>in "Quality" mode, the game runs at a native resolution of 1440p, 25/30 fps (in gameplay)
>in "Performance" mode, it runs at a native resolution of 900p/1080p, 35/60 fps (in gameplay)
>the game's cinematics are locked to 30 fps (with dips into the 20s) on both "Quality" and "Performance"
It looks like a PS3 game.
 Shopping Cart Returner Shirt $21.68 |
 DMT Has Friends For Me Shirt $21.68 |
Shopping Cart Returner Shirt $21.68 |
That's more than enough for me. Plus the upscaling looks great. Cope Barry.
>upscaling looks great
Let us not live in delusion, Anon.
Why do the models look so blurry?
Normalgays don't like seeing pixels. There are two ways the PS5 can remedy that.
>render the game at really high resolution with high resolution assets
>render the game at low resolution but upscale it to a higher resolution
In this case they have gone with option number two.
>Why?
Because it should allow the framerate to go higher, and high FPS looks smoother.
>So why is the FPS low and the models look blurry?
Because coding video games is for smart people.
>render the game at low resolution but upscale it to a higher resolution
Yeah but why does that make the models look blurry?
Because when an image is upscaled, from say 1080p to 1440p, the pixels will become more noticeable because you're literally dragging the image out, making each pixel bigger and thus more noticeable. In order to remedy that a mild blur is put on places where it's especially eye-catching. That way they hope the big pixels merge together more smoothly and create a more pleasing overall image.
The reality however, is as you pinpointed, a loss of quality and detail due to blurring.
When upscaling a frame you can either blur the image, or accept big pixels and most devs chose blurring because it helps maintain the illusion instead of just accepting larger more noticeable pixels.
TAA. Only 2-3 devs know how to code that. The rest is a blurry mess.
Essentially this. It looks bad because making it look better would require work and they're either too lazy or incompetent to do it right.
Because the game is being rendered at sub 1080p.
Ill buy and play it at launch, but will pirate the PC version for the inevitable replay. The intro through the Shiva/Titan part was fine, then this part was immediately noticeable how shit the blur was. Ignoring Clive's hair, which is just fricked from blur all the time
>beaner that can't even pixel count
Don't care waiting for VG Tech
Holy shit that's an old template.
I know, right? That's why I saved it. I wish we could bring back old shitposting instead of nu-shitposting where everything is just søyjak over and over again.
I like the game and even I'll admit it looks pretty shit at times. It seems the extra power of the PS5 wasn't used to make a more polished game, but for devs to just get lazy with the extra headroom
>Quality Mode: 30fps
>time to boomp it up to ultra performance mode!
>35 fps
this is the same demo press played last year. there is reason to believe optimizations have been made.
you can transfer your save to the final game, there's more reason to believe this is the final build
graphical/performance updates are different than gameplay updates/any flags that are triggered indicating what point in the game has been reached. You can very easily transfer at what point of the story you're at, along with levels/stats/items across builds assuming those did not inherently change, unless you've directly changed something to where that would not be true or you implemented some sort of "this is the incorrect version" thing to block loading that save.
what does save data have to do with graphical optimization?
I don't understand why they even make the visuals so demanding. I'm still arguing graphics peaked with Kingdom Hearts and that mankind essentially don't need video games that look any better than that. Imagination can literally fill in the blanks.
Because the average person prefers visuals over higher framerate.
I don't actually think they do. I think they've been marketed visuals to the point where they think that's all that matters. If the game looks better, it is better.
>click on the video
>the first line in the description says: PS5 Performance Mode: 1440p/60fps (upscaled from 1080p)
???
Variable resolution.
>It looks like a PS3 game.
Like a whatnow?
>only play 10+ year old games
>decide to borrow a console to play this
>looks great
I feel that upscaled shit almost always looks like total trash unless it's integer scaling.
>unless it's integer scaling.
You dont know what that means if you think it can apply to modern looking games
It is se dark soul3
Is it that bad? I lurk in XVI threads and skimmed the posts and the shills never mentioned the performance
Yes, that's pretty bad. In the days of the PS3 it was made fun of for not being able to natively do 1080p at 60 fps. The fact that the PS5 can't do that is quite damming.
The practical results will be a blurrier picture that feels less responsive. You will also notice that there are less frames drawn per second resulting in the game feeling less responsive than it should.
Go play DMC5 or something if you want to "feel" the difference.
go away esl
I thought he was pretty informative.
Literally 0 dips below 30fps.
Why you lie?
also zero dips over 35
It dips in cutscenes. Just look at the campfire part.
>nu Ganker thinks it the hardware is the problem
The problem is dogshit developers that have gotten even lazier .Due to "Pro" models being s established thing, there's even less of a reason to properly optmize games.
Don't worry just wait for the pro model to brute force the game like how a high end PC does it
This. I guarante you will regret allowing Pro consoles to become a thing.
1080p is enough for me.
I'm sure any slop is enough for (You).