Those are the fixes unless they can somehow squeeze out more performance without touching anything.
-
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.
Digital Foundry: Assassin's Creed Valhalla: PS5 vs Xbox Series X/ Series S Next-Gen Comparison!
- Thread starter chandoog
- Start date
On certain subreddits people are having silly meltdowns, both ways.
And I just remember the - much clearer back in the day - situation with PS2 vs Dreamcast, with developers unable to get a hang on properly utilizing antialiasing on PS2. Dead or Alive 2 on PS2 looked ugly, aliased, had less polygons, didn't change the fact which console ended up on top back then.
The only people fully aware what's causing the current situation are the developers with access to SDKs of both platforms, and even then the fact that Valhalla on Xbox - and PC - was kinda half-assed, gets in the way of this benchmarks having any deeper meaning. It is what it is, single butchered game with abysmal performance problems and audio so bad someone would have to pay me to play it.
I'm not saying Xbox will end up being faster on average. So far the only quarrel I've got with PS5 is about the fact they apparently didn't prevent PSU's coil whine like Microsoft did, that can be fixed even in later production batches, we'll see. Performance-wise, it's a brilliant design by Cerny, no doubt about that. Wether Xbox will surprise us down the line or not, remains to be seen, but it's not just about performance. While I suspect that sampler feedback and the whole Velocity architecture will change things a lot when utilized properly, it'll certainly take some time. But even then there's no doubt some multiplatform titles will prefer more narrow architecture with higher clocks. It all depends on the engine, and even not considering in-house engines of some big studios, how engines like Unity and Unreal will perform on both platforms down the line, will heavily shape this generation performance-wise.
But even that isn't what Microsoft counts on. It's all about Game Pass and how some are out of touch with reality regarding prices. Ryan recently said that when you compare the amount of hours of entertainment a game gives you compared to other things, prices are fair. What he forgot to mention is, you usually don't have time to enjoy it all in one go. Sometimes, for many games, you actually may not even want to. Single player, story-driven experiences, as great as they are (my favourites!), are an exception. Things like racing games, fighting games and everything else, are sometimes better served in smaller portions. Sometimes you'll get a great deal, getting hundreds of hours from a $70 purchase, sometimes not so much. In the end, it's a gamble - you're paying for something you're betting on having time for down the line, not even considering the fact if it turns out good enough for you to deliver that promised entertainment. And then comes another game, another sale (yay! $50 instead of $70! must buy now!) and another thing waiting to deliver in exchange for the money you've spent already. Steam exploits that into oblivion, with people having way more games in their collections than they'll ever play.
When you'll look at it that way, Game Pass makes much more sense. You're getting what you're paying for at the moment, and you're getting way more with much higher degree of freedom regarding the most important choice in this hobby: what you wanna play right now. That's what Microsoft is betting on, it's a long-term plan and it makes sense.
And no amount of benchmarks will change the fact that both platforms will do just fine. Sony has their exclusive IPs that will keep selling, regardless of how long the full transition to PS5 exclusives takes (judging by recent interview with Ryan, they're still not sure - or don't wanna say - if next God of War will end up being crossgen, I would say it probably will and it makes sense, 2021 is too early to just drop PS4 userbase), while Microsoft has Game Pass which matters not only for Series S, but also for Series X and PC.
But hey, reality isn't something that can get in the way of fanboys willing to have their imaginary "console wars", it never was.
Exactly. XSX and PS5 won't be hitting native 4k for any sort of open world sort of 3d game.
Series X has a smaller performance multiplier vs One X, compared to PS5 vs PS4 Pro. Digital Foundry mentioned it already, it matters, but in the end it's just one of the factors.
Regarding resolution targets, it's all in the hands of the devs. Valhalla could offer reconstructed 1080p60 on Series S as an option, they just didn't bother. Blaming Microsoft for it makes no sense, it's just yet another badly optimized crossgen game. Not the first one in history, not the last one either.
Native 4k is an overkill. There's nothing wrong with reconstructed 4k, and Series S shouldn't have problems with reconstructed 1440p. Lets not forget that DLSS equivalent for AMD GPUs will be utilized on those consoles sooner or later, Forza devs were already experimenting with it.
In the end, it makes much more sense to push for graphical fidelity than pixels most people won't even notice, with proper reconstruction techniques/AI-based upscaling, it doesn't make the resolution claims any less valid. People are hellbent on "native" resolutions while in reality you often can't even do a proper pixel count when the game uses different resolution for geometry, different for postprocessing, different for raytracing and other heavy effects, and so on.
It's just meaningless.
Yes, unfortunately (at this stage at least) we can't really know what's going on there.
I'm not saying it's 100% Microsoft's fault, I'm just saying that them pushing the S as a 1440p console isn't giving the right message to consumers or developers.
They likely meant true next gen. I'm guessing that next gen (not cross platform) open-world games will hit 4k/30 but not 4k/60. But honestly I'd take checkerboard or reconstructed 4k/60 over 4k/30 any day and every day.
Honestly, I rather take the tearing, it doesn't bother me much. I'd be more bothered knowing I'm playing a downscaled version than knowing I could upgrade the TV if tearing is problematic.
Just wait for XSX's eventual Digital Foundry win by a frame or two. There will be questioning of why Cerny didn't put more tflops in there, full RDNA 2 and thread titles like "Did Sony focus TOO much on Dualsense and not enough on power?" Which is a long way of saying people are bugging these consoles are really close and its awesome for everyone.
Indeed. I love how my XsX is so damn quiet I don't even know if it's on or off *checks...it's off* and performance is great. What do I care if people who got it on another console gain an average of...less screen tearing?
Anyone else find it concerning that people are already relying on VRR to save them from tearing?
There's not a lot of TV's out there that support this featureset and people with TV's already at home not supporting this, if this is going to be the norm I'm dissapointed.
There's not a lot of TV's out there that support this featureset and people with TV's already at home not supporting this, if this is going to be the norm I'm dissapointed.
Wondering the same, or if they have communicated about it. Want to buy the Gold Edition for Series X, but the tearing seems like it would bug me to no end.
Yeah, I am holding out for a patch. If it doesn't come then I will grab it on the PS5 when I pick one up.
They have. On their official forums there is a thread with a rep in there promising a patch.
not native 4k at 60fps.
Count me in as thinking native 4k is pointless. As far as I'm concerned, only the UI for games should be native 4k.
[RESOLVED] Screen Tearing on Xbox One X|S | POST HERE
I am playing on the Xbox one X and the screen tearing is shockingly bad, especially for a triple A title, it completely ruins any kind of immersion as it is near constant in gameplay and cut-scences. This needs to be patched ASAP.
discussions.ubisoft.com
I agree. It's impossible to notice the difference at normal viewing distances. Even close up in motion its very, very hard to spot difference between good upscaled 4K and native.
This already happened on Origins/Odyssey on the PC version. Honestly I hope they look into it for the next entry (hopefully next gen only)
Not yet, also mid game there are a lot of issues regarding frame drop. Especially in your settlement
There hasn't been promise of a patch. The issue isn't even listed in their Known Issues thread, which hasn't been updated since the 11th.
All there is is a community rep trying to do damage control and saying it'll be reported to the devs.
It does have some, but not as bad or frequently as all the Xbox Consoles.
Yes, it is true. I have bought ACV on both systems and the PS5 version has no tearing in the towns. Some tearing during the dialogues.
I have played 20 hours on Serie X and now I will go on on PS5.
I have played 20 hours on Serie X and now I will go on on PS5.
No, much lighter BUT even the SX is not as bad as the X1S or even X1X.
This is the way. Dynamic resolution > VSync, in my opinion.
Until they can figure out something more granular, that would be a pretty good "quickfix"
A Ubisoft rep came into the thread asked for feedback and then reported it to the dev team and said there would be a patch. No, they didn't write it in blood but the team is aware of it and they're trying to fix it.
Imagine the PR loss for Microsoft though. Need to run the game in lower resolution on the "most powerful" console.
The cooling seems insanely functional though, MS should check if the GPU can be overclocked, might fix these issues.
X1X has it too? I'm playing on PS4 Pro right now, and I haven't noticed a single tear.
Honestly, aside from the framerate, the game looks pretty much the same as it does on next-gen. I'm kind of curious how it stacks up to XSS, since they're running the same framerate and probably similar resolutions.
Good performance > bad PR due to resolution, though.
Hopefully they can fix the optimization overall to hit the same targets as PS5, but this would be welcome for people. Tearing is just awful. I can't play when there's tearing, I'm super sensitive to it. Resolution being slightly lower doesn't really bother me, so long as I can get consistent frames.
Overclocking the GPU (or any part of the APU, really) isn't just a matter of cooling, there's power delivery, chip variance, a load of other considerations.
Yeah but it'll still suck to know that after that it's a scaled down version. Knowing a TV upgrade (VRR) or maybe a system patch or devtool upgrade by MS will fix it is easier to take imo. I choose the XSX version because I thought it would be the definitive edition outside of PC. I don't think the tearing is awful, just occasionally distracting.
Last edited:
True but I think they should look into it, they did it with XB1.
Yeah, "quick fix" vs long term patch. Here's hoping. I've been playing games at 1440p on my 4K TV for a while just to get the extra frames, so I'm not super picky. But ya, no reason this shouldn't be better.
I'm not super picky either but I think they need to do this right, this whole multiplat scenario is weird.
I would have liked some speculation in the video as to why the games were getting the results they were. The DMC5 video had it but this was much more surprising and has no thoughts given to that end? XsX with more CPU, GPU and throughput performing poorer in a game that it has the promotion for seems like something worth discussing?