyScreenPercentage=50
+CVars=sg.EffectsQuality=2
+CVars=PS5.DefaultBackBufferWidth=1920
+CVars=PS5.DefaultBackBufferHeight=1080
+CVars=r.EmitterSpawnRateScale=0.7
+CVars=sg.globalilluminantionquality=2
PC High preset with MaterialQuality set to 0
PC High setting with MaterialQuality set to 1
It would be great if this information and this post reached the hands of DF or even, better yet, the Studio itself.
Seeing that the detail and lights of the buildings are also part of it, everything is resolved.
Clearly it has all the appearance of an error or bug (because in other areas it does not occur) and it does not make sense to use 0 in any way as it totally distorts the visual fidelity. Before, it would have been decided to cut other aspects. Much more so when in that same area in XSX it works at 10 fps more (probably more).
Now the interesting thing would be to know how disabling that affects performance and we could get an idea of what we could find in an upcoming patch in terms of performance.
It's not that he doesn't care, he's simply telling you that when PS5 maintains 60fps in that area it doesn't mean that it is matching the real framerate of XSX.
If XSX runs at 60fps when PS5 drops to 48fps, it means that when the latter goes up to 60fps in XSX it could perfectly well be running at ~70s fps.
All in all, I believe that the problem and the issue in question is now resolved by T terintamel . It only remains to know how much performance it requires to activate that conf. in that area which also coincides with being the only one the (in príncipe) "bug" exist and where there is such a marked difference in framerate.
Last edited:
GymWolf
Member
I don't like how enemies fly in random directions when getting hit, ragdoll seems a bit light also, robocop also has this problem but it looks worse in trapang.
I like enemies to react properly when get shot, not just fly for spectacle, they have to fly in the right direction and with the right weight.
I have to play the game because from videos, the gunplay look good but not perfect.
Last edited:
Dr.Morris79
Gold Member
Gym, You're to picky! Just shoot stuff with the nice sounding guns
Vick
Member
This kind of group effort would be great. I mean this Thread already achieved more than DF.
A whole lot of assumptions you made there..
But it actually occurs in any iteration of Downtown levels. Also how do you know it's absent from later Chapters?
Would be interesting to know if these differences are also caused by the MaterialQuality setting:
Or the missing sea water and its reflections in the background?
Because rationally there's no way these are not impacting performances as well.
Same should go for the reflections differences spotted by DF.
A simple and often imperceptible LOD setting often result in considerable performance gains on Consoles, no way generational differences like these would not.
Last edited:
GymWolf
Member
GymWolf
Member
You should try darktide.Gym, You're to picky! Just shoot stuff with the nice sounding guns
The boltgun may be an even better weapon than robocop pistol, feeling wise, and i thought robocop pistol was a lock for best weapon of the year.
Your overlooking the ps5 can go 15% lower in dynamic resolution than the xbx, the settings are not identical even with that switched to 1 as a result. Is it a bug? maybe but it could create texture memory issues on the x with the 2 pools of different speed memory and that was a way to save texture memory use and then they noticed they could bump the dynamic res lower bound by 15% as a result?
Someone needs to check on pc if it effects performance and if the vram usage increases or not, if it effects vram noticeably it may not be a bug.
Dr.Morris79
Gold Member
Hrrrmm, Darktide you say? Haven't seen that yet
I'll be trying that later then, cheers for the nod Gym
GymWolf
Member
It's multyplayer only but it's very fun even with strangers.Hrrrmm, Darktide you say? Haven't seen that yet
I'll be trying that later then, cheers for the nod Gym
Onestly, every dude who like meaty combat should play that game asap, the combat feels THAT good.
Mahavastu
Member
I checked: here in germany the movies are on Amazon Prime. I guess I will look them again too. I can hardly remember the originals...
Vergil1992
Member
I was able to reproduce the road texture quality issue that the XSX has on my PC. I changed the MaterialQualityLevel value in the GameUserSettings.ini to 0 from 1. As you can see below the default XSX settings has that set to 0 but the PS5 and PC (even on lowest preset) have it set to 1.
[XSX_Performance DeviceProfile]
DeviceType=XSX
BaseProfileName=XSX_Anaconda
+CVars=t.maxfps=60
+CVars=nvn.syncinterval=1
+CVars=rhi.syncinterval=1
+CVars=r.GTSyncType=1
+CVars=r.DynamicRes.OperationMode=2
+CVars=r.DynamicRes.FrameTimeBudget=16.66
+CVars=r.DynamicRes.MinScreenPercentage=75
+CVars=r.DynamicRes.MaxScreenPercentage=100
+CVars=sg.ReflectionQuality=2
+CVars=sg.PostProcessQuality=2
+CVars=sg.ShadowQuality=1
+CVars=sg.FoliageQuality=2
+CVars=sg.ViewDistanceQuality=2
+CVars=sg.EffectsQuality=2
+CVars=r.MaterialQualityLevel=0 (PS5 set to 1)
+CVars=Anaconda.BackbufferResX=1920
+CVars=Anaconda.BackbufferResY=1080
+CVars=r.separateTranslucencyScreenPercentage=50
+CVars=sg.globalilluminantionquality=2
[PS5_Performance DeviceProfile]
DeviceType=PS5
BaseProfileName=PS5
+CVars=t.maxfps=60
+CVars=nvn.syncinterval=1
+CVars=rhi.syncinterval=1
+CVars=r.GTSyncType=1
+CVars=r.MaterialQualityLevel=1
+CVars=r.DynamicRes.OperationMode=2
+CVars=r.DynamicRes.FrameTimeBudget=16.66
+CVars=r.DynamicRes.MinScreenPercentage=60
+CVars=r.DynamicRes.MaxScreenPercentage=100
+CVars=sg.ReflectionQuality=2
+CVars=sg.PostProcessQuality=2
+CVars=sg.ShadingQuality=2
+CVars=sg.GlobalIlluminationQuality=2
+CVars=sg.ShadowQuality=1
+CVars=sg.FoliageQuality=2
+CVars=sg.ViewDistanceQuality=2
+CVars=r.separateTranslucencyScreenPercentage=50
+CVars=sg.EffectsQuality=2
+CVars=PS5.DefaultBackBufferWidth=1920
+CVars=PS5.DefaultBackBufferHeight=1080
+CVars=r.EmitterSpawnRateScale=0.7
+CVars=sg.globalilluminantionquality=2
PC High preset with MaterialQuality set to 0
PC High setting with MaterialQuality set to 1
Very interesting, thanks for the contribution. I'm going to do tests too.
If it is a possible degradation in the game engine, I suspect that XSS is to blame here. XSX and PS5 seem 1:1 except for "MaterialQualityLevel", which is lower on Xbox than PC in its lowest mode. It is a very noticeable problem and also incomprehensible that you cannot play it on a PC without touching the .ini, since in theory it could improve performance on a less powerful PC. Seeing this, I would think more that an "optimization" for XSS has slipped in here. It could have an impact on performance or maybe not, if they did it so that the XSS VRAM memory did not overflow we may see little or none, but if it is something that affects the GPU / CPU we may gain performance.
This is also interesting:
+CVars=r.DynamicRes.FrameTimeBudget=16.66
+CVars=r.DynamicRes.MinScreenPercentage=60
+CVars=r.DynamicRes.MaxScreenPercentage=100
+CVars=r.DynamicRes.FrameTimeBudget=16.66
+CVars=r.DynamicRes.MinScreenPercentage=75
+CVars=r.DynamicRes.MaxScreenPercentage=100
Lower minimum resolution on PS5?
I've been doing my tests. Definitely, if I change between 0 and 1 in the MaterialQualityLevel, there is a performance loss, but it is negligible.
MaterialQuality Level 0
MaterialQuality Level 1
There is a difference of 2 to 5fps.
It doesn't make much sense, it's a massive loss on a visual level and you gain very little performance (in relation to what you lose). I firmly bet this is a graphical XSS tweak that has "snuck in" here. It might explain the PS5/XSX performance difference, but not entirely, there's no way there's a +10fps difference here.
I can also confirm that the buildings and what comrade Vick points out are affected by this option. In my capture if you look in the distance you can clearly see the building.
It is a problem with a single graphical adjustment, but its impact on visual quality is too great and I have barely noticed a difference in performance. I would say about 2-3fps on average. VRAM and GPU usage have not increased.
I think it is an XSS graphical adjustment because perhaps it crashed its VRAM.
Last edited:
Lysandros
Member
Those settings taken from PC version's ini files may well not be represent the current states of the console versions accurately in certain areas. PS5 version has clearly higher resolution compared to XSX in quality mode for example (1440p vs 1080P international resolution), the files posted seem to be inaccurate in this regard. They may be outdated, not applied etc. who is preventing the developers to make further changes in consoles after those PC files were created?
Last edited:
Bojji
Member
Very interesting, thanks for the contribution. I'm going to do tests too.
If it is a possible degradation in the game engine, I suspect that XSS is to blame here. XSX and PS5 seem 1:1 except for "MaterialQualityLevel", which is lower on Xbox than PC in its lowest mode. It is a very noticeable problem and also incomprehensible that you cannot play it on a PC without touching the .ini, since in theory it could improve performance on a less powerful PC. Seeing this, I would think more that an "optimization" for XSS has slipped in here. It could have an impact on performance or maybe not, if they did it so that the XSS VRAM memory did not overflow we may see little or none, but if it is something that affects the GPU / CPU we may gain performance.
This is also interesting:
+CVars=r.DynamicRes.FrameTimeBudget=16.66
+CVars=r.DynamicRes.MinScreenPercentage=60
+CVars=r.DynamicRes.MaxScreenPercentage=100
+CVars=r.DynamicRes.FrameTimeBudget=16.66
+CVars=r.DynamicRes.MinScreenPercentage=75
+CVars=r.DynamicRes.MaxScreenPercentage=100
Lower minimum resolution on PS5?
I've been doing my tests. Definitely, if I change between 0 and 1 in the MaterialQualityLevel, there is a performance loss, but it is negligible.
MaterialQuality Level 0
MaterialQuality Level 1
There is a difference of 2 to 5fps.
It doesn't make much sense, it's a massive loss on a visual level and you gain very little performance (in relation to what you lose). I firmly bet this is a graphical XSS tweak that has "snuck in" here. It might explain the PS5/XSX performance difference, but not entirely, there's no way there's a +10fps difference here.
I can also confirm that the buildings and what comrade Vick points out are affected by this option. In my capture if you look in the distance you can clearly see the building.
It is a problem with a single graphical adjustment, but its impact on visual quality is too great and I have barely noticed a difference in performance. I would say about 2-3fps on average. VRAM and GPU usage have not increased.
I think it is an XSS graphical adjustment because perhaps it crashed its VRAM.
What GPU you have? It probably has more impact on weaker GPU (like Xbox) but I don't think it explains 49 vs 60fps difference (probably just Xbox hardware advantage in part).
Vergil1992
Member
I think they are both performance mode. It would not be strange if the dynamic resolution was lower on PS5, it is something much more common than it seems, especially if we see a difference of 49 vs 60fps here.
Edit: Bojji, I have two computers, on this occasion I used the secondary PC. The GPU is a 6700XT. I can also try using my 7900XTX, but I thought the same as you, that's why I used a GPU more similar to the XSX. I can do more checks (although I won't be able to for a few hours). I think that if they activate this graphical setting, surely XSX will lose a few frames, but not 10 or more. There may still be some difference in favor of XSX, but it may not be as big.
It's also fair to say that that difference is at +70fps, if I increase the resolution slightly and it's at 50-60fps the difference is even smaller.
A very small difference for everything that is lost visually.
Last edited:
Lysandros
Member
What's the real world evidence for "PS5 can go 15% lower dynamic resolution than XSX"? PS5 is running at ~70% higher internal resolution compared XSX in quality mode with the same higher quality assets at "similar performance". The ini file here is clearly inaccurate as to current PS5 version in this area.
Last edited:
Vick
Member
Good job
Vergil1992
.
Along with the sea water?
This is the spot for that comparison, same exact level you're in already, you have to use the ladder to get on top:
Same for this:
Because that would give more ground to your first quoted statement.
Vergil1992
.Could you also confirm these differences being a result of that same Setting?
Along with the sea water?
This is the spot for that comparison, same exact level you're in already, you have to use the ladder to get on top:
Same for this:
Because that would give more ground to your first quoted statement.
Why would think that difference would translate 1:1 on the Console though? That makes no sense, we would have always had AF X16 on Consoles since the 360 generation if that was the case.
I think this would be a more plausible explanation that the casual and random "bug" one.
Vergil1992
Member
Vick, thanks, I am going to try.
Regarding whether the difference on PC can be extrapolated to consoles or not... keep in mind the following, when you are optimizing a game for two platforms, and one has a power deficit compared to the other, its performance is below and you want gain some valuable extra frames... the natural thing is to lower the less visible graphic settings but which have the most impact on performance. For example, if I put two screenshots right now like in those images in Epic and in High-medium the difference will be very little, but in terms of performance it will be very big (in this particular game it is VERY big).
However, in this case they have lowered a graphical setting (which cannot even be used on PC, when it would help less powerful systems a lot, if the performance gain were relevant) that destroys the image of XSX and that seems to have a zero performance impact.
If XSX in this game was not performing like PS5, it would have been much smarter to lower settings that have little visual difference and gain a lot of performance, but that is not the case. For example, if in this game you lower the settings such as shadows, reflections, post-processing or effects, from high to medium for example, the visual difference is small but you can easily gain 10fps.
As I said before, I can confirm that all the differences you had pointed out are justified by setting the MaterialQuality Level option to 0.
But I can understand that you don't trust my words 100%, and I don't blame you; People can lie to reinforce their argument.
I have gone to the area that you have pointed out to me to take a capture:
It looks exactly the same as in XSS/XSX in all its modes. Maybe a little better in some areas, but because the graphic settings are probably not the same (everything is at high there except MaterialQuality Level). I can't check it at the police station, I'm not in that area at the moment.
I think the topic is quite clear at this point. XSX and PS5 match in graphical settings, but it has one (which you cannot access in the game) that is lower in XSX, it has a very clear impact on the image but almost zero in terms of performance. I think it seems pretty obvious that the problem here is that a Series S tweak has been "sneaked in."
But if someone prefers to come up with outlandish theories (I'm not saying that for you, Vick) to explain this difference, they are free to do so. In my opinion, this will eventually be fixed. It's too obvious to me that it's a mistake.
Regarding whether the difference on PC can be extrapolated to consoles or not... keep in mind the following, when you are optimizing a game for two platforms, and one has a power deficit compared to the other, its performance is below and you want gain some valuable extra frames... the natural thing is to lower the less visible graphic settings but which have the most impact on performance. For example, if I put two screenshots right now like in those images in Epic and in High-medium the difference will be very little, but in terms of performance it will be very big (in this particular game it is VERY big).
However, in this case they have lowered a graphical setting (which cannot even be used on PC, when it would help less powerful systems a lot, if the performance gain were relevant) that destroys the image of XSX and that seems to have a zero performance impact.
If XSX in this game was not performing like PS5, it would have been much smarter to lower settings that have little visual difference and gain a lot of performance, but that is not the case. For example, if in this game you lower the settings such as shadows, reflections, post-processing or effects, from high to medium for example, the visual difference is small but you can easily gain 10fps.
As I said before, I can confirm that all the differences you had pointed out are justified by setting the MaterialQuality Level option to 0.
But I can understand that you don't trust my words 100%, and I don't blame you; People can lie to reinforce their argument.
I have gone to the area that you have pointed out to me to take a capture:
It looks exactly the same as in XSS/XSX in all its modes. Maybe a little better in some areas, but because the graphic settings are probably not the same (everything is at high there except MaterialQuality Level). I can't check it at the police station, I'm not in that area at the moment.
I think the topic is quite clear at this point. XSX and PS5 match in graphical settings, but it has one (which you cannot access in the game) that is lower in XSX, it has a very clear impact on the image but almost zero in terms of performance. I think it seems pretty obvious that the problem here is that a Series S tweak has been "sneaked in."
But if someone prefers to come up with outlandish theories (I'm not saying that for you, Vick) to explain this difference, they are free to do so. In my opinion, this will eventually be fixed. It's too obvious to me that it's a mistake.
Last edited:
thatJohann
Member
Is it worth getting a PS5 just for this game?
Looks like they forgot to turn that var on.Vick, thanks, I am going to try.
Regarding whether the difference on PC can be extrapolated to consoles or not... keep in mind the following, when you are optimizing a game for two platforms, and one has a power deficit compared to the other, its performance is below and you want gain some valuable extra frames... the natural thing is to lower the less visible graphic settings but which have the most impact on performance. For example, if I put two screenshots right now like in those images in Epic and in High-medium the difference will be very little, but in terms of performance it will be very big (in this particular game it is VERY big).
However, in this case they have lowered a graphical setting (which cannot even be used on PC, when it would help less powerful systems a lot, if the performance gain were relevant) that destroys the image of XSX and that seems to have a zero performance impact.
If XSX in this game was not performing like PS5, it would have been much smarter to lower settings that have little visual difference and gain a lot of performance, but that is not the case. For example, if in this game you lower the settings such as shadows, reflections, post-processing or effects, from high to medium for example, the visual difference is small but you can easily gain 10fps.
As I said before, I can confirm that all the differences you had pointed out are justified by setting the MaterialQuality Level option to 0.
But I can understand that you don't trust my words 100%, and I don't blame you; People can lie to reinforce their argument.
I have gone to the area that you have pointed out to me to take a capture:
It looks exactly the same as in XSS/XSX in all its modes. Maybe a little better in some areas, but because the graphic settings are probably not the same (everything is at high there except MaterialQuality Level). I can't check it at the police station, I'm not in that area at the moment.
I think the topic is quite clear at this point. XSX and PS5 match in graphical settings, but it has one (which you cannot access in the game) that is lower in XSX, it has a very clear impact on the image but almost zero in terms of performance. I think it seems pretty obvious that the problem here is that a Series S tweak has been "sneaked in."
But if someone prefers to come up with outlandish theories (I'm not saying that for you, Vick) to explain this difference, they are free to do so. In my opinion, this will eventually be fixed. It's too obvious to me that it's a mistake.
Vick
Member
Thanks a lot for checking Vergil, this basically settles it.
Let's hope it gets changed at this point, assuming it won't have a bigger impact on performances than it does on the 5fps on PC.
Felt absurd to be playing something like this in 2023, this along with Terminator: Resistance legit made me love gaming again.
It's a AA game though, don't expect games like these to be proper showcases of these machines.
Let's hope it gets changed at this point, assuming it won't have a bigger impact on performances than it does on the 5fps on PC.
If you're a RoboCop head and don't have a capable PC, I would honestly say yes because I really loved the game.
Felt absurd to be playing something like this in 2023, this along with Terminator: Resistance legit made me love gaming again.
It's a AA game though, don't expect games like these to be proper showcases of these machines.
Last edited:
Physiognomonics
Member
5fps on PC could mean 10fps on console with more limited bandwidth. We already seen this with stuff like AF settings on consoles compared to PC.
Vergil1992
Member
It's possible, but I wouldn't say you gain 5fps. I said between 2 and 5fps. If I stayed still, it ranged between 68-71fps (with the value at 1), and between 71-73 (value at zero). If I was walking around, it was something like 64-65-66fps vs 66-68-69. Depending on where you looked they even went to the same framerate, 1fps up or down.
It must also be said that the difference between PS5 and XSX is not 10fps, it could actually be more. In the comparison it is seen that in XSX it is locked at 60fps and in PS5 it drops to 49. It is not known if they are 10, 15 or 20fps (obviously I don't think 20fps, it would be very exaggerated). It's probably something like 12-13fps more.
If it were a 9-10fps advantage, we would surely see some drops in those same areas to 58-59, or at the very least we would see a more unstable frametime. That it is a solid 60fps when the PS5 runs at 49-50fps indicates that the difference is greater than 10fps. Maybe slightly.
It is practically identical to the one we have recently seen in Alan Wake 2.
Last edited:
Lysandros
Member
So does this particular setting cover all the graphical differences you pointed out including reflection quality on puddles besides the resolution difference in quality mode? (couldn't see the image posted, it's broken)
On another note, expecting x. amount processing cost of such setting on a particular PC to translate 1:1 to a specific console APU with all the substantial architectural differences is simply naive. Bottlenecks/costs on any given frame can be highly variable depending on the system, i agree with you.
Last edited:
Again
, that PS5 works at a higher resolution in quality mode is another mystery like the detail of materials at O without logic in performanceLike that, there is no sense that the quality mode does not have a higher resolution compared to the performance mode when the assets are practically identical. There is no sense either that the XSS version goes to that same resolution and similar/same performance target only with some cuts. This is far from the norm seen in any other game.
The "similar performance on PS5 at 1440p" is also inaccurate. We know that in performance mode it drops to 20sfps in the only area and scene where a drop was detected in 30fps quality mode. That is, the resolution is not the cause there.
Regarding whether that 15% DRS is present in the final game... The fact is that if we are guided by the fact that details materials to 0 is present in XSX, the logical thing is to think that this conf. of the DRS is also present.
It is clear that we cannot be evaluative or have absolute certainty, but I am clear that if it were the other way around you would be defending that logic
Great work. It would be great if what has been resolved here could be transferred by someone to DF and for them to inform the Studio to know what their position is. Know if it is a decision or an error.Very interesting, thanks for the contribution. I'm going to do tests too.
If it is a possible degradation in the game engine, I suspect that XSS is to blame here. XSX and PS5 seem 1:1 except for "MaterialQualityLevel", which is lower on Xbox than PC in its lowest mode. It is a very noticeable problem and also incomprehensible that you cannot play it on a PC without touching the .ini, since in theory it could improve performance on a less powerful PC. Seeing this, I would think more that an "optimization" for XSS has slipped in here. It could have an impact on performance or maybe not, if they did it so that the XSS VRAM memory did not overflow we may see little or none, but if it is something that affects the GPU / CPU we may gain performance.
This is also interesting:
+CVars=r.DynamicRes.FrameTimeBudget=16.66
+CVars=r.DynamicRes.MinScreenPercentage=60
+CVars=r.DynamicRes.MaxScreenPercentage=100
+CVars=r.DynamicRes.FrameTimeBudget=16.66
+CVars=r.DynamicRes.MinScreenPercentage=75
+CVars=r.DynamicRes.MaxScreenPercentage=100
Lower minimum resolution on PS5?
I've been doing my tests. Definitely, if I change between 0 and 1 in the MaterialQualityLevel, there is a performance loss, but it is negligible.
MaterialQuality Level 0
MaterialQuality Level 1
There is a difference of 2 to 5fps.
It doesn't make much sense, it's a massive loss on a visual level and you gain very little performance (in relation to what you lose). I firmly bet this is a graphical XSS tweak that has "snuck in" here. It might explain the PS5/XSX performance difference, but not entirely, there's no way there's a +10fps difference here.
I can also confirm that the buildings and what comrade Vick points out are affected by this option. In my capture if you look in the distance you can clearly see the building.
It is a problem with a single graphical adjustment, but its impact on visual quality is too great and I have barely noticed a difference in performance. I would say about 2-3fps on average. VRAM and GPU usage have not increased.
I think it is an XSS graphical adjustment because perhaps it crashed its VRAM.
In príncipe, XSS cause is the most logical possibility. Among other reasons because it is a situation that has happened on other occasions.
Possibly they disabled the material detail in the XSS optimization and it was reproduced in XSX. It wouldn't make sense for such a blatant and visible visual aspect to be discarded before other options. Even less when there was plenty of room for performance.
It would have been more normal to activate and have the game run at 49-50fps (what happens on PS5) or even lower than to deteriorate the visual appearance so much.
Vergil1992
Member
It is completely unpredictable what can happen in terms of performance. It may happen that it has no impact, that it has little or that it has a lot. At the moment it seems that it is an adjustment that affects little on PC (I would say that marginally, any other option, such as shadows or post-processing, the visual difference is almost zero and you lose more frames), and in this generation of consoles in particular The line that separated consoles and PC is more blurred than ever, this game has the same stuttering problems on PC as on consoles, even when generally "transverse stuttering" was not very common on console.
In The Witcher 3 it also happened that XSX (due to a bug) had the same settings as Series S in its quality mode, but surprisingly, the bug did not affect performance. It had worse LOD in all aspects compared to PS5 and coincided with Series S, but when it was updated the performance did not change at all, despite having a much better level of detail.
And yes, this setting affects the entire environment, including some reflections. It does not affect the quality of the reflections in itself, but it can (at least in the area I am in) cause some elements to not be reflected or to be less precise. In water, for example, it can be observed. The funny thing is that if you change the reflections from "high" to "medium" you gain many more frames, even though the difference to the naked eye is minor.
I think that no one is giving importance to the difference in resolution in quality mode because it is evident that it is a mistake, for all the reasons that have been explained in this thread. It makes no sense that in a PS5 mode it works at 70% higher resolution and then in performance mode (with the same or perhaps lower resolution) with the same visual differences XSX has a solid advantage of +10fps. It is also not normal that the resolution in both modes on Xbox Series X is the same, or that XSS works at the same resolution as XSX. It is so obvious that it is a mistake that that is why I think most of us talk about performance mode.
poodaddy
Member
While I get what you're saying, I get what Gym's saying too. It's why I loved games Read Dead Redemption and GTA 4 so much, there's something visceral about when you shoot something and the body reacts realistically, it grounds you in the world and makes the whole experience feel that much "harder" if you will, grittier.Gym, You're to picky! Just shoot stuff with the nice sounding guns
That being said, I love boomer shooters too, so it's not a necessity.
Last edited:
Vergil1992
Member
I agree that the "discoveries" in this thread should be seen by the guys at Digital Foundry.
In this thread, we have seen which is the option that on Xbox is at 0, it seems that a 15% advantage has also been discovered in the Xbox DRS compared to PS5 (DF did not rule out that there was DRS), and we can also make an idea of how much difference in performance there is with MaterialQualityLevel at 0 or 1. Honorable mention to terintamel for discovering it, and to Vick for pointing out problems beyond the asphalt, he was indeed right. I think DF should have put more emphasis here, because the difference made by setting MaterialQualityLevel to 0 affects more things than just the asphalt.
It would be interesting if DF saw this thread. He could help them update their analysis, and they could even inform the developers of the problem on Xbox, both the resolution in quality mode and the MaterialQualityLevel problem.
It's clear to me that it's a bug, I think it's an "extra optimization" for Series S, which isn't even available in the game's visual options. And someone forgot to change it into her older sister. This does not make sense on a platform as "powerful" as XSX, there are much more demanding options with less visual impact if it were a question of performance.
In this thread, we have seen which is the option that on Xbox is at 0, it seems that a 15% advantage has also been discovered in the Xbox DRS compared to PS5 (DF did not rule out that there was DRS), and we can also make an idea of how much difference in performance there is with MaterialQualityLevel at 0 or 1. Honorable mention to terintamel for discovering it, and to Vick for pointing out problems beyond the asphalt, he was indeed right. I think DF should have put more emphasis here, because the difference made by setting MaterialQualityLevel to 0 affects more things than just the asphalt.
It would be interesting if DF saw this thread. He could help them update their analysis, and they could even inform the developers of the problem on Xbox, both the resolution in quality mode and the MaterialQualityLevel problem.
It's clear to me that it's a bug, I think it's an "extra optimization" for Series S, which isn't even available in the game's visual options. And someone forgot to change it into her older sister. This does not make sense on a platform as "powerful" as XSX, there are much more demanding options with less visual impact if it were a question of performance.
Last edited:
Dr.Morris79
Gold Member
You've got me thinking now as to what other games have this grittier mechanic, I can only think of the two you've listed. Damn brains gone.
Robocops just crazy in that regard. I punched a bloke through a wall into the next room and then some
Even without more testing thanks for what you already tested.
edit: it's also handy you used amd hardware cheers.
Last edited: