Well this doesn’t look good for a next gen switch if newer next gen titles run at 720p on beefy consoles.
?si=YMe-Eq_l7F335EVZ
>720p 48fps next gen experience on ps5 and series x
Well this doesn’t look good for a next gen switch if newer next gen titles run at 720p on beefy consoles.
?si=YMe-Eq_l7F335EVZ
2023 gaming folks
That is steam deck/switch resolution, I do not get at all why people cope with such shitty resolutions and frame rates. I have a deck and running games at below native Rez looks like shit tbh and muh 30-40fps just looks like crap especially considering it dips all the time.
Jesus Christ
Gaming is collapsing. Nature is healing.
>768x436
>436p upscaled to 4k
WTF?!
>436 to 2160
Why would you even do that?
So morons can say they're running it at 4k.
Because nvidia is pushing their technology again. Ray tracing makes games run like shit and nvidia has pushed it hard on gaming but nvidia says that's no big deal if you also have dlls!
Nvidia is actively making games worse just so they can keep pushing a new gimmick that requires people buying new overpriced cards.
This game doesn't have raytracking lmao
Then why the hell is so low res?
UE5
It has lumen and nanite (which uses software ray tracing iirc)
cuz unoptimized use of unreal engine 5 lol
there's no optimized use for unreal 5
this is a unreal engine 5 game
https://store.steampowered.com/app/2365810/Pseudoregalia/
wtf its out
why didnt you tell me?
yeah and I saw someone getting like 30fps on a gtx 960 or some shit meanwhile that game tries to look like some old ass 2003 game
>Minimum RAM: 8 GB
>Storage space required: 600 MB
Yea, I can tell.
I don't mind retro-looking games, but those textures are below Nintendo 64 grade.
It does. It has ray traced global illumination and reflections.
The game uses UE5's Lumen, which allows for an approach to lighting and reflections similar to using RTX, but Nvidia isn't at all related in this case. It's still technically ray-tracing, though.
RTX is just the nvidia brand name for Windows DXR support. On PC this game will also be using DXR regardless.
it's using FSR and not DLSS, you dumb Black person
Its a typo. Its using FSR ultra performance which reduces the resolution to 33% of the output resolution. Series s targets 1080p. The bigger consoles target 4k.
Looks fine
Yeah I think 436p could actually hold up *fine*. Not great, not terrible. On a 5 inch PS Vita screen, that is.
>people will blame the Series S for these morons thinking you can upscale 436p to 4k
Even 720p to 4k, like PS5/Series X do is fricking stupid. If you still think devs aren't to blame for this shit you are defending this absolute moronation.
Wouldn't 436p to 1080p look better? Either way is awful (there's no reason for this slop to only run at 436p), but why the frick would they think this is a good idea?
>Wouldn't 436p to 1080p look better?
Would look better on a tiny monitor but the artifacts would be about as bad.
Vita consistently ran at higher resolution
>Sub-480p
Steam deck/switch resolution
Sad
uhmm sweatie this is a cutting edge next gen game
that graphical quality would never be possible at higher resolution
This is literally a lower resolution than Beyond Good & Evil on the PS2.
>i-it's the pc port being bad!
>Microsoft is forcing developers to make their games run on 436p@40fps console and everyone happily agrees to it
Come on dude, this is clearly not Microsoft's fault. Even Series X/PS5 can't go above 720p on a game that looks like ass. If you're blaming anyone other than the devs you're just flat out wrong.
moron
Good point, I change my mind.
They still foce you to develop your games for S that shouldn't even be allowed to be called current gen all while putting 4k 120 fps on the box. 15 years ago no one would even bother making multiplats for a console with requirement like that
Sure, and there are games where that might be a relevant factor (like Baldur's Gate not having enough RAM for split screen on Series S). But when a game can't even run properly on Series X, you seriously have to question what the frick the developers are doing.
its called raytracing u moron
And why exactly are they trying raytracing on current gen? It's clear to everyone that the hardware is simply not good enough to maintain acceptable performance if you do it.
>It's clear to everyone
normies dont even notice, like usual
Normies can't tell if a game has raytracing either unless it's specifically pointed out. So again, any dev that tries it on current gen is a moron. IoA developers are doubly moronic because they used raytracing and their game still looks like garbage.
not the guy you're replying to but the series s is supposed to be used with a 1080p TV
436p is roughly 16% of pixels of 1080p
720p is roughly 11% of pixels of 4K
If the Series S is failing, so are the other consoles.
The other consoles are failing. I'm glad I sold my PS5.
keep in mind the upscaling was nearly worthless back then
If more games release like this, hell yeah PS5 and Series X are failing too. We're down to PS3/360 era resolutions and games don't even look better than PS4/XBone.
>games don't even look better than PS4/XBone.
cringe. u npcs are weird, some of u dont notice low res, some of u dont notice low fps, and some of you dont notice raytracing
Raytracing is not enough to make up for 720p on unstable fps, sorry. The image quality hit alone makes this game look worse than many PS4 titles.
ps4 titles running at 60 fps also ran at 720p, without raytracing
ps4 didnt do 60fps because of its potato cpu.
>ps4 titles running at 60 fps also ran at 720p
Battlefield 4 (and most PS4 Frostbite games for that matter) ran at 900p60.
Same with Killzone Shadowfall.
Every CoD game ran at 1080p or 900p at 60 FPS.
those are launch games, its not the same. also bf4 was more like 45-60
don’t call anybody else an NPC when you type like the lyrics of a Prince song
which song
>the series s is supposed to be used with a 1080p TV
No it's not. Essentially every TV is 4K now. It's completely standardized. Even $250 TVs are 4K now.
It's supposed to use the same resolution standard as the previous generation.
It's for people who either don't want to get a new TV or are poorgays or live in poorgay countries and won't get higher than 1080p TVs.
I don't know where you live but I live in an european country and the cheapest brand new TVs you can get are 720p (768p actually) and 1080p.
The entire purpose of the Series S is to run games at a lower resolution, no one in their right mind is pairing it with a giant 4K TV.
This
The usual target range for Series S is 1080p-1440p.
So upscaling to 4K just tells me the devs behind Immortals are fully moronic
They aren’t, it’s a typo in the DF video, on series S it’s being upscaled to 1080p
>pairing it with a giant 4K TV.
Black person, $200 43" TVs are 4K now.
Anon, I hate to break it to you, but that isn't really 4k.
Yes it is. You're fricking moronic.
You missed the point. He thinks that only "giant TVs" are 4K. When in reality the vast majority of TVs of every size are 4K now.
>that isn't really 4k
The C350 doesn't seem to have a weird subpixel layout or anything, as far as I can find with a quick search.
Are you saying it has fewer than 3840x2160x3 subpixels?
Or are you just doing the pedantic "3840 < 4000" thing, ignoring the fact that essentially no consumer displays support DCI 4K making it an irrelevant consideration?
>43"
>giant
You can't even pretend you have a huge TV in 2023 unless it's at least 75".
>He doesn't know
That you're a seething moron? We know.
Yes you are, you can't even tell the HDMI ports aren't proper.
So now we went from to "w-well ok
>i-it's not real 4K!
to
>o-ok it's real 4K but muh HDMI ports!!
It has 3 HDMI ports you moron. Any other bullshit you want to babble?
what a timeline when Nintendo's next system will probably be doing 1080/60fps while sony and xbox are down to 436p
Sony doesn't have an underpowered console, so they're not down to 436p.
They're "only" down to 720 lmao.
wtih denuvo DRM? not a chance.
CRTchads rise up
could some similar technology be used to upscale old 240p videos to a decent quality?
Yes, AI video upscaling is already a thing. 240p is very low though, results will be questionable on many things (especially human faces)
Rtx supersampling has been really great since launching earlier this year. It’s only for 30 and 40 series cards, but nvidia said it’ll come to 20 eventually. Makes 1080p videos look close to 4k and 480p like 1080p. 360p looks like acceptable dvd quality with it on but definitely not hd.
https://github.com/n00mkrad/cupscale
have fun
Soulcalibur was seen as a revolutionary title for running on a home console at 480p@60hz, almost a quarter of a fricking century ago.
>errrrrrrrrrre da pixels meesa want more pixels mammy I she looks like me mammy
Dumb idiot.
Just for comparison, this random no-name handheld from 2009 runs at a resolution of 800x480.
Toshiba Libretto 100ct, a tiny Pentium 1 subnotebook from 1996 has a 7inch display with a resolution of 800x480
Fricking dire.
Literally a resolution that wouldn't be out of place almost 30 fricking years ago and we're seeing it in modern games.
oof, toshiba won
>It's $70 on PS5, like all PS5 games
>subhuman peasants pay an extra $10 + another $10 for online access
Console users...lmao
It’s a single player game
moronic NPC, consumer-cattle is the reason why this is "standard". Anyone who bought shitty triple A slop contributed to this problem. I dont know why homosexuals are more angry with devs and publishers and not with the vermin that validates them buy buying this trash and funding this devolution.
>switch like resolution
do consolegays really?
Switch/steam deck resoultion
Modern games areway too demandinh
>You lived long enough to see japanese devs optimize their games better than westoids
I remember 10 years ago when the meme was that japanese were moronic and didn't know how to code so everything ran like shit outside of consoles
The absolute state of the west, from worshipping Black folk to getting beaten in their own turf by japanese.
Just why? The consoles are powerful. Why do they need to target 4K if it means it's going to be a shimmery mess? RDR2 looks a billion times better than this game on an Xbox One X.
they could target 4k and look like this if the devs didn't force a bunch of bullshit features
Looks like a mobile gme but ok
Honestly that comment reminds me of people wanking about metal gear solid 5 being """""optimised""""""
The game looks like arena breakout ffs.
post a good looking game, CS2 looks exactly like you'd want it to
Anon, MGSV is 8 years old.
For a 2015 game it's far from bad-looking even if the Africa map is kind of ugly.
crisp, clear, runs well, what more do you need
Mobage look better than the average AAA today, you're all morons for eating this ugly shit up.
This has so much more soul than Immortals of Aveum it's unreal.
And? Was it a bad game as a result? Did it need raytracing and 10 gorillion polygons on screen? No.
seriously I have no idea how you can look at CS2 and think it looks bad, especially compared to games that run at 1/10th the framerate with more visual clutter but nothing actually looks any better, just blurry uncanny shit
Yeah, IoA looks decent-ish at times but during combat it's a fricking mess full of visual pollution. It's like they came up with 5 or 6 different ideas for visual effects and just decided to put all of them in.
They also forgot Game Design 101 as far as light sources go: too many and it becomes distracting, cluttered and confusing. But they're far from the only ones.
has exactly the level of detail you want from it, runs more than well enough, doesn't rely on upscaling bullshit
I, Anon, am calling for a total and complete shutdown of trannies women and browns from entering the gaming industry until we can figure what the hell is going on!
kek, we're already at those weird obscure resolutions that late x360/ps3 CODs ran at.
to my knowledge the lowest resolution cod on those consoles was 2010's Black Ops at 544p on PS3, so still significantly higher than this actually
And that was horribly mismanaged, by the way. Treyarch couldn't be arsed to do the port themselves so they outsourced it in the last fricking month of development. The fact that it even worked is a miracle.
Is Unreal Engine goyslop of the engines? Why the hell everyone chooses to adopt it?
It takes no actual effort to learn it. That's literally it.
I guess I will just skip UE5 games then. It seems like an unoptimized slop engine since every UE5 game as of now has been a technical disaster(Remnant 2, Immortals of Aveum).
Unreal engine 5 has little documentation.It is something developers especially indie ones have been asking for.
Eeehhhh not really, despite it being a visual, just use blueprints sorta thing it is less intuitive than unity.
>goyslop
There are really only 2 endgines that are useable at the moment, unity and unreal engine. Unreal engine 5 at the moent is quite intensive to run especially on igpus compared to unity.
>Why the hell everyone chooses to adopt it?
It's easy.
If you noticed, lots of AAA devs are moving away from in-house engines towards UE because that way they can outsource more labor and save more money.
Which is ironic because they will lose money on every game like this
It's insane that using your own engine is now a genuine marker for a good dev these days but I genuinely am appreciative of devs who don't use slop engines
A lot of studios, especially smaller ones, don't want to invest the money and time required to build their own engines. Which is a shame. They also probably don't want to have to spend a lot of time training people how to use in-house technology, when they can instead hire people who have already been working in Unreal Engine and wouldn't need as much training.
You'd think companies would hate these homosexuals for easily exposing all their fake HD 4K bullshit to the masses
The guys from DF were arguing that forcing image upscaling techniques on the players is not inherently bad since the quality per pixel has been improvimg steadily and what even is a real pixel anyway. But when a huge chunk of those pixels is a blurry mess of smeared artifacts it's hard to believe this is not a bad trend.
Here's the clip for those interested:
?si=g_o-ygzJ_IgciOrt
>what even is a real pixel anyway.
Ah, should have known this gaslighting originated from the industry plants. Consolegays are so easy.
>the quality per pixel has been improvimg steadily
That's a complete fricking lie.
It’s true, but the AA, noise reduction, and upscaling necessary to make it presentable kills the detail. That’s why DLSS 3.5 is a big deal, because it does all the above at once, allowing it to preserve more detail.
Every single Series S shill and apologist should be publicly garrotted
You kidding me? without them we wouldn't have modern gaming kino like this
overnight this company became a laughingstock of the whole industry, the Series S is basically a moron filter for developers.
Everyone's laughing at the Series S, clown.
Not me. It shows how low res can perform the same as hardware 3x more powerful than it. The current gen was premature. FSR on the xbox1 and PS4 would be nearly indistinguishable from the gen after it. A return to low res is welcome. All devs should aim for the lowest res possible.
>sirs please do not be mock the series s, the best deal in the gaming
Not me either, I'm laughing my ass off at these pathetic devs
>Everyone
Only salty snoys try to spin this like that while they conveniently forget how Forspoken, FF16 and now this game runs 720p unstable "60"fps on their supposedly 8K console. If they could remove their seething googles for a nanosecond they should be furious how Sony, MS and the video game industry fooled them and they get worse looking games than a gen before. There should be mandates for minimum resolution for every console and if the devs can't pull them then maybe they shouldn't make that game. Even if someone dares to criticize the holy cow the cope is always "t-the PS5Pro will fix it!". Fricking shame.
When you think things couldn't possibly get any worse.
Post (You) playing the game at a higher res and fps on your pc
knew it.
Amazing.
>taking consoleplebs seriously after 2008
hahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahhahahahahhaakekekekekekekekekekekekekke
Meanwhile everyone is talking shit about AC6 and its "shit graphics" that runs perfectly stable with no upscaling.
Enjoy your shiny 436p lights graphicsgays
To be fair AC6 is still running poorly given how it looks.
I just installed it today.
>120 fps
>runs poorly
What are GPU are you using?
And the games looks like a ps4 game which it is.
General question can you turn off the vignette and chromatic aberration. I swear those two are worse than motion blur yet they never get the shit they deserve.
>He bought Exoprimal
Enjoy your dead game.
>literally less than 480p
>upscaled to 4k
Everyone involved in the production of this game needs to be imprisoned.
Soon we are going to get close to 3DS's 320p kino.
>I-it's ok as long as it's written in green
>shadman
doesn't look good for pc either
>Tfw in the top 4
That said, the game looks like absolute shit in every way, so I could never see myself playing it.
Stop posting GameGPU, their benchmarks are fake. TechPowerUp actually tested the game, post their graphs instead.
https://www.techpowerup.com/review/immortals-of-aveum-benchmark-test-and-performance-analysis/5.html
uh, the numbers you posted don't look much better, dude. A 4090 can only reach 43 fps in this game? And PC gamers seriously are making fun of consoles?
at 9x the pixel count of consoles, in fairness.
I mean, no one is pretending consoles are insanely powerful or anything. The Series X and PS5 have an equivalent GPU of a 2080. Take a look at how the 2080 performs in this game.... 15 FPS at 4k. If you wanted to get this game running on a 2080 at 60 fps, you'd have to go all the way down to 1080k or probably 720p too.
and higher settings. dunno why people pretend PS5 is max settings, the volumetrics are clearly toned down on consoles.
>uh, the numbers you posted don't look much better
It has nothing to do with the numbers looking better or worse, it's about accuracy. GameGPU tests ONE graphics card and "extrapolates" the rest. That's what they do: this is why they are able to publish a full suit of benchmarks five minutes after a new game comes out.
People should stop posting GameGPU.
>literally cant run on a 4090
pointless worthless game made by the worst devs
It is really funny how Japanese devs started to care about optimizing their video games while Western devs are just brute forcing it on the highest fricking specs possible.
Maybe "optimisation" is why Clive looks so stupid in FFXVI, and so is the cause of FF dying.
FF16 is 720p in the 60fps mode
Only when fighting. Outside of fights is 1440p with variable fps. And fights never dip below 60fps.
SOUL
Y'know, this'd look bussin' on a CRT TV
>Whilst Microsoft's original Xbox, launched as part of the sixth generation of video game consoles in 2001, could support a 1080i output in limited circumstances,
>support for 1080p began with the launch of the seventh generation of home video game consoles in 2005. Both the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 were capable of outputting at 1080p
>2005
>2005
>2005
No games ran at 1080p thoughever
Many PS3 games run at 1080p.
And then you woke up
There you go morono.
Full Native 1080p/60fps on PS3.
the majority of them are sub 720p. PS2 had some games that did 1080i, that doesn't mean all games did.
Not many, but ps3 actually had a few decent 1080p games.
But a lot of those where ports, like the okami remaster.
ridge racer 7 ran at 1080p 60fps at launch
Straight up lie. The back of game covers showed what resolutions it supported and the options menu had them there. That was as far as consoles to push graphics to 60fps. Once the PS4 came out you started seeing "locked at 30fps" games because the hardware couldn't really handle all the shit on screen.
what? 7th gen was 600p 20-30fps and 8th gen was 900p-1080p 30fps.
you are absolutely delusional
Those labels showed output resolution, not the native resolution of the game. If you're struggling, thing of it like this. If Immortals of Aveum had one of those stickers it would say 4k resolution, even though the game never goes above 1080p native.
Mortal Kombat 9 ran at 1080/60fps native on PS3. Pretty much everything ran at 1080p on the 360 because it upscaled internally from 720p.
>fighting game
yeah, thanks
No it didnt
>Pretty much everything ran at 1080p
>because it upscaled internally from 720p.
So it didn't run at 1080p
It would be fantastic if someone implement meme scaling for Xbox360 or ps3 just to mog the industry
Launch 360 couldn't do 1080p until an update and even then it was over component. Current gen consoles output at 4K, what's your argument here?
Dont worry about it. If you can't even understand the meaning of one sentence then I dont think any explaining will accomplish anything.
Series X supports 8k
Back then I could get 1080i cable channels for free over QAM too. Everything went downhill so fast.
I don't understand why PC cucks think this is funny though. You literally need a 4090 to play this unoptimized game at 60 fps on PC at 1080p. That's not me being hyperbolic by the way. A 3080 for instance can't hold 60 fps at 1080p in Immortals of Avernum. The game is just horribly optimized regardless what platform you play it on.
>. A 3080 for instance can't hold 60 fps at 1080p in Immortals of Avernum.
At max settings, just turn some settings dowm comsidering it is using lumen and nanite
Output resolution is not the same as the resolution the game actually runs at. You don't seriously think 7th gen games were all running at 1080p, do you?
>people actually looked at the game running with FSR Ultra Performance and thought: "yeah this is good we'll ship it :)"
Devs probably thought "this is just DLSS for consoles right?"
even DLSS wouldn't save this
Ultra Performance might work on a 15.6 in 4K laptop monitor, but on a TV it's going to be pretty grim even accounting for the viewing distance
>people actually looked at the game running with FSR
They should have stopped right there tbqh especially at games under 1080p
Diablo 4 makes FSR2 work because it's clearly running on Quality settings, so the difference between 1440p -> 4K is not as jarring
But FSR is not a replacement for normal optimization, it just helps you balance performance and visual quality a bit better.
>If you see a developer b***hing about the Series S's RAM holding them back
this.
Though I do get why some devs don't want to use DX12 yet, even if it lets them get their games to run better. I get the distinct sense that devs are really dragging their feet on the reality that the days of the GTX 9000 and 10XX series are sort of over, you're not going to have both AMD and Nvidia just bumping core count, clock speed and memory every generation from now on. Devs are probably going to have to start getting smarter about these things because 8GB is here to stay, and you're probably going to still have to be smart about how you allocate resources to shader computation and asset streaming.
If you look at the end of last gen with the half-gen console and the way Nvidia and AMD were releasing GPUs, the hardware was getting better in a way that fit how devs were already making games. But now, due to heat issues, due to supply chain issues, due to competition on resources from AI companies, you're not going to see GPUs just get bigger and faster anymore. They're going to start staying the same size mostly, but with new capabilities that need to be manually applied
And devs are PISSED about this, after the PS4 Pro and Xbox One X and GTX 1000 series. They're not very happy that the hardware isn't just going to keep expanding limits that lets graphics engineers stay lazy.
1440p gives TAAU enough detail to work with so even a joke like FSR can be okay. Sony and others did this even in 2016 with the Pro's checkerboard rendering (though that was more 1527p>2160p i think)
But 720p to 4K really needs Ai fed TAAU like DLSS or XESS, of course consoles don't have that but stubborn devs still act like these machines are magical boxes.
Yeah.
I think it'll be funny if the Switch ends up getting some form of DLSS (probably DLSS2 if anything)
But devs should probably not use these upscaling techniques as a panacea for all their optimization woes
It should, i think Nvidia will enjoy the marketing and adoption. Lots of indie devs on Switch would implement DLSS.
Hell, lots of AAA devs would implement DLSS
pair it with a decent SSD, maybe even NVMe and sufficiently fast memory and you're looking at a situation where the switch becomes the tip of the spear on forcing developers to get their shit together and adopt and optimize with newer software solutions
And yeah, Nvidia will benefit immensely since it means that any AAA game that wants to come to switch will likely use DLSS2 at least, meaning the PC versions of those same games will probably have it as well.
>meaning the PC versions of those same games will probably have it as well.
AMD sponsorship to the rescue!
>AMD sponsorship to the rescue!
By far the funniest way to respond to DLSS being good
Nah, let's not make FSR better. Let's just fricking buy, of all things, upscaling algorithm exclusivity
It's going to take them years to catch up to Nvidia's IQ with DLSS. Nvidia is too far ahead with Ai and their training models. it's even funnier that sony ponies are claiming PS5 Pro will have it's own Ai tech, like sony have any fricking R&D in that.
DLSS 3.5 also looking real good
Yeah and if you check on PC you can run immortal at 4K and about 60fps with DLSS ultra perf on a 3060ti just like the consoles but the image quality is a lot better.
And the 3060ti is around 300 bucks now.
Crypto. And now AI. At least on the PC side this is devastating, because at least back in the PS3 and early PS4 era you could just bruteforce past this shit with superior PC graphic silicon that was worth their prices. Now the pc is just barely keeping up with consoles performances when it comes to price/perf ratio.
>Now the pc is just barely keeping up with consoles performances when it comes to price/perf ratio.
nah its in favor of the consoles at this point.
True if we're talking about an entire PC vs an entire console, although I still believe the PC will save you more money in the long run.
That Ray Reconstruction works on literally any RTX card is neat
I'm not a huge fan of frame-generation
This isn't ray reconstruction. It's very confusing but the marketing name DLSS 3.5 isn't the same as the software version DLSS 3.5.0.
They actually are the same thing - version 3.5.0 should support it, but it requires you to rewrite your renderer to make use of it, you can’t just switch out a dll.
The first step to improve FSR is for AMD to add their own general matrix multiplication cores to their consumer GPUs, something which even Intlel has done. Too bad they want the poverty route instead.
>Too bad they want the poverty route instead.
Well they went the Generic route instead, preferring most of their hardware to basically be a generic CU that can be used for anything.
What they failed to appreciate is that the way Nvidia is handling it actually ends up being more performance efficient in the long run
It's very hard to make an upscaling algorithm which exists for the purpose of improving performance also look good. Good-looking upscaling algorithms tend to be more computationally expensive, but if you're AMD then this is a major problem because you can't make your upscaler expensive or it starts negating its primary purpose of improving performance. NVIDIA bypassed this issue by simply including dedicated hardware which can run a better quality upscaler without kneecapping the primary rendering cores with upscaler number crunching. That's why they can afford to make good-looking shit. AMD have not done this and as such have to make due.
If the internet wasnt so widespread these days the industry would already have crashed again.
Why is the PS5 so weak?
>very high
Could put it down to high then up the resolution, and fiddle with the settings. Nevertheless it shows that modern GPUs can’t handld ue5 full feature set other than the 4090, gpu manufacturers really shouldn’t have shilled muh 4k when they were really running gimped ps4 and xbone ports, if you stopped gaming and wait 5-10 years you will be able to play games well with tech that can handle it.
Eh phones have raytracing in games now, I don’t think technological advancement is a bad thing.
>phones have raytracing in games
Ray tracing is not a linear thing, the more complex things the more of tax it takes.
>it shows that modern GPUs can’t handld ue5 full feature
What it shows to me is that UE5 is worthless garbage that provides shit performance despite having no visible image quality improvements compared to other games in other engines which provide similar image quality.
RTX is a brand name for an implementation of standard ray tracing functionality provided by APIs like DX12 and Vulkan. As far as I know, these UE5 dumpster fire games don't even use the RT hardware acceleration that modern cards provide.
>As far as I know, these UE5 dumpster fire games don't even use the RT hardware acceleration that modern cards provide.
Hardware lumen exists, but it works only on nvidia gpu
UE5 is good, I think nanite is what is ending up not being particularly good
lumen is a mixed bag that barely seems worth it
>you play as a disgusting troony beast
Frickin' dropped. Shame. The game looked pretty cool otherwise.
I thought you play as an isekai'd man
>3080 can't do 60, at 1080p
Meanwhile BG3, AC6, Starfield all have great performance.
Why does everyone else suck?
Honestly TV producers did a number on gaming
There was no fricking need to jump from FullHD to 4k
Is there any particular reason developers refuse to make games that can actually run properly on the systems on which they release them?
Most gamers don't care. They'll even actively defend it.
moronic developers jumped on the "WE'RE IN NEXT-GEN GO FRICKING HOGWILD WITH UNCOMPRESSED ASSETS AND UNREAL ENGINE EFFECTS YEAAAAAH" bandwagon not realizing the Xbox Series and Playstation 5 aren't anywhere near as drastic a step up as the advertising made them out to be, nor that a top of the line PC needed for this garbage is out of 95% of gamer's price ranges. They just see shiny new shit and shovel it together thinking it's so cool what they can push now.
If you see a developer b***hing about the Series S's RAM holding them back, remember that they're fricking awful at optimizing probably and that we really shouldn't be pushing 12-16GB of RAM games when most GPUs still keep shortchanging RAM in the first place.
People want better graphics but want 4k 1440p goodness, you can’t have both and these GPUs including high end ones aren’t capable of both , they are only really capable of running Xbox one/ps4 games at 4k well.
>you can’t have both and these GPUs including high end ones aren’t capable of both
Okay but here's the thing: you can. It requires changes in how you manage memory but you absolutely can.
Both the PS5 and Xbox Series consoles have new tech for reducing asset pool consumption that I know for a fact aren't being used.
Devs are just being morons about wanting everything to stay the same as it was 10 years ago, when every generation, you'd just get more cores and faster clock speeds and more memory. They want to go back to when the hardware innovations completely compensated for incompetency
The Series S holding back meme just proves that the gaming community deserves everything they get.
I wish the Series S held them more back, I wish the Series S was literally base PS4 tier, cross gen period was the best time for these consoles because they could actually play the game with aceptable image quality and performance.
Enjoy now the full glory of game with "next-gen" assets that you can't see or play because the IQ and performance is fricking awful.
>I wish the Series S held them more back, I wish the Series S was literally base PS4 tier, cross gen period was the best time for these consoles because they could actually play the game with aceptable image quality and performance.
This
When devs are given stronger hardware, they just get lazier with optimization. The level of engineering competency on display today is worse than John Carmack's original code for DOOM nearly 30 years ago
They want to push cloud gaming.
>no need to make consoles which sell at a loss
>people still have to pay montly to use + games
>zero risk of jailbreaking the console, pirating games and making them lose money
>no need to make consoles which sell at a loss
Which console does EA make moron?
>this moron thinks that israelites don't help each other
Geforce now is popular on third world countries were people cannot afford to get a decent gpu. In a few years first world countries will be in the same situation.
>In a few years first world countries will be in the same situation.
and if they are not fighting back, they deserve their fate.
>cloud gaming.
Google tried, and it failed.
Cloud gaming runs worse than dedicated hardware and will forever run worse than dedicated hardware, not only due to the completely unavoidable issues of latency and loss of quality from the use of lossy codecs at low bandwidth (to save money and for lowest-common-denominator reasons of not excluding people with bad internet connections) but more importantly because the cloud gaming provider will ALWAYS want to squeeze the most suckers possible into the same hardware on their server side and as such you'll just get the bare minimum acceptable performance because that means they can sell more subscriptions for the same amount of hardware running in their data center.
People want next gen but don’t have the hardware for it. It is like playing games on a switch or a low end mediatek/snapdragon 600/700 series phone, and wondering why games run like crap.
>People want next gen
There is no reason for "next-gen" games to run at a lower resolution than the previous generation of consoles. PS5 shouldn't be rendering games at a lower res than PS4 did during its time. Not to mention that the PS5 for 2020 is a lot better than the PS4 was for 2013.
And let's say that people want a true generational leap... they're not getting it here. There is nothing even remotely impressive about this game.
> There is no reason for "next-gen" games to run at a lower resolution than the previous generation of consoles.
You can’t have both, GPUs aren’t really powerful and doing both of those stuff yet. Just look at hog warts legacy on ps4 vs ps5 lol.
>PS5 shouldn't be rendering games at a lower res than PS4 did during its time. Not to mention that the PS5 for 2020 is a lot better than the PS4 was for 2013.
Not better enough to render games that look a generation above the predecessor. Even naughty dogs last of us games looked similar to the par 2 version.
Also cpus don’t seem powerful enough for more complex ai. Looking at how Baldur’s gate 3 fared during the later stages of the game.
>cpus don’t seem powerful enough for more complex ai
lel, this is an aspect of gaming that has been abandoned for over a decade at this point
AAA games (and especially the one this thread is about) absolutely don't focus on it
>Looking at how Baldur’s gate 3 fared during the later stages of the game.
Ran just fine on my oldie ryzen 3600
PS4 ran games at a substantially higher resolution than PS3, and the graphics jump was much higher than the one we're seeing this gen.
Hell, this game doesn't look impressive in any capacity even on PC. On console, it looks more akin to an early gen PS4 game, just running at a lower resolution.
> PS4 ran games at a substantially higher resolution than PS3, and the graphics jump was much higher than the one we're seeing this gen.
Obviously because technology hasn’t improved as much + diminishing returns
> that I know for a fact aren't being used
How do you know? Not meming,
>How do you know? Not meming,
Because devs usually brag or get asked to brag when they do use them.
Like, Sony would not be able to shut-up if a new decently budgeted title like this was using a piece of PS5-specific tech, they'd be stroking themselves off. Same with Microsoft.
Also because these technologies usually exist in some shape or fashion on PC and I know they're not being used there.
For PS5, you have shit like primitive shaders (a precursor to mesh shaders) which optimize the rasterization pipeline a lot
Xbox actually has a bit more, with stuff like Variable Rate Shading, Sampler Feedback Streaming, proper Mesh Shaders and some other smaller tidbits.
These technologies have existed since the Ampere series of GPUS on PC, but I know they're not being used looking at GPU and VRAM load
Not him but yeah I'm remembering how much they were pushing the PS5 SSD for ratchet and clank and then never talked about it again.
Well the thing is that in Ratchet and Clank, they still have loading screens, they're just fast and more seamlessly integrated into gameplay
That moment where the game fricking freezes when the game is running on an HDD on PC? That's the loading screen. It's just shorter on PS5
But the game still has that moment because the game is clearly not designed to just have you be streaming assets in from moment to moment
>Obviously because technology hasn’t improved as much + diminishing returns
But in this case it's not even a diminishing return, it's quite literally a downgrade. There's plenty of PS4 games that look better and run better than this PS5/Series exclusive. That's a new low.
This is a stupid criteria to apply. The game isn’t running at a lower resolution, it’s internally rendering at a lower resolution then using FSR to upscale the output image. If FSR wasn’t an option they’d just cut down on whatever graphical effects they needed to to hit the target resolution
>The game isn’t running at a lower resolution
It literally is. Then it's upscaled. The real resolution for this game is and will always be 720p.
because consolegays will eat it up regardless
>UE5
This is what happens when you use a cookie cutter engine and have no clue how to optimize anymore. It's not a surprise the only good games are still made from companies who roll their own engines.
I don't get why they're putting out consoles with tech years old that cost as much as a cheap PC. You're barely getting any return in performance compared to upgrading a PC. After PS3 I was done with consoles.
Stronger hardware is a meme and not needed at all. All it's there for is to let devs get away with less work while pushing the cost onto the consumer.
they can't even do NATIVE 1080p what the frick
it's the same resolution as on a 4K TV
FSR Quality 1080p = FSR Ultra Performance 4K
this screenshot captures everything i hate about modern lighting. god it so fricking ugly
APOLOGIZE NOW NOW NOW
The only apology should be you for not having a modern resolution image of doom 3.
>modern resolution
anon... read the thread's opening post, 720p is what's trending now
Remember when the Series S was suppose to do native 1440p/60fps?
720p native on both
>Well this doesn’t look good for a next gen switch if newer next gen titles run at 720p on beefy consoles.
just turn off nanite and lumen. raytracing is expensive as frick. problem solved
>Drops into the low 40s at fricking 720p on PS5/XSX
What an absolute dogshit showing, are the devs moronic?
Just drop the fricking settings you mongs.
It dips into the 40s on low settings on a 4090 and no I'm not exaggerating. Go look at the benchmarks.
At least on PC, going from ultra to low doesn't affect image quality or performance that much. Nanite and Lumen just crush performance, it seems. UE5 is garbage.
GPU improvements are grinding to a halt and gamedevs will need to stop obsessing over graffix or actually make quality software instead of rushed garbage.
How does optimizing a game usually work in development? Imagine it happens closer to the end. They must have at least a couple test rigs to see how it runs on high and low-end specs no? I just can't concieve how there wouldn't be alam bells going off aat the studio that something is definitely fricked and in need of fixing when a fricking 4090 can't hold 60fps
>just tell them to use upscaling bro, it's better than native!
It's usually fairly early on in the actual build state, but various studios have different workflows. I respect that it's a small studio working with very cutting edge tech, but they probably should have ditched the engine entirely once they realized they couldn't get consistent FPS on even top end hardware, which is obviously a major issue in a shooter.
They made the game on UE4, then ported it to UE5 and enabled every new feature even though they didn’t make use of them.
So they could be the first console UE5 game not made by Epic, most likely
Jesus. You know, the worst part is I actually remember when UE was incredibly well optimized. The old UT 2k4 days, even UT3 and the Gears of War era, the scaling for hardware was fantastic. UT3 could run on anything from a damn ancient at the time 6200 all the way up to the bleeding edge 8800, and you could tweak the settings to get a stable 60 FPS no matter what. Now you need a 1500 dollar GPU to maybe hit that target on max settings, with guaranteed frame drops. It's so exhausting.
The same is true of UE5, even Fortnite runs at a higher resolution and more stable framerate on consoles also using Nanite and Lumen. These devs just wanted to have every feature on the highest setting, with no regard for performance - the game doesn’t look enjoyable, but I’m sure it will run fine on PC with lower settings.
>Manufacturers push 4K resolution and meme post-processing tech at all costs to incentivize buying new grafics cards
>Games can barely maintain 1K at any stable framerate anymore
Shit has somehow gotten even worse than the 00s when consolegays made excuses for "silky smooth 30FPS" on PS360 games running at 480i
Mankind should have never gone beyond 800x600.
>PS360 games running at 480i
Why do people keep pushing this meme
Most games on those consoles stuck fairly close 720p.
I don't know of a single game that ran at 480p, let alone 480i. CoD games were some of the lowest res games (for the sake of 60 fps) and they were still well above that.
and btw yes, that means this game on Series S has a lower resolution than any PS360 game.
most xbox 360 games ran at 576p 30 fps
>30 fps
on a good day, most were in the 20s
>source: my ass
Even GTA V ran at native 720p.
yeah and it would dip to 15fps
Could dip to 25 or 5 fps, it's irrelevant to the matter at hand.
https://forum.beyond3d.com/threads/list-of-rendering-resolutions.41152/
Tell me what % of games run at 576p or lower on these consoles
>Could dip to 25 or 5 fps, it's irrelevant to the matter at hand.
its 100% relevant idiot
its relevant because games should have been lower res to have better performance since those consoles clearly weren't up to the task.
I'm sure some games could be 1080p but would run even shitter than they already did. 7th gen consoles were the worst for performance. and taking a quick glance it looks like a lot are below 1280x720.
lmao yeah with drops to low 20s when action was on screen https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tPzMZ_Cz7iI
It's irrelevant, look at my initial reply.
This entire reply chain is about resolution, not frame rate.
you are literally one of those consolegays he was mentioning, making excuses for silky smooth 30fps and low resolution.
No, he mentioned 480i (which is half of 480p) and I simply corrected him. Most games sacrificed frame rate for the sake of graphics and resolution on those consoles. So this myth that the games ran at 480p or whatever is silly.
>those consoles
ps3 often had both lower res and fps
Slightly so, in the early years.
And still reasonably close to 720p in the vast majority of games. Look at the link I provided.
He first mentioned 480i and then 576p. Overwhelming majority of games ran at higher resolutions than this, and I don't know of a single one that ran at 480i.
i never said 480i
I was referring to
, maybe the 576p reply was a different anon then
many did run at 540p, 600p etc
Consumers have more computing power at their disposal than ever before in the history of mankind but yet these mongoloids cannot push out a functional product. As if they are all sabotaging this on purpose.
I can run very heavy fluid simulations on my computer in Houdini, this kind of stuff was unheard of 15 years ago even but these c**ts cannot make a functional game - they didn't even develop the engine on their own.
Truly, nu-devs deserve all the hate get.
You guys need to change your thinking. It's not about pixel counts. It's about the quality of pixels.
Sad that the quality of pixels in this game is so poor
this is the series s fault for holding back these genious developers
>games now look worse than PS4 releases and run worse too
9th gen consoles were a mistake.
schizo
When the frick will GRAFFIX end? I'd be fine with one game like Immortals every year or two, sold on the premise of being PC killing GRAFFIX beasts but it feels every major title is trying to be that now. I'd rather we set graphics back two-three generations if it means proper resolutions, framerates and physics.
>I'd rather we set graphics back two-three generations if it means proper resolutions, framerates and physics
Physics being the biggest one for me. I still remember playing GTA IV back in the day and being amazed, thinking from now on all games would have physics like that. 15 years later and it's still pretty much just Rockstar doing physics with high quality like that.
Really feels like the early to mid days of the 360/PS3 generation saw people trying to innovate or at least do something a little different. They have just given up for over a decade now.
>15 years later and it's still pretty much just Rockstar doing physics with high quality like that
not even rockstr is, gta 5 had much simplified physics
RDR 2 made them more complex again. I think GTA V was just downgraded because it had to run on 360/PS3, but even then it did some things better than GTA IV.
The problem is that doing something like Rocktar's physics engine (Euphoria) takes actual skilled developers, and skilled developers are clearly in short order at most studios.
Take two bought zinga, because it owned the studio that developed euphoria
that sort of stuff is more about raw iq. there are only so many smart people in the world.
Even cuckstar dropped europhia engine lmao
No, they didn't. RDR 2 still uses it and it's their latest game.
I'd be fine going back about 10 years on graphics, honestly. Take away all the new rendering toys from the devs until they learn how to optimize again. Apparently all the competent people who understood hardware optimization retired without passing that knowledge on, so it'll take the current generation a while to figure it out.
>optimize
you keep using that word but you have no idea what it means. this all about raytracing being extremely expensive. u could argue they should just drop it and go back to the old lighting ystem that weve had since 2004 with doom 3, but its not a question of optimization
Yes, it is a question of optimization. Cutting out superfluous tech that does nothing but make the game run like shit is the definition of optimization.
It doesn't "do nothing", but what it doesn't isn't worth the performance hit.
>Cutting out superfluous tech that does nothing but make the game run like shit is the definition of optimization.
you just went full moron
>bro we NEED to tank our FPS because the reflections need to be dynamic!
Okay moron. Somehow we survived without raytracing for decades, had amazingly fun video games at low resolutions, but apparently we cannot remove bogus, resource-wasting tech like raytracing because it is now "essential".
People like you ruined video games.
People want improvements and don't want their games to look dated, even mobile games are trying to push the envolope, this isn't a bad thing.
>People want improvements
MUH GRAFFIX are not "improvements" if they fricking ruin the overall experience by turning it into a blurry, stuttering mess you fricking gibbering moron. You fricking tech-fellating homosexuals only care about MUH HARDWARE MUH SKYBOX MUH GRAFFIX and need to FRICK OFF from video games.
🙂
Stupid fricking idiot.
>Bbbb-but the blur
homosexualy useless idiot.
I’m just saying why it’s happening, whenever a game looks somewhat outdated in terms of graphics it turns a lot of people off.
High fidelity mobile gaming is growing overall especially in countries like China.
https://www.arm.com/resources/report/high-fidelity-mobile-gaming
then explain baldurs gate 3's success because its graphics are not impressive at all. ppl want a good video game that looks decent not everything needs to push the latest graphic memes
>its graphics are not impressive at all
The faces in the game look better than anything in Starfield or Cyberpunk
Graphics are over average looking at the goyslop that is being released today. At least the game runs on most hardware in native 4K lmao
>The faces in the game look better than anything in Starfield or Cyberpunk
Starfield sure, but definitely not Cyberpunk. The characters look fricking weird in Aveum, just because they're face scanned with excessive detail doesn't mean it looks better.
Not to mention, the in-game faces look fricking awful its only the cutscene ones that look ok.
youre a homosexual moron. 4k is not essential either. not even 1080p is essential. youre a homosexual moron graphics prostitute who ruined gaming. i never said this game should have raytracing, im saying youre a homosexual moron npc for not noticing raytracing. youre the type of npc moron who never noticed framerate problems before you saw a youtube video about framerates
>4k is not essential either. not even 1080p is essential.
Correct. None of these are essential. We had fun with games back when you could count the pixels on the screen with the naked eye.
> youre a homosexual moron graphics prostitute who ruined gaming.
Is this that thing where you accuse somebody of the thing you obviously are yourself? Frick off you MUH GRAFFIX moron.
homosexual moron projecting prostitute. you spent the whole thread complaining about the resolution being too low
Bro just make it look like a mobile game, big brain moment
Kind of amazing how this console generation started out with more developers trying to do 60 FPS on consoles, but now they have just given up. It feels like we're regressing.
that is every single console ever since the ps2. you must be a zoomer
>game nobody has heard of is poorly optimized for consoles.
wow....anyway
Feels good to be playing at over 60fps at native 1440p with a gpu from 2018. Consoles are a giant waste of money. Just get a good pc every 8 years and you're set. Had a 680 before I got a 2080. Also, frick ray tracing. It's barely noticeable outside of still shots. When everything is moving and your playing its imperceptible.
>Feels good to be playing at over 60fps at native 1440p with a gpu from 2018
no raytracing, ure playing at lower settings than xbox
>Feels good to be playing at over 60fps at native 1440p with a gpu from 2018.
lel, on what?
A 2080 Ti, an enthusiast class 4K capable (for the time) GPU from 2018, hits 45 fps at 1920x1080
The EA diarrhea particle effects game is not a benchmark for anything
you can sleep soundly knowing this piece of shit flopped hard
I mean this shit's gonna bomb hard one way or another, fricking no one knew or cared about it, but I don't get why people hold player counts for singleplayer games as a damning statement that something is a failure.
The animation is awful in that game too. The guys arm never moves at all even though he's running around everywhere. It basically looks like a jpg at the bottom of the screen and they only animated the hand. Looks fricking awful
Aveum shills we aren't that relevant to save a dead game during the launch of 2 decent games like BG3 and Armored Core
I won't explain but frick EA
>Digital foundry
Idiot. Low res is good.
>but I prefer low fps, low graphics and high resolution because i'm an idiot.
Idiot. Frick off.
>720p 48fps
My god, imagine being a console cuck
>FSR from 720 to 4K
Hubris of the highest order
>436 to 4K
GENUINELY STRAINING CREDULITY
JUST OPTIMIZE NATIVELY
0 days since an AAA game was released running lower than 1080p.
■ Cyberpunk 2077 at 900p
■ Dead Space Remake at 936p
■ Final Fantasy XVI at 720p
■ Forspoken at 720p
■ Immortals of Aveum at 720p
■ Star Wars Jedi Survivor at 648p
Returnal is 1080p, but with worse graphics
nanite and lumen are fricking useless when all it results in is this bland smeary garbage
What happened this gen? Why did everything go to shit? I know you could say it went to shit in the PS4 gen or PS3 gen but really this gen is really really gone to shit.
>Unreal Engine
>AI
>raytracing
>incredibly horrible priorities in "development" staffing that chase out or marginalize actually competent devs in favor of prioritizing investor-pleasing diversity hires and cynical outsourcing/contracting on the cheap
The four horsemen of the Gamingpocalypse.
What is the point of making everything hyper-detailed if it's going to wind up looking all smudged and blurry?
>worlds most powerful console
>70 game
>720p
Holy shit
Xbox holding back gaming again
why is there no difference from rdna2 from series x to ps5? Both run like shit
technically the ps5 is more rdna 1.5 than 2, they rushed that shit.
and what difference did it make in relation to series X?
even worse raytracing capabilities and is overall weaker.
Well that's a lie, show me one game that has better raytracing on X
Both Series consoles has better fps in the game than the PS5. But the main issue in general that only the Xbox has hardware acceleration for some RDNA2 features and the PS5 doesn't. Which means most devs won't take the extra time to rewrite a significant portion of the renderer for just the Series consoles when they have their hands full with the Series S already. If Xbox had a large marketshare I'm sure they would but right now what little advantage the Series has is basically nonexistent due their low sales.
Were these consoles rushed out in 2020? They should have held off until 2022 or 2023 and made them more powerful.
>*causes your game to run at 720p*
heh, nothing personnel
Unreal Engine has always been a performance killer on consoles. It always seem to use a frick ton of resources yet the games don't even look that great. Just compare this shit to God of War or Horizon and these games don't even seem to belong to the same generation.
Inhouse engines will always be better than third party engines.
except Dragon Engine
They aren't in 99%, but they can have a specific feature that was better implemented than in licensed engine. Any universal tool loses to specialized one
Here's your next gen game.
And in case you're wondering, this is not a screencap of a Youtube video, this is directly from Eurogamer's site.
a-at least it's running at 60 fps... sometimes...
the human eye can't see the difference between 40 and 60 so it's fine
series s is not a next gen console. its more or less a xbox one x in a smaller package.
In that case, here's your TRUE next gen game.
>Series X can't run this slop at more than 720p
yikes
astonishing how fricking moronic devs are
These morons used Raytracing, nanite and lumen on top of FSR for a slop-artstyle game that looks ugly as sin even when it's on a high end PC GPU
you can just smell the outsourced team of jeets who were given an AI generated tasklist for 3D assets which were then mushed together into this uninspired garbage
gaming is becoming more and more unironic goyslop by the year
>gaming is becoming more and more unironic goyslop by the year
So I actually think this year was pretty good overall, but I do think that in the AAA space, games are getting more and more generic and uninspired. I wouldnt complain if most AAA studios in the west just collapsed.
This year, we got a decent array of art-styles, graphical fidelities and tech but then shit like Jedi Survivor or Immortals comes out and you're reminded that, oh yeah, Unreal Engine still sucks shit
kek
No one can run it, not even a 4090 can get 4k with 60 fps. Not to mention even outside the performance issues the game is just pure unfiltered slop.
For comparison, here is an actual fricking Xbox 360 game.
Not exactly difficult to produce good looking distant images. Here's what the same level looks like in the next section
It's a skybox
Fricking moron
switch is gonna use dlss, its gonna be way waaaay better
assuming nintendo doesnt drop nvidia for amd. deck can already emulate switch games at full speed.
>full speed
Keep in mind that Deck emulates TOTK and MH Rise and better than playing the real Switch hardware itself as proven already by 30 different YouTube videos and Steam Deck emulation wiki.
It doesn't at all. Especially if you overclock and boost thw ram speed on the switchh.
Read dead gets 60fps on the switch but around 25 emulated on the steam deck
Switch already has FSR 1 (Zelda TOTK) and FSR 2.1 (No Man's Sky), will be interesting to see where things go from here.
Yikes, what went wrong?
The setting/characters/dialog that I've seen were completely uninspired and boring at best, off-putting at worst, and the game runs like complete crap. The first impression is so bad I will never even try this game. Like they could release a free demo or something and I wouldn't even bother installing it because I have better shit to play.
>five years of development
holy shit how much money did they waste making this
Hopefully a lot, and hopefully they don't make it back. Other devs need to be scared to put out games like this.
>keep showing environments and the white protagonist in the first two minutes
>"this brings us to immortals' most obvious flaw - the image quality"
>show a close up of the nigress for the first time
hahahahahaha they know exactly what they're doing, based
I noticed that as well, maybe DF aren't as cucked as they seem.
>unreal 5.1 engine
huh?
isn't this supposed to be the most optimized game engine on the market?
Over half the upcoming games will be running on that engine, are they all fricked?
>isn't this supposed to be the most optimized game engine on the market?
No, not even UE fans would say that
>Over half the upcoming games will be running on that engine, are they all fricked?
it depends on if they're moronic enough to forget to turn off most of the unnecessary shit
>The best feeling games of this generation is XBone/PS4 games with an uncapped frame rate and 4K option update.
I don’t want another dev to blame the series s again. Jesus I can’t believe high end hardware is holding back this fricking generation. I can’t believe devs would use this extra power as this much of a crutch
The real story is that Epic fricked up, they built UE5 with the expectation that devs would be making 30 fps games again on console, but suddenly console players don’t want that and devs are scrambling for anything they can do to hit 60
Just give them a quality 30fps or performance 60fps mode, it's that easy
Even if they got this game down to 30 fps it would still be well below 1080p on PS5/Series X, considering at 720p it drops to 40 fps at times.
The ps5 version is clearly sharper than the series x version and he didn't talk about that at all, wtf?
It isn't it is just the jpeg artifacts+ low tres imagd
Damn, people here have subhuman IQ
>if you squint really hard to can see 3 extra pixels on PS5
Why are snoys so mentally ill. The game is shit. It's that simple.
>Amy Hennig wrote for Flopspoken
>Michael Kirkbride write for this shit
What went so wrong?
hacks who got carried by everyone else
otherwise their contributions would have stuck out in an otherwise bad project
It turns out that one person does not a team make.
Having one good writer surrounded by a bunch of shitty writers is a lot less useful than one good writer surrounded by a bunch of other competent writers.
In Forespoken's case, Hennig was surrounded by absolute fricking morons on the writing team.
What happened to nanite. I thought it was meant to give developers easy performance?
>native 720p
Here bro, I made a wallpaper with your game library for you.
Series X is blurrier than PS5 and it's the same res apparently
not gonna lie i thought this was a closeup on a dragon's wiener sheath at first glance
why is Ganker using this game as a place holder? Every video of this game that I have seen, has been the worst fricking gameplay ever. Literally enemies have color systems that you have to hit them with the same color as your "magic" how is this a game in 2023?
UE4 was a mistake
UE5 is even worse
Explain to me why did we move from CRTs again?
You see way back then we were under the impression that games would continue to be developed and coded by predominantly competent white men.
>Predominantly
TV sellers wanted to make a fortune selling inferrior products that were cheaper to make and to push blu-ray a degenerate compromise that was at least 10x less storage than holographic disc. Killing the disc format.
Jews.
Yeah, engineering Deck and contributing to Linux development was a much better use of that money, AAA is a dead model and everyone worth their salt knows it.
>I have the power to make an engine, free for all the users of biggest PC storefront and the one that doesn't shit smears asset dumps
>Nah I collect knifs and let my team jack off into nothingness for 10 years (while bunch of old timers c**t's shoot down all attempts because their ego is worth billions)
>I have the power to make an engine, free for all the users of biggest PC
>Nah I collect knifs and let my team jack off into nothingness for 10 years (while bunch of old timers c**t's shoot down all attempts because their ego is worth billions)
This isn't true.
I had a job interview at Valve about 2 years ago and GabeN was in on tele. To the point of near obsession, his concerns seemed to revolve around the value of skins and microtransactions in video games, and probing whether or not I understood them. I was applying as a systems programmer.
Valve are not what you think they are. Whatever heroic spirit or scrappy ego was there is long gone.
UE5 is free (they take 5% royalties after $1m revenue) and making it a blurry mess is a dev decision
I don't like a ton of particle effects thrown at me.
same but for Black folk
In principle I'm open to the idea of a soft presentation in exchange for a very high level of geometric detail. That's a tradeoff that feels at least worth debating.
However the temporal issues- shimmer on edges, upscaling artefacts, etc- kill it. They result in a very unstable and ugly image to my eye.
Could have been a different story if the consoles were able to run something comparable to DLSS.
>436p
Steam Deck Bros can't stop winning
After 20 years of progress, games are going back to standard definition 480p. You can't make this shit up.
Feels good to play on pee sea.
This game runs like shit on PC too. Even a 4090 struggles to hit 60.
>standard definition 480p
480p is enhanced definition. 480i is standard definition.
Full 1080p 50fps on Ps4 Pro 😀
Not switching till PS5 pro launches so it can hit 1080 with muh ray tracing
>Full 1080p 50fps on Ps4 Pro
0p 0fps actually
why did he take this picture at a public pool's locker room?
>signs you're about to play slop
what's your point? all the games Now are made with some form of reconstruction technology in mind from the ground up.. and real NextGen starts with unreal engine 5.
<= Made by a single guy
is that supposed to be impressive? that looks like your basic cryengine or unreal engine forest population tool
<= PS5 flagship
what game?
Ghost of a Tale
so fricking disgusting how devs crank everything to the max and wonder why nothing can run it, and instead of making an effort to optimize, they rely on AI upscaling which looks fine if you were scaling from 1440p up to 4k or something but these lazy homosexuals think its a fix it all button. I'm so sick of the UE5 meme because its just a pretty effects machine used by morons that don't know what making an optimization means and you get bullshit like this. No one expects 4k 60fps on console and i wish devs would stop attempting it
They don't "crank everything to the max" they make with shit hardware in mind and find out that hardware is even shitter than expected. Usually they cut content and degrade everything to keep a high resolution and idiots like you satisfied. What they should always do is lower the res.
you're truly fricking moronic. They literally slapped on lumin and nanite, lowered the res to 720p and slapped on fsr without even trying. Both are great technologies that can run great on console(see fortnite) with a bit of tweaking, but there was no effort here.
>Usually they cut content and degrade everything to keep a high resolution and idiots like you satisfied.
I literally argued against using the highest possible resolution, clearly you cant fricking read.
>Both are great technologies that can run great on console(see fortnite) with a bit of tweaking
I think this is the issue. I like DLSS, but currently I really do feel like developers are using it as a crutch. If you're going all out on raytracing or trying to do path raytracing then I can give you a bit more leeway, but I don't think this game even has any kind of ray tracing shit.
I'm sure if Nanite was used properly then it could be impressive, but all I feel about it now is that it's being used as an excuse for why some games are so dependent on upscaling.
DLSS/upscaling on high end hardware should be to get FPS above 60, not be the bare requirement to get 60 FPS.
Fortnite drops to 861p on consoles the the sbox series x and ps5
Nintendo will move on to mo0bile gaming. It's inevitable. They simply do not have the talent or willingness to work with modern technology. These deadbeat fricks are still lost somewhere in the Flash era of games. Mobile ports are perfect for them. And then they can charge full price for old roms all over again.
There has never been a time when home consoles could do 1080p 60FPS.
They could do it as early as the PS360, but only if the developer gave enough of a shit.
so..this...is...the...power...of...western...game devs...woah
>the studio is made up of former telltale guys
>switch will be higher resolution then modern ps5/xbone games
Lol
Lmao
To be fair, what they've achieved on consoles is impressive. The performance really isn't bad. It's the optimization and graphical choices that are questionable.
The game is running 60FPS using Nanite and Lumine. One is a new way of doing geometry and the other is software ray tracing. So you've got ray tracing running at 60FPS with a ton of particle effects going on. Besides Metro, I can't think of any other game that does ray tracing at 60FPS.
It's just the choices are weird. You can tell they wanted a fast and responsive game. But you have visual effects that run at 30FPS which doesn't make sense.
They probably couldn't hit a smooth 1440P at 30FPS so they left it out all together. But then again, they could've scaled back a lot of the particle effects and visual effects. I find a lot of particle effects distracting and hard to tell what's going on. It feels like I'm watching Tempest and I'm on the cusp of having a seizure from the videos. I can't imagine what it's like actually playing it.
>Besides Metro, I can't think of any other game that does ray tracing at 60FPS.
Fortnite
Final Fantasy 16
Spider-Man/Miles Morales
Ratchet and Clank Rift Apart
Call of Duty Black Ops Cold War
DMC5
Doom Eternal
Gran Turismo 7
RE Village
And almost all of them have better visuals than this game.
All those games using very light ray tracing, GT7 doesn't use it in game.
Also lumen isn't really RT exactly, it's just dynamic GI. The game doesn't use RT and still uses say SSR for reflections.
>beefy consoles
they should make series S portable somehow
it would be great then
Impossible at the pricepoint. The Series S is at least twice as powerful as the Steam Deck for half the price.
Buy one of those screen attachments. It reminds me of the PSone.
FSR3 will luckily fix the incompetency of modern game devs soon.
>most new games look and run like shit on PS5 and Series X
but remember, Series S is the problem. kek
bruh, generating frames by interpolating has more artifacts the bigger the difference between the two frames. there are only two mitigating factors a dev can take advantage of:
>everything moves slowly in your game
>the (native) framerate is high
FSR3 might work well for strategy games, turn-based games and such. and FSR3 might work to bring an action game that already runs at 60 fps natively up to 120 fps. now here's what devs will actually use FSR3 for:
>take Immortals 720p48 style slop, activate frame generation, then increase the resolution until the framerate is back down to barely 60 fps
that's what FSR3 will do for console games in practice. it gives slop devs even more leeway on top of what dynamic res has done for a decade now. they will be even more wasteful with the actual renderer and post effects.
tldr: game performance is only limited by what consoomers will put up with. you can make a nice looking game run at 1440p60 on the fricking One X and PS4 Pro, and you can make unplayable trash on Series X and PS5. the hardware has nothing to do with it, it's merely a result of cost/benefit analysis about what consoomers will accept.
>FSR3 might work well for games which don't need high framerates anyway
Great.
It's no coincidence that the more brown people get into the industry the worse everything gets. There isn't a single thing that becomes diverse and retains its quality. Instead everything just becomes worse.
>ps6 will have ps3 tier graphics at 720p30 upscaled to 8k
yup we keep going backwards folks.
Remember when consoles had actual QA and you couldn't publish broken crap willy nilly.
Yeah, now that online updates are a thing and it's expected for you to have internet, it's much cheaper to just shit things out as fast as possible and maybe fix it at some point if the game is still being talked about a month later.