its gross but we accept you and love you in the most creep of ways. There should be an option for Max 30 as well as a locked 60 settings.
-
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.
Gears 5 - Graphics and Frame Rate Comparison
- Thread starter Theorry
- Start date
There's nothing facetious about what I'm saying. The mentality or pov about what "4K" means should change imo since reconstruction techniques have become so prevalent. Before resolutions were measured by counting pixels, so it was pretty straightforward but times have changed now. A game can still produce a 3840x2160 resolution but not internally render every pixel in every frame. It would be nice for studios and journalists to be more specific but that's an unrealistic expectation. I've said in the past that it would be nice to know the rendering type of some games but again I'm not going to hold anyone's feet to the fire over something we can figure out ourselves and ultimately isn't the most important thing.
These days I think it's safer to assume a reconstruction technique is used when a game is said to be 4K, especially when running at 60fps, unless otherwise specified by the devs or tech journalists (like DF) that it's running at a native resolution. You all are so hell bent on proclaiming that people are being deceiving when there are logical reasons why people generally just say "4K". I don't even understand why this is such a hot topic now when we've had countless 4K games using reconstruction techniques. Maybe it's because it's an Xbox game, maybe it's because people just assume 4K games on the Pro use CBR so it's never a question there, I don't know. This whole thing being spun into a controversy is silly to put it kindly. We can be discussing so much about the video but instead people want to argue over things like this, which I don't understand even if I'm guilty of it myself.
Last edited:
Real talk, options are nice for those who prefer visuals over framerate.
Real talk, options are nice for those who prefer visuals over framerate.
Being selfish here, but I prefer it if this was always at 60FPS (and more games to follow), to set 60FPS as the standard
Absolutely stunning backpedal on display in this thread. Come on, folks. Don't act like the Xbox crowd wasn't buzzing about this game being in 4K/60 for a looong time. It was the defacto argument.
And no, just mentioning 4K doesn't mean cb4K, especially not on an enthusiast board like this. Checkerboarded 4K games got clowned on a lot in DF comparison threads so let's drop the facade at least.
And no, just mentioning 4K doesn't mean cb4K, especially not on an enthusiast board like this. Checkerboarded 4K games got clowned on a lot in DF comparison threads so let's drop the facade at least.
I think it all depends on context.
For example, people don't expect "4K" to mean native when it comes to the Pro because the power is simply not there, but it's still scummy when they try to pretend it's native, like in that RDR2 ad. With the X, though, it's actually very possible. I didn't believe Gears would be native, but that was mostly me thinking "there's no way they'll reach it, right?", because it seemed too good to be true, not because the wording was obvious or anything. Also didn't expect it to go as low as 1440p, and I'm sure everyone else who expected it to not be native also didn't expect it to go this low.
Another important context to keep in mind is that this discussion is a continuation of the "Gears 5 is one of the best looking games this gen", where some people pointed to RDR2 as a much better looking example, a game that IS native 4K on the X, even though it's an open world title, and others replied to that with "yeah, but Gears 5 is 4K/60". I think it's pretty safe to assume they weren't considering drops to 1440p and 48fps when they were talking about how much more impressive Gears 5 is than RDR2, a native 4K open world game.
And the video being discussed in that thread was the benchmark video, which is, in my experience, more demanding in general than the tutorial, which is where those 48~50fps drops were recorded.
The wording makes a difference too, it's one thing to say "it'll be 4K/60 for every mode", another to say "there will be 4K support", and "we're targeting 60fps". It creates very different expectations. "4K support" does mean "higher than 1080p for 4K screens", and "targeting 60" shows that there's still work to be done to get there, and they may not reach it 100% of the time.
And in fact, a game I remember the "targeting 60" wording being used is Shadow of the Colossus PS4, which was almost locked to its target, except for a few occasional 1~2fps drops. Sure, it's not a game as demanding as Gears 5, but my point isn't that one game is better than the other, only that the wording "targeting" could still mean a better result than what's in this video, let alone only saying "it's 60fps".
At the end of the day, it's not really a big deal, I don't think the marketing was misleading or anything, but in the context of the discussions happening in this forum, people were absolutely talking as if it was native. Even if not explicitly so. No one mentions resolution and framerate as a reason for one game to be more impressive than the other if they're expecting it to be lower.
"How about game X, it's native 4K."
"Well, not that impressive, because game Y upscales to 4K from a lower resolution."
This just doesn't make any sense at all. No one thinks like that.
Salty and troll comments are on point, as usual
So are the hyperbolic fan force ones lol "best looking game I've ever seen [holy moly]" from the usual suspects lol 😂😂😂
They said 4K not dynamic 4K.
It's deceptive no matter how we spin it.
It is a great looking game and seems to perform admirably on the XB1X but I am struggling to see where this trounces other games of this generation in terms of visual quality. Maybe it's just the art style or I've habituated to how games look these days because I'm not really "wowed" by Gears 5.
Oh look another thread about gears turns into an incredibly stupid shitshow
What is wrong with you?
What is wrong with you?
I think all companies need to be called out more when they say something is specific specs. Either use the actual specs as in 4k because it is 4k or be legit and detail what it actually is. It goes both ways, though I was not a member a lot of people called out Sony for that RDR2 add where it said 4K
Real talk, options are nice for those who prefer visuals over framerate.
Yeah, even if they kept the dynamic/reconstructed resolution, I'd like to see how it would look in a 30fps mode. More options is never a bad thing.
You can always call these people out instead of taking another opportunity to troll a thread or player-base.
As good as you'd expect from The Coalition. Which is to say, one of the best around.
Are there many console titles that get this sort of image setup quite this "right" for 60 fps target?
The native 4K shifting to a reconstructed 4K smoothly enough to hold a stable 60 fps isn't something I recall seeing very often. I've seen it floated as an ideal, but It seems like a lot of games are either reconstructed or dynamic, but not both with such a high performance target. If anything, I've wondered if Battlefield 1/V on PC was doing something similar behind the scenes, because you can sometimes see artifacts on close analysis that aren't called out in the settings anywhere.
Really nice (and flexible for both low and high-end), with an excellent benchmark. I had an odd gsync issue where some tearing would come through, but using the in-game setting solved that.
The native 4K shifting to a reconstructed 4K smoothly enough to hold a stable 60 fps isn't something I recall seeing very often. I've seen it floated as an ideal, but It seems like a lot of games are either reconstructed or dynamic, but not both with such a high performance target. If anything, I've wondered if Battlefield 1/V on PC was doing something similar behind the scenes, because you can sometimes see artifacts on close analysis that aren't called out in the settings anywhere.
Really nice (and flexible for both low and high-end), with an excellent benchmark. I had an odd gsync issue where some tearing would come through, but using the in-game setting solved that.
Yet people say Horizon, Spider-Man or God of War are the best looking games they've ever seen and no one bats an eyelid.
It's an opinion at the end of the day. Everyone's entitled to one and they're the basis of discussion forums no matter how many childish emoji's you spam to try and sell your own point of view.
Nice!
I had lots of crashes on Gears 4 unfortunately, ended up playing through it on the X instead (which wasn't all that bad actually), but I hope I can play this on the PC this time.
There's a "round 2" of the technical test this coming weekend, so it's probably worth checking just to see if there's a similar conflict with your system or not.
I don't think Horizon looks that hot either, tbh. The gifs are more impressive than the game on a bigger screen, in my opinion.
The game is great, though, surprised at how much I enjoyed it, but yeah. The baked ToD changes are particularly glitchy, and can produce some weird visual artifacts on the terrain.
Last edited:
I could but since it's free through Game Pass I can check the launch version once it's out instead, gotta love GP! :)
It is a pretty game. But I still agree on the gifs, I just roll my eyes when those small gifs show up on just about any game, it's a really crappy way to show how impressive a game is today. Even 30fps racers can look great in gifs, but start playing on a big screen and all you see is the 30fps stutter. :s
Knowing Gears 5 is 60fps median while still looking pretty in screenshots is something to be excited about I think.
Now that you mention it, I also think Driveclub looks kind of awful. The gifs were so impressive, but playing it was just... meh.
The IQ is really not great.
Maybe at 4K it would be more impressive.
Tell me more about the PBR in God of War. I personally think the game looks incredible, but I'm genuinely curious.
It's really unfortunate that they're removing DC from PSN and closed down Evolution, likely means that we will never get a PS5 enhanced patch that unlocks the framerate and push it up to the 60fps it always deserved. It really would've been an amazing thing to witness.
But DC is no exception, 30fps in any faster game can really hurt the visuals. With motion blur you get less stutter but lose the clarity and without motion blur you get better clarity but it starts to stutter. You can get used to it though but as soon as you try a 60fps game and go back to the 30fps game you'll start off by frowning for awhile. :s
User banned (2 weeks): platform wars, trolling
Read the initial comment judge and juror don't be a hypocrite. Idgaf what ppl like or say my point was it goes both ways no matter how edgy and cool you think your lame response was lol 😂 Oh and you've had ppl trying to discount those games but we all know the consensus was out on all of them and we know what the result was.
Also at the end of the day you have professionals for tht who in a resounding consensus usually find Sony first party ips the graphical benchmark on consoles since ps3 days :)
Just my take but you know it's all opinions 😁😁😁
Didn't think a game like Gears could get people so riled up lol. I hope this isn't going to be the norm in every Gears thread.
Where have you been since E3 2018?
This is pretty much the norm now.
Enter any Gears 5 thread and theyll be some super nitpicky things being mentioned: clunky controls, roadie run is stupid, the game hasnt evolved since Gears 1 (ridiculous)....or it will go totally off topic about how the game must be in trouble because they refuse to show Campaign footage.
This whole Native4K-Gate is stupid.
The game uses a dynamic resolution, when that resolution is below 4K the game reconstructs........to 4K mind you.
So its Native but can reconstruct to 4K from a lower resolution if need be.
Since the proliferation of dynamic resolutions im shocked people are shocked a game might drop res to maintain frames especially in Multiplayer.
This is even better than most solutions because when it drops res it still uses TR to reach 4K, in motion its probably impossible to notice when it drops but dropping frames? God Forbido.
I dont see other games getting bashed for calling themselves 60fps because the the framerate drops below 60 sometimes.
DF threads are gonna be super interesting seeing all the people calling out Res drops with reconstruction who will defend frame drops if its the right game.
Probably just muscle memory in your hands. Gears, for me, has always been a separate beast when it comes to controls lol. I have to really adjust when I come back to it every couple years.
Game is great and looks great!
Not only is it a smooth 60 FPS in MP, but they're finally doing 60hz servers which is one of the factors as to why the technical test felt buttery smooth to me.
My friend went as far as to claim that it felt like he was playing Gears on LAN, that's how well the hit registration felt to him. Unlike Gears 4 where some deaths felt like you were cheated, especially with the lag compensation it has.
Not only is it a smooth 60 FPS in MP, but they're finally doing 60hz servers which is one of the factors as to why the technical test felt buttery smooth to me.
My friend went as far as to claim that it felt like he was playing Gears on LAN, that's how well the hit registration felt to him. Unlike Gears 4 where some deaths felt like you were cheated, especially with the lag compensation it has.
Gears 4 on the X had the option to run the campaign at 1080P 60FPS, or knock it down to 30FPS and run in 4k. Let's be hopeful that this time around they offer something similar for those like you that rather up the visuals and knock the frames per second, I am definitely not one of those people.
Ehh, can't say i agree with that, maybe you're thinking checkerboard or something. Dynamic resolutions are always my preference, especially when it leads to a more stable game.
It says in the OP Gears 5 uses reconstructing techniques to achieve a 2160p pixel count. Whether it uses CB or some other technique, I don't have a clue. It's not just a dynamic resolution, it's dynamic and reconstructed up to 4K.
What's there to change? 4K means a display resolution of 3840 × 2160. The point of contention here in a video game is how those pixels are created. Sony internally in there SDK and developer documentation label a reconstructed resolution, for example, 4K as 4KCB or 2160CB. In public, they are referred to as dynamic 4K. Digital foundry and VG Tech still rely on pixel counting but as has been proven time and time again, some reconstruction methods are so good that they can easily fool Digital Foundry.
Preaching to the choir mate. But it is necessary that studios and developers to be specific on how they achieve their results and it is not unrealistic for us to expect them to. That's been the SOP since I could remember reading gaming magazines from years ago.
Nobody is holding anyone's feet to the fire, they are demanding transparency and a little honesty when advertising their product.
No, it is not safe to assume so. It is safe to assume when someone says 1080p or 4K, they mean native unless otherwise stated as reconstructed. You have it backward. That said, I have been a big proponent of developers forgoing doing everything natively and pursuing a temporal reconstruction method, they just have to label it as such when they market it.
I'm not arguing over this game using reconstruction to achieve 4K, I'm arguing about your assertion that when people were praising this game for achieving 4K 60fps they weren't talking about reconstruction, they most certainly thought it was native 4K. It is facetious to claim otherwise. That said, impressive showing by The Coalition. Some of the best looking games this generation have relied on reconstruction to achieve 4K resolution.
don't think anything else needs to be said tbh, it displays a native 4k output in certain situations
This game might be the first to use both so that the pixel count is always 2160p. (Correct me if im wrong but I cant think of another one)
When the budget allows the game will be Native 4K.
Under stress it will start reconstruction from a lower resolution....the lowest being found is 1440p with other resolutions all the way up to native available.
But whenever it is under native resolution it will use UE4s Temporal reconstruction.
This is a brilliant solution to keeping the visuals high and frames at 60.
Hell this helps the base model probably more than the X honestly.....cant believe the base console is able to run this at 1080p60.
This solution will be super helpful for SP in future, devs will be able to budget resources so well....high impact "cinematic" moments where no one would notice reconstruction - drop the res and reconstruct, everywhere else aim as high as possible.
Using just one has shortcomings eitherway....this is literally the best of both worlds.
Games which just use dynamic res...it can be super obvious when the res has dropped, and you also get rogue res drops.
Games which just use reconstruction, when you slow down to take in stuff the artifacts show their ugly head....use both and in slow sections you have native res. Stressful sections you have reconstructon up to the native res nigh impossible to perceive in motion.
On X all modes are 60fps.
Base 60fps for PvP. Escape, Campaign and Horde 30fps
I'm super impressed with this style of rendering! Keep a native 4k when possible but in demanding scenes it can lower but use reconstruction to get back to a 4k image while keeping 60fps. More importantly this allows the dev to push graphical features beyond too! I'm hyped to see the graphics in the campaign. The game looked astonishing on my 4k hdr tv in the mp beta
ever since moving to a dual monitor setup i noticed i have to set almost every game to fullscreen for gsync to work correctly, even with two matching monitors and gsync activated on both. If i use windowed fullscreen any game's FPS is wack on my monitor.
Really wish microsoft would allow us the option to treat each screen as a seperate visual instead of combined.
Yeah its such a clever yet obvious solution.
Im surprised it took this long for devs to put 2 and 2 together.
We know how to reconstruct, we know how to use dynamic resolutions. Both seem to come with problems that the other solves.
I am convinced that the Coalition is indeed practicing witchcraft. Rod Ferguson must be burned at the stake.
Actually The Division 1 uses the same technique. Native 4k whenever possible and reconstruction to 4k when it drops below.Yeah its such a clever yet obvious solution.
Im surprised it took this long for devs to put 2 and 2 together.
We know how to reconstruct, we know how to use dynamic resolutions. Both seem to come with problems that the other solves.