-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Demon Souls has a cinematic mode which is a native 4K at 30fps or performance mode which is dynamic 4K at 60 frames
- Thread starter Loudninja
- Start date
Dynamic resolution in this case means that the rendering resolution of the game varies according to rendering load to hit the desired framerate target.
Checkerboard rendering would notwwork with this as it is a technique that relies on a fixed rendering resolution.
It does work with temporal injection though - which shadow of the colussus used. So maybe this game does as well.
I see, thanks for the explanation. I think maybe they are doing what they did in SotC, I was very impressed with that game.
Cinematic mode probably has better lightning, shadows and other effects.
"It means we can up the resolution of every single tiny pebble in the game, right? The tessellation is incredible and it's all real-time, and it all casts real-time shadows. It's so immersive.
Elsewhere, the Performance Mode will allow players to experience Demon's Souls at 60 FPS in dynamic 4K resolution"
"It means we can up the resolution of every single tiny pebble in the game, right? The tessellation is incredible and it's all real-time, and it all casts real-time shadows. It's so immersive.
Elsewhere, the Performance Mode will allow players to experience Demon's Souls at 60 FPS in dynamic 4K resolution"
Some people would hate it if anyone forced a 30fps mode on everyone, so they should appreciate not forcing a 60fps mode on everyone too.
I've always played souls games at 30fps (or at least roughly..) so the style and pacing of the game works at 30fps for me. If its solid and the graphics are noticably better thats the mode I'll choose.
Dynamic res is also a smart choice. As long as the 'floor' is not too low (eg 1440p) and the scaling/reconstruction is solid, thats a great option. Gives you headroom to increase the detail in your world while having a safety net to protect framerates. If you forced 4k native and locked framerate, the dev would need to dial back all settings to account for worst case scenario (lots of explosions/enemies on screen/effects etc) which means for other situations you're leaving potentially huge amounts of performance unused.
fwiw, mostly i like smoother 60fps gameplay but in some games it makes them look cheaper and they have some sort of soap opera effect, i don´t know how to describe it. there is surely some truth to that "30fps feels more cinematic" claim.
for example God of War in 60fps was just not my thing, the 30fps mode looked and felt way better to me. or that footage from Spider-Man remaster performance mode, i wouldn´t play that mode at all tbh, give me 30fps with everything cranked up instead of shimmering/morphing shadow details.
SOTC remake the same, played 60fps for 30minutes, switched to 30fps and never looked back. i think that games have to be designed with 60fps in mind to make it feel right.
often the sacrifice for 60fps is too big on console games. curious how it will turn out in Demon´s Souls, i am gonna switch between modes for sure.
I was one of those people who was going to check out both modes (probably cinematic for the first playthrough and would have switched to performance after the credits) but now that we know RT isn't in, I don't know what's the point of the cinematic mode anymore. I can't imagine it looking good enough to justify halving the framerate given that what we've seen of the performance mode already looks visually stunning. If it really is just native 4K than that's not worth it at all to me.
Performance mode for me, but I'd rather be in the reality where "also available on PC" was true 😭
It depends.
As someone who started playing the souls games this gen, DSR and DS2SOTFS were both 60fps and DS3 has an unlocked framerate that is in the 40s and 50s (On PS4Pro), going back to playing DeS on PS3 was jarring as it was my only DS title in 30fps.
It will most likely downsample to 1080p from whatever higher native res, so you're still getting a much cleaner sharper image on your 1080p tv in 60fps mode.
Get a grip mate.... Who the flip are you to "educate" someone on "the best way" to play games?
The two aren't even comparable. Forcing better motion resolution and character fluidity onto someone is as bad as forcing worse motion resolution and character fluidity? The only time this makes any sense is if the graphics suffer in a bad way, which is generally why AAA games are always 30fps. They prioritize graphics over everything after hitting at least 30fps. That's also why I don't expect 60fps to ever become "the standard" on the consoles either.
Friend of mine who always played console games, and at 30fps played a few games on my PC at 60fps and claimed it looked like the soap opera effect, and all I could do is wonder what the hell he was talking about. It's pretty obvious when viewing HFR movies or TV shows with motion interpolation on, but it has absolutely never looked similar in gaming to me. I think a lot of people are either too young, or just forgot that a good majority of the 16-bit games were 60fps.
4K is a waste of resources and console manufacturers are going to realize soon How much of a mistake pushing for 4K when PC can't even do it natively without enthusiast hardware owned by less than 5% of PC gaming audience. Prepare for more 4ksub30 soon and lots of studios folding because making assets at 4k is fucking expensive.
30 fps is perfectly fine and will live for years and years to come.
They're a choice.
Solid 30ps with rock solid frame pacing, high quality motion blur and appropriate Post processing can look and feel great to me for many types of games (DS would fit that category). I don't know if there is a difference on PC vs console with 30fps handling but I've never really had an issue on console at least. TVs have a relatively low motion resolution anyway (300ish lines without things like black frame insertion which still is quite rare and not a perfect solution yet) so maybe that helps mitigate? Do PC monitors have better motion resolutoin?
Last edited:
It could be that it feels jarring sometimes because i am a mostly console gamer these days. the old 16bit consoles are too long ago and the majority of console games are 30fps. it also depends on the game, something like Nex Machina needs 60fps, something like Spider-Man doesn´t really need 60fps.
that being said, a friend of mine had an american SNES and i had the PAL SNES and Street Fighter II was much faster on his console. PAL consoles were running in 50hz afaik.
I still chuckle when they call 30 fps as 'cinematic'. Tbh if it were truly 'cinematic' it would be in 24 fps in a real cinematic aspect ratio such as 2.35:1.
Video games should not have a 'cinematic' frame rate imo, especially not games like Souls that barely have cutscenes.
Video games should not have a 'cinematic' frame rate imo, especially not games like Souls that barely have cutscenes.
Generally the higher the refresh rate, the better the motion resolution. 120hz will always look better than 60hz, which will always look better than 30hz for games, despite not being played on CRTs anymore. Motion blur is also practically a requirement for 30fps games. It's used in an attempt to make it look like there's more motion happening than there really is.
Anyway, this isn't worth arguing over. I don't honestly care what frame rate someone wants to play at, I was just commenting on your strange comparison.
The best games in the series have never been playable in 60fps, so how can you claim this?
sorry - I was talking about display motion resolution. Modern LCDs (and even OLEDs) have around 300lines of motion resolution so movement of the camera will blur the image. I dont' know if refreshing from source at 60fps helps with that or would be partly covered by the screen blur itself?
As the post you quoted said - the higher the refresh rate, the better the motion resolution, whatever display tech you are using.
Yeah, you can have 4k or you can have 60fps. Before game details started coming out it was 4k60 and 4k120 that was getting excitedly talked about. Now we're back to 4k30, or compromising IQ to keep framerate up to 60. Might as well do a super-ultra graphics mode at a ROCK SOLID 15.
The test for next gen is whether these high fps modes will actually be able to hit their target. I feel like with this gen some games had modes where they targeted 60fps but in reality you got something with and unstable frame rate that averaged like 45.
Cinematic is not necessarily exactly like cinema. Don't forget that cinema itself has a multitude of aspect ratios and framerates. The word is there just to emphasize the extra image quality. And, I dunno about you, but I loved playing the original Demon's Souls, as well as Dark Souls, Bloodborn and Sekiro, and they were all for the most part 30FPS. In this sense, I look forward to seeing the image quality that can be achieved in the cinematic mode.
Why not just call it what it is then instead? There's performance mode, and then there's presentation mode. Cinematic is just stupid, because half of the time it's always held a negative connotation when mentioned with video games. It's either talking about games that have a lot of cutscenes, or games that have a low frame rate (and the typical "AAA" game has both!).
All bitching aside, I played Demon's Souls, Dark Souls and Dark Souls 2 at release on the PS3, despite also knowing Dark Souls 2 would be out on PC a month later. The frame rate wasn't the greatest, but it's something someone can acclimate to, and then just get lost in the game. Given the choice though, I'll always pick the PC version for the performance, without having to sacrifice fidelity in the process. With this game, I don't know what I'm going to do for a first playthrough. As someone already mentioned, it would be harder playing it at 60fps and then playing it again at 30fps instead of the other way around, and I'm curious about just how different the two modes look.
They still should not try to pass it off as "cinematic". Call them something like "Performance" vs "Image quality" modes. Or just "dynamic 60 fps" vs "fixed 30 fps".
Souls games feel immensely better to play at 60+ fps. Sekiro is just plain awesome modded for 120 fps, it feels very responsive and the fast movement of the game really gets nicer.
Dynamic resolution or other performance increasing features are hopefully the norm for PS5 games going forward. Most would not be able to tell a difference between 1440p and 4K in movement and 1800p vs 4K is fairly subtle when standing still. Add some image sharpening from AMD content aware sharpening and the difference shrinks even further. Add a DLSS like reconstruction and you can't tell it apart from native 4K.
I think the term cinematic manages to convey the emphasis on image quality without having to resort to the technical terminology, so no wonder devs often refer to it. Keep in mind that these sort of graphics options on consoles are intentionally kept streamlined in order to not cause friction with less enthusiastic consumers.
I could tolerate the janky performance in Bloodborne because the game is so great in all other aspects, but if it ran much better in 60 FPS or more would no doubt elevate it.
There is nothing cinematic about having lower frame rate because of hardware limitations. It is what it is, hardware limitations. And I will replay Sekiro on Series X with the improved performance.
I'll try both modes, and just like every other game that has offered these options, I'll stick with the 60fps option after realizing the 30FPS mode feels broken in comparison.