• 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.

VGTech: LEGO Star Wars: The Skywalker Saga PS5 vs Xbox Series X|S Frame Rate Comparison

Darsxx82

Member
I'm not going to debate what was clearly said by the actual devs. Believe what you want.

I don't have to believe anything, I just have to read what they describe there. And there they are not describing an engine situation with base problems, unusable ...what for me can be called an "engine in bad shape".

There they only describe a situation in which part of the developer team thought that using UE could be better than NTT for different reasons, the most important being the ease of hiring new employees and facilitating their adaptation to being UE better known.

Therefore, going to the justification of the engine is in poor condition to explain the differences between the XSX and PS5 versions (the origin of the discussion) makes no sense. Among others because the graphics engine is the same for all platforms.
 
Last edited:

RoadHazard

Gold Member
Why would they do a shit port on the biggest and most popular platform? That makes no sense at all. What's far more likely is Xbox has been receiving less than stellar ports for most of this generation so far. People have been lead to believe that these two systems are identical which is not the case, this is an example of Series X producing to a level it should have been from the very beginning.

Lol. No. It might be true that the X has been underperforming so far, but this is not the game that suddenly shows the actual difference between the consoles. They are not identical, no, but the power delta is definitely not THIS big.
 

Topher

Gold Member
I don't have to believe anything, I just have to read what they describe there. And there they are not describing an engine situation with base problems, unusable or "in bad shape"...

There they only describe a situation in which part of the developer team thought that using UE could be better than NTT for different reasons, the most important being the ease of hiring new employees and facilitating their adaptation to being UE better known.

Therefore, going to the justification of the engine is in poor condition to explain the differences between the XSX and PS5 versions (the origin of the discussion) makes no sense. Among others because the graphics engine is the same for all platforms.

I'm not talking about an explanation of the differences between XSX and PS5 at all. The question was asked if the reason folks were pointing to the engine being in "bad shape" was because XSX performed better. That simply isn't the case. The situation surrounding the problems they had with engine are explicitly stated and it said nothing about specific platforms.

"Members of the team say that in practice, when they got their hands on NTT, it was unstable and missing features. Tasks like adding animations that would take two minutes in the old engine could take 10 minutes or longer this time around, depending on how many times the engine crashed. It also resulted in hours of work vanishing if the engine didn’t save properly."
 

MasterCornholio

Gold Member
Lol. No. It might be true that the X has been underperforming so far, but this is not the game that suddenly shows the actual difference between the consoles. They are not identical, no, but the power delta is definitely not THIS big.

If the power difference was that big it would have manifested itself in many other titles. But I’m currently not seeing that.
 

Mr Moose

Member
I don't have to believe anything, I just have to read what they describe there. And there they are not describing an engine situation with base problems, unusable ...what for me can be called an "engine in bad shape".

There they only describe a situation in which part of the developer team thought that using UE could be better than NTT for different reasons, the most important being the ease of hiring new employees and facilitating their adaptation to being UE better known.

Therefore, going to the justification of the engine is in poor condition to explain the differences between the XSX and PS5 versions (the origin of the discussion) makes no sense. Among others because the graphics engine is the same for all platforms.
Members of the team say that in practice, when they got their hands on NTT, it was unstable and missing features. Tasks like adding animations that would take two minutes in the old engine could take 10 minutes or longer this time around, depending on how many times the engine crashed. It also resulted in hours of work vanishing if the engine didn’t save properly. New engines typically arrive with teething issues, but several former employees wondered why the company had taken this risk on such a high-profile project.

To add to this, staff say that much of the pre-production on The Skywalker Saga had been done with the old engine in mind. That created problems when trying to implement the game’s design, as assets and animation had to be reexported and reintegrated. According to some staffers, the struggles with the new engine were the straw that broke the camel’s back.
 

MarkMe2525

Gold Member
Just wait for the patch... A feel a bunch of folks are going to be eating crow pretty soon. Its silly to draw conclusions based off the performance of a single game, especially when it is so atypical.

Also, I see the argument that the engine is in bad shape and that's the reason for the poor performance on PS5. If that was the case, you would expect similar poor performance on XSX similar to elden ring which we do not see here. Pretty silly to make such claims based off of the quotes of select unnamed individuals working on the project. Also ignores the fact that these "journalist" routinely ignore contradictory statements in order to give credibility to their angle/agenda. Drama sells. Confirmation bias at work here.
 
Last edited:

Topher

Gold Member
Just wait for the patch... A feel a bunch of folks are going to be eating crow pretty soon. Its silly to draw conclusions based off the performance of a single game, especially when it is so atypical.

Also, I see the argument that the engine is in bad shape and that's the reason for the poor performance on PS5. If that was the case, you would expect similar poor performance on XSX similar to elden ring which we do not see here. Pretty silly to make such claims based off of the quotes of a single person working on the project. Confirmation bias at work here.

The argument regarding the engine being in bad shape describes the overall situation of the game's development, not necessarily the PS5's performance. That's my take on it anyway. It is clear, however, that the development of this game was troubled at best. Suggesting that played a part into the poor PS5 port isn't unreasonable.

But you are right. I think there will probably be a patch resolving these issues.
 

SenjutsuSage

Halo TV Series Promoter - Live from: Reach
Based on the specs of these two console's GPUs, the Series X, while perhaps not always THIS massive, should be capable of demonstrating pretty solid (or big depending on your definition) advantages in resolution performance fairly often.
 

SenjutsuSage

Halo TV Series Promoter - Live from: Reach
Just wait for the patch... A feel a bunch of folks are going to be eating crow pretty soon. Its silly to draw conclusions based off the performance of a single game, especially when it is so atypical.

Also, I see the argument that the engine is in bad shape and that's the reason for the poor performance on PS5. If that was the case, you would expect similar poor performance on XSX similar to elden ring which we do not see here. Pretty silly to make such claims based off of the quotes of select unnamed individuals working on the project. Also ignores the fact that these "journalist" routinely ignore contradictory statements in order to give credibility to their angle/agenda. Drama sells. Confirmation bias at work here.

The big giveaway something is off is the 89% at 60fps stat with all the tearing on PS5. Very low in the frame, too, which signals even worse performance. Something definitely isn't playing nice. I'm wondering if in optimizing for the Series X's asymmetric memory design they just ported it to PS5 and something is off as a result of what was done.
 

MasterCornholio

Gold Member
Based on the specs of these two console's GPUs, the Series X, while perhaps not always THIS massive, should be capable of demonstrating pretty solid (or big depending on your definition) advantages in resolution performance fairly often.

I think the point is that it hasn’t happened fairly often. Usually the differences between the two are pretty minor.
 

StreetsofBeige

Gold Member
You are sure based on what? Do you know how the code runs on ps5 or you just trolling again? Looking at the thread seems you are more interested to fuel console war just to lead the conversation to the XSX hardware superiority than to know what's going on ps5

It's that normal a game runs so better on Xbox hardware and so bad on ps5 or we just deliberately ignore this part of the equation? Because seems quite uncommon such gap on multiplat, aside when BC is heavily involved and I wouldn't exclude they just care to run the old code on ps5 without care to optimise it better imo.
You just came back from a month long ban being a console warrior, and your first goal coming back is posting 9 times out of 10 in a Lego Vs. thread. Wow.
 

adamsapple

Gold Member
Alright even I think this topic has outlived its usefulness now lol.

Green rats are calling this the greatest victory since sliced bread and Blue beetles are not buying it because its just a kiddy lego game.

Lets end this suffering please mods lol
 

MasterCornholio

Gold Member
Alright even I think this topic has outlived its usefulness now lol.

Green rats are calling this the greatest victory since sliced bread and Blue beetles are not buying it because its just a kiddy lego game.

Lets end this suffering please mods lol

If people gave the XSX the benefit of a doubt then I don’t see why the same can’t be done with the PS5. Let’s all wait and see if this is just an outlier or the new standard. In the meantime there’s plenty of comparisons to look at and to look forward to,
 

JackMcGunns

Member
Haven't seen a game favor one platform so decisively this gen.

And......it's a Lego game.

Ryan Reynolds Wtf GIF
Hitman 3
 

Darsxx82

Member
I'm not talking about an explanation of the differences between XSX and PS5 at all. The question was asked if the reason folks were pointing to the engine being in "bad shape" was because XSX performed better. That simply isn't the case. The situation surrounding the problems they had with engine are explicitly stated and it said nothing about specific platforms.

"Members of the team say that in practice, when they got their hands on NTT, it was unstable and missing features. Tasks like adding animations that would take two minutes in the old engine could take 10 minutes or longer this time around, depending on how many times the engine crashed. It also resulted in hours of work vanishing if the engine didn’t save properly."

I repeat, what is described there has nothing to do with a broken or unusable graphics engine, which is what it would be appropriate to describe as a bad shape engine.

All these reactions are based on the opinion of part of the team that UE could be a better option and development base, not that the NTT was useless. As simple as if the UE did not exist, surely the NTT would be the preferable and intelligent option to use.
That same issue is what has resulted in CDPR changing to UE5. Not because CDprojectRed engine was "in bad shape", they have simply seen the option of UE5 more profitable and accessible and facilitator to hire staff.

From there, someone here wants to focus on the graphics engine and development difficulties to explain the differences between versions when this situation is very common in the industry. And it has only been brought to the scene simply because of the situation of the PS5 version. If the affected platform had been XSX, they would be talking about bottlenecks and hardware problems as we see in the SofP and Elden threads.
Otherwise I do not understand the reason why it was not brought to the scene in more flagrant cases such as Stranger of Paradise or even Elden (although in the case of Elden the last patch in XSX has made things more even with the PS5 version) where every platform malfunctions and the bases of these engines are broken.

In those cases, the XSX version is not up to par with PS5, not because of the engine, no matter how broken it is, not for harware bottleneks, it is simply that it has been harmed for the same reasons as PS5 in LEGO, not being a base platform or lacking the necessary time to optimization.
 
Last edited:

Bogroll

Likes moldy games
Alright even I think this topic has outlived its usefulness now lol.

Green rats are calling this the greatest victory since sliced bread and Blue beetles Snakes are not buying it because its just a kiddy lego game.

Lets end this suffering please mods lol
Too nice that. Got to be Blue Snakes :messenger_beaming:
 

SenjutsuSage

Halo TV Series Promoter - Live from: Reach
Damn I feel bad for them. Makes sense why they want to use Unreal and it’s a shame that management was doing this to avoid licensing costs.

A few people saying negative things doesn't erase the incredible product that was made. This engine is beautiful. What's on display from this project is some incredible work. There are always growing pains with working on a new engine, but I'm not totally convinced after this it makes sense to abandon it for Unreal Engine. If they decide to that's one thing, but there's something here worth keeping based on the quality of the game they released.
 

Topher

Gold Member
I repeat, what is described there has nothing to do with a broken or unusable graphics engine, which is what it would be appropriate to describe as a bad shape engine.

I stand corrected. The engine wasn't in "bad shape".

The engine was....

-the engine that gave "terrible final results" (exactly as the developer said it would)
-the engine that "broke the camels back"
-the engine that was "unstable and missing features".
-the engine that "resulted in hours of work vanishing".

But "bad shape"......lol, no we certainly can't go that far. So fine.....I'll just let the devs describe the engine for me from now on and you can define "bad shape" however you want.



Even that game wasn't this bad.
 
Last edited:

MasterCornholio

Gold Member
A few people saying negative things doesn't erase the incredible product that was made. This engine is beautiful. What's on display from this project is some incredible work. There are always growing pains with working on a new engine, but I'm not totally convinced after this it makes sense to abandon it for Unreal Engine. If they decide to that's one thing, but there's something here worth keeping based on the quality of the game they released.

The developers seem to hate the engine. I’d say for their sake it’s better to use something else. They mentioned all the issues they had with it and it really doesn’t seem ideal. I’m more concerned for the developers than the engine to be honest. They definitely can make beautiful games with other engines and be less stressed as the same time.
 

assurdum

Member
I don't have to believe anything, I just have to read what they describe there. And there they are not describing an engine situation with base problems, unusable ...what for me can be called an "engine in bad shape".

There they only describe a situation in which part of the developer team thought that using UE could be better than NTT for different reasons, the most important being the ease of hiring new employees and facilitating their adaptation to being UE better known.

Therefore, going to the justification of the engine is in poor condition to explain the differences between the XSX and PS5 versions (the origin of the discussion) makes no sense. Among others because the graphics engine is the same for all platforms.
But the API on console are different. We are talking about of evident performance differences or about a tech gap between consoles out of the reality? Genuine question.
 
Last edited:

SenjutsuSage

Halo TV Series Promoter - Live from: Reach
The developers seem to hate the engine. I’d say for their sake it’s better to use something else. They mentioned all the issues they had with it and it really doesn’t seem ideal. I’m more concerned for the developers than the engine to be honest. They definitely can make beautiful games with other engines and be less stressed as the same time.

A few definitely not speak for the whole. I would have thought people learned this lesson already. That's why these articles are such nonsense sometimes. They aim to get complaints from specific people without giving the entire picture, because giving the entire picture goes against the narrative they're trying to create. And who knows, maybe they tried to get positive statements on the engine, I don't know, but clearly the end results speak for themselves. If this game is still on that brand new engine they designed, then it pretty much delivered their magnum opus based on what people have been saying.
 

SenjutsuSage

Halo TV Series Promoter - Live from: Reach
But the API on console are different. We are talking about of evident performance differences or about a tech gap between consoles out of the reality? Genuine question.

API are indeed different, but large swaths of the development community have stated how identical the PS5 API is to the PS4 API. So reasonably they should have been able to do a better job on PS5 than they did, but I understand his core point - there's zero evidence that this game engine is somehow a "bad engine." It's an unbelievably great looking title with effects galore. It's their best playing LEGO game ever, their most ambitious ever, their best looking ever. It's also being called by many the best LEGO game ever. Some have even literally called it one of the best Star Wars games ever.
 

DJ12

Member
Here in the uk, don't know about elsewhere, this game is only advertised as on xbox, ime sure that has nothing at all to do with it being the better version at launch.....

I mean if you are going to get on version to an acceptable level, it's definitely going to be the version you've made a deal for.

The sad thing is this will probably be like Harry Potter part 2 and never be fixed.

Anyway, at least I don't need to buy the game anymore, will wait for it to be fixed and/or in a sale on steam or psn.
 
Last edited:

assurdum

Member
API are indeed different, but large swaths of the development community have stated how identical the PS5 API is to the PS4 API. So reasonably they should have been able to do a better job on PS5 than they did, but I understand his core point - there's zero evidence that this game engine is somehow a "bad engine." It's an unbelievably great looking title with effects galore. It's their best playing LEGO game ever, their most ambitious ever, their best looking ever. It's also being called by many the best LEGO game ever. Some have even literally called it one of the best Star Wars games ever.
I have to say it: I never seen so many try to reverse and manipulate a thread conversation so intensely just to fit to their narrative. It's almost scary. The article posted said enough. I think we can move on.
 
Last edited:

Darsxx82

Member
I stand corrected. The engine wasn't in "bad shape".

The engine was....

-the engine that gave "terrible final results" (exactly as the developer said it would)
?? A game that looks great close to Lego movies, running at 60fps 99% of the time or near native 4K perfect 30fps ..... OK. the final result is terrible.

What are SofP and Elden engines for you then? What is the reason that "the engine in bad shape" did not come into the picture to explain differences between versions whwn all of which (unlike what you see in LEGO) are a mess?
🤔

-the engine that "broke the camels back"

If you read the description, that problem is more related to wanting to "recycle" situations from the original versions than with the engine itself.
-the engine that was "unstable and missing features".
-the engine that "resulted in hours of work vanishing".
But "bad shape"......lol, no we certainly can't go that far. So fine.....I'll just let the devs describe the engine for now on.
I repeat again, there they are comparing with the benefits of having used UE that would have made it easier to implement features than to do it on an engine in creation.
If UE had not been an option, the complaints would not have existed and would have been accepted. As I was saying, again, it's the same situation why CDPR changes to UE5 and it's not because the CDPred engine is in bad shape or doesn't work. Simply UE can offer similar results and has other advantages. The main one is to facilitate the hiring of new developers.
 

Darsxx82

Member
But the API on console are different. We are talking about of evident performance differences or about a tech gap between consoles out of the reality? Genuine question.
We are talking about a clear case where one version has had a better optimization process than another and possibly has also had the advantage of being a base development platform.

In an egalitarian development and optimization process, the differences (if they exist) would be much shorter and more in line with equality seen as a normal general rule.

I have already repeated it many times, between consoles so similar in power and architecture, being a base platform or an extra optimization time is more determining and decisive than minor hardware advantages or disadvantages that may exist.
 

SenjutsuSage

Halo TV Series Promoter - Live from: Reach
I have to say: I never seen someone try to manipulate a whole argumentation so intensively just to fit his narrative. It's almost scary.

Say what you want buddy. The results on screen quite clearly speak for themselves. This game looks and plays fantastic. I don't know, or really care, if you can't accept that or not.

Zzz Ok GIF by Jim Gaffigan
 

MasterCornholio

Gold Member
A few definitely not speak for the whole. I would have thought people learned this lesson already. That's why these articles are such nonsense sometimes. They aim to get complaints from specific people without giving the entire picture, because giving the entire picture goes against the narrative they're trying to create. And who knows, maybe they tried to get positive statements on the engine, I don't know, but clearly the end results speak for themselves. If this game is still on that brand new engine they designed, then it pretty much delivered their magnum opus based on what people have been saying.

Not really after they announced they won’t be using the engine for future titles. You don’t ditch an in house engine that’s license free just because a couple of people don’t like it.

Don’t worry UE5 is very good and they will continue to make great looking games with it. You really shouldn’t doubt them in that regard.
 
No way that XSX hardware will have such performance advantage on ps5. I can't believe you are trying to argue such absurdity based to this opinable port. It's like I would have said Elden Ring and GTA remastered proved the ps5 hardware superiority.
The XSX has a hardware advantage and not just in the 2tflops extra.
The reality is that both consoles are a mish mash of both RDNA 1 and RDNA 2. For instance, the PS5 has the older RDNA 1 ROPs, while the XSX has the newer RDNA 2 ROPs. VRS is done in the GPUs ROP, which is why the XSX has VRS and the PS5 doesn't. That also goes with the PS5 having the older AMD Primitive Shader and GE tech, while the XSX has the newer Mesh Shader pipeline of RDNA 2.
We are yet to see what performance difference these will make when they are fully utilised.
As it stands, Mesh Shaders, SFS on the XSX arnt being used in this game, and neither is Primitive Shaders on the PS5.
So as you say, there is no reason at this point for there to be this difference. It's not a hardware thing, so it has to be a development thing.
 
I don't have to believe anything, I just have to read what they describe there. And there they are not describing an engine situation with base problems, unusable ...what for me can be called an "engine in bad shape".

There they only describe a situation in which part of the developer team thought that using UE could be better than NTT for different reasons, the most important being the ease of hiring new employees and facilitating their adaptation to being UE better known.

Therefore, going to the justification of the engine is in poor condition to explain the differences between the XSX and PS5 versions (the origin of the discussion) makes no sense. Among others because the graphics engine is the same for all platforms.
From what I have read, and it may be wrong, but Lego games are a bit like COD games in they they launch every year, there is tons of crunch and the games are generally rushed to get them out of the door. It could be for instance that TT used GDK as the lead development as it now does both Xbox and PC, and then ported over to the PS5. If they were running short on time and resources they may not of had enough time to get the PS5 version up to where it should be but released it anyway and are going to patch it later.
Now I don't know if that is what happened, but it's an example of what could happen to result in something like we see now.
 
I think the point is that it hasn’t happened fairly often. Usually the differences between the two are pretty minor.
You sure do like to clarify what the point is a lot don't you? Your clever, I'll give you that. The only chink in your armor is that you repeatedly clarify this point immediately after someone points out something positive towards Xbox.

Of course the differences haven't been this drastic thus far this gen. That's really not debatable at this point. People here trying to speculate as to why it might be happening here, and everytime someone suggests anything pointing to the PS5 perhaps not being at least equal to or superior than the XSX... It's immediately followed by you clarifying for the umpteenth time that we haven't seen this big a discrepancy before, and so that can't be the case. When someone finally comes along with a suggestion that suits your narrative, like the engine being responsible... You seem to have no problem with it.
Not really after they announced they won’t be using the engine for future titles. You don’t ditch an in house engine that’s license free just because a couple of people don’t like it.

Don’t worry UE5 is very good and they will continue to make great looking games with it. You really shouldn’t doubt them in that regard.
This doesn't support the claim you believe it does. The story states that the engine wasn't as easy to develop for, and that it had some issues such as crashes, and saving problems. They also pointed to how many new employees would likely have an easier time working with UE5 vs their proprietary in house engine. None of those would cause the finished product to work just fine on all available platforms except one.

The most likely cause is poor optimization or a bug on the PS5 version.
 

sinnergy

Member
From what I have read, and it may be wrong, but Lego games are a bit like COD games in they they launch every year, there is tons of crunch and the games are generally rushed to get them out of the door. It could be for instance that TT used GDK as the lead development as it now does both Xbox and PC, and then ported over to the PS5. If they were running short on time and resources they may not of had enough time to get the PS5 version up to where it should be but released it anyway and are going to patch it later.
Now I don't know if that is what happened, but it's an example of what could happen to result in something like we see now.
But ps5 is all powerful it should just run it🤣 that was the narrative 2 years ago .. and the another one gifs flew around daily .. not ?? Surely it had nothing to do with tools / software and time .
 
Last edited:
Are people really using this one game to prove that "massive difference in power" between the two consoles?

The game DRS range is from 1080p to 2160p on XSX. Doesn't that give them a clue that there is something wrong with the game's optimization?

And if one-off instances were enough to prove the power, does that mean that PS5 was more powerful than XSX in February 2022 when Elden Ring was released? And now suddenly it is less powerful than XSX in April 2022 when Lego Star Wars was released? lol.
 

John Wick

Member
why are some people acting like the specs are the same between the consoles. there is a big hardware advantange for the series X.
the series consoles had a brand new dev kit different than the xbox one, so previous games and engines had to be ported quickly to get the games out. we are now seeing the big power difference once devs had more time.
What a cringe post. You don't even know what the reason is for the poor performance of the PS5 yet have already concluded that there is a big power difference.
The Geforce 3090 is far more powerful than a 3080 yet in games the difference was only 10-15% max. Yet the gap between those is far bigger than XSX and PS5.
 

01011001

Gold Member
Which game would that be?

well anything that is just not well optimized like Elden Ring or Cyberpunk. as well as games that perform well below what you expect on both systems if you look how they run on PC, like Guardians of the Galaxy, where a GTX1070 perfoms almost as well as a PS5...
or DMC5, which also runs way better on equivalent PC hardware than on either console
and especially Control, which runs at 1440p60 LOW settings on console... like, wtf? my old ass PC could run higher settings than that! even a GTX1060 can almost match that
 
Last edited:

Topher

Gold Member
well anything that is just not well optimized like Elden Ring or Cyberpunk. as well as games that perform well below what you expect on both systems if you look how they run on PC, like Guardians of the Galaxy, where a GTX1070 perfoms almost as well as a PS5...
or DMC5, which also runs way better on equivalent PC hardware than on either console

AS Heisenberg007 Heisenberg007 pointed out, this game is also not well-optimized. Cyberpunk 2077 has a higher lower bound resolution on both consoles than this Lego game. And it was pointed out earlier that running on a PC with a 3060 ti this game's frame rates dips into the 40s.
 

01011001

Gold Member
AS Heisenberg007 Heisenberg007 pointed out, this game is also not well-optimized. Cyberpunk 2077 has a higher lower bound resolution on both consoles than this Lego game. And it was pointed out earlier that running on a PC with a 3060 ti this game's frame rates dips into the 40s.

still not as dumb as some other games that run better on worse hardware. at least this game is not perfectly optimised on any system. stuff like Control where a GTX1060 (4.4TFLOPs card that is 2 architecture generations old) can almost match the performance of the PS5 version... that is something you should never use as a comparison when it comes to performance.

I was able to run, and even posted screenshots in another thread of this, Control at 900p low settings with RT reflections on, at roughly 30fps on a GTX1070oc... yet these consoles that have RT acceleration only run it at 1440p30, a very small upgrade considering that I was running this on a card that did the RT entirely in software.
if you only enable transparent reflections (which limits the surfaces that use RT and also only applies to mostly smooth surfaces) you can even get 60fps on that card at surprisingly high resolutions

(of course thx to the unlocked fps in photo mode we know that the SX could reach 45 to 50fps easily if they allowed you to unlock the fps, but still)
 
Last edited:

Topher

Gold Member
still not as dumb as some other games that run better on worse hardware. at least this game is not perfectly optimised on any system. stuff like Control where a GTX1060 can almost match the performance of the PS5 version... that is something you should never use as a comparison when it comes to performance

I disagree. It makes less sense to harp on this game when the performance discrepancy is far larger than anyone anticipated for reasons no one really knows. At least with Control, the comparison was in the same ballpark.
 

DenchDeckard

Gold Member
Which game would that be?

There has been some terrible games, unfortunately. that ghostrunner game (which the current gen ports were outsourced) for example.

Basically smaller indie games and some smaller third party or quick upgraded ports of last gen games where we got pages of crazy theory of the bottlenecks and diagrams of the series x explaining why it wasn't performing on par with the ps5. I even mentioned that it would probably just be a bad port, or less focus from an outsourced team but you would have a lot of replies on how split memory and whatever else was a bottleneck when i would imagine it wasn't.

Obviously, you reach a point that you understand you are talking to people with an agenda and no real reasoning.

There is something obviously off here with this game, but maybe there is also something where this engine doesn't work well with more narrow design gpus. It would be interesting to see how a gpu on PC that has a similar CU arrangement to ps5 (5700xt) handles this game. We know the PC port is pretty damn good, so it would favour it too.

I would just like to add, I can't see how such a bad engine can deliver such a great looking game with excellent performance on so many platforms. The evidence just doesn't add up to me.

It doesn't have any stutter like unreal engine, no direct x 12 issues. Has no texture pop in or draw distance issues. I've only seen the odd bug of infinite loading on a couple of occasions but nothing compared to what we have seen in games like elden ring or horizon forbidden west.
 
Last edited:

01011001

Gold Member
I disagree. It makes less sense to harp on this game when the performance discrepancy is far larger than anyone anticipated for reasons no one really knows. At least with Control, the comparison was in the same ballpark.

still tho, if a 4.4TFLOPs GPU from 2017 can perform almost at the same level as a PS5, you know there's something wrong here.

the only thing different here seems to be that whatever is wrong with this game doesn't affect one console as much as another console. this could be for many reasons like one of the chosen settings acting up... or maybe there's a value set to the wrong number in one version but not the other.
or it could be that whatever is wrong with the game can be brute forced past by the Series X but not the PS5 for one reason or another... could be that having more GPU cores helps with whatever is wrong with this game
 
Top Bottom