Just wanna thank you for everything that you're doing. The next-gen launch has gotta be rough for y'all, thanks for marching through it.
-
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.
Watch Dogs Legion: PlayStation 5 vs Xbox Series X/ Series S - Graphics, Performance, Ray Tracing! |
- Thread starter Uzupedro
- Start date
Wait there is a 60 FPS hidden mode really?
Both Sony and MS should allow mods on all games and let modders do the magics:
IMO give the game's console settings a try at 1440p. You would probably be at like 100 fps if not more?
they can play around with the settings quite a bit to achieve 60fps, like LODs and such would help the CPU
I think I was using your recommended settings from the first video. I could get above 60 pretty often, but it dipped below 60 pretty often, too. I've got G-sync, so I probably wouldn't really have noticed if not for the on-screen RTSS graph, and the times it dips down into the 40s.
I'll probably revisit it soon once they release the patch, see what that "improved performance" on the CPU side looks like.
From here in the comparison video some mentioned that the PS5 can have better resolution at some points. Like here with the cables the PS5 has better res there:
From here in the comparison video some mentioned that the PS5 can have better resolution at some points. Like here with the cables the PS5 has better res there:
The draw distance is the same and the texture filtering is bugged in the DF comparison. This could be affecting the resolution for DF; alternatively, maybe over scenes they decided it was too tit for tat to claim an advantage to one console. Or maybe not rendering the RT'd puddles gives the PS5 an advantage in res in some scenes.
Someone posted a comparison pic on here a couple of weeks back and the ray tracing is much better on PC, with more objects showing RT reflections and shadows, and higher resolution to boot. And DF themselves said that the console versions are only on par with a 2060. But it is just a launch title, we'll see a ton of optimisations in the years to come, not to mention the custom GPU features of both XSX and PS5 won't be getting utilised yet in any real capacity.
Yeah it's weird. I think it's bugged for both tbh. I don't blame early and launch games. Hopefully patches will fix that for both.
Why is parity seen as a good thing from a consumer perspective? I think each console should be taken advantage of and it's obvious both consoles are close. But I don't think this means parity should be the goal.
We're seeing ps5 with load time differences and the ability to beat the xs1x at some performance modes when there seems to be larger/faster transfer data speeds necessary - that was one of the big advantages discussed, are we seeing it come true?
XBSX capture looks like 4:2:0 and has serious banding here.From here in the comparison video some mentioned that the PS5 can have better resolution at some points. Like here with the cables the PS5 has better res there:
Considering how equal the consoles are, i don't think the difference will be so big at all from 3P. They have no incentive to try and tweak xtra mustard from the consoles. Considering how expensive it already is, if they achieve a level of parity on both consoles, I think that will be good enough for them. Only the biggest 3P will have resources to tweak extra stuff but.. is it worth it? It is 1P that should (and will) makes the machine sing and it is for 1P that one usually buys X over Y..
And also, fanboyism and general state of internet stupidity.. I don't know but I see it as a good thing with parity in this regard as well. If differences are 1-2 FPS here, some reflection there.. that is nothing to fanboy about really.
The age old motto is always valid, 1P games is what makes people chose one over the other. And if one have the means, one buy them all..
This is true, but warriors will always war. Its all kinda funny really, you have two sets of people that has already decided on what to do or even think before any of this happened using these comparisons as fodder to justify their choices. that's why you see claims like a 1 or 2-second frame drop here or there or a lightly (imperceptible with analysis) rez drop here or there being reason enough to chose one platform over the other.
Even hen the people doing the testing is telling people that there's hardly any difference between them.
Are you certain? A 3080 at console settings (well actually higher since the denoiser is much better here) at 1440p with 1.0 frame scale (for full native):
The GPU ends up actually being CPU limited on the 10900K (typical 80-90% GPU utilisation):
How did you come to the conclusion that its 4:2:0?
Last edited:
It's during driving and action sequences where it'd dip.Are you certain? A 3080 at console settings (well actually higher since the denoiser is much better here) at 1440p with 1.0 frame scale (for full native):
The GPU ends up actually being CPU limited on the 10900K (typical 80-90% GPU utilisation):
Walking around seems to be mostly fine.
My point exactly. It doesnt have any RT, and still an extremely good global lightning and dynamic lightning system, and it looks glorious.
I understand what you say and agree for the developers themselves it's probably better to go for parity, because this makes more business sense as it keeps cost down. However as a consumer I want every console to be taken advantage off. It doesn't matter if it's RAM, bandwith, CPU, GPU, gamepad, I/O, ... . They should try their best and avoid parity.
Don't get me wrong, I am not one of those criticising developers heavily and insulting them. There are NO lazy developers, because making games run well at all is a huge task. Especially during a pandemic. I can also respect each developer, despite games having bugs. But I want every consoles be it PS5 or Xbox to be taken advantage off due to them, albeit being very close, having different advantages.
I think twitter and even some resetera threads since launch have shown, people always find differences, even if the difference is 1-2FPS. Which is fine, if you put it into perspective and don't go overboard with hyping up the difference for something they are not and then make premature hottakes. But my point is I guess even with parity you'll find fanboys arguing over them and they always find a way.
yeah don't see anything wrong with this
people make purchasing decisions based on these stuff, so if an advantage is marketed on paper i would like to see it in reality too.
be it some extra vfx on xbox or ssd, dualsense features on ps.
though complete parity is fun too in a sense that it shuts up chest thumping fanboys, and make them go after tiniest irrelevant differences, which in turn exposes the real idiocy of the whole thing.
Yes...
it's what I've been saying for a long time...
It's clear to me that the all the PR marketing on this consoles is being huge about FPS , resolution and ray tracing because is by far the easy and of course the less expensive way to improve a game in terms of visuals advances but to me it's clear not sufficient.
Animations ( body and facial animations) draw distances, LOD, physics ( specially fluid simulations), IA behaviors from living beings needs a huge, huge upgrade this gen even if it costs games not being 4K or even reflections in my opinion.
Damn, we watch CGs running in fullHD only from some games and movies and it looks absolute fantastic.
Killzone shadowfall and Ryse when released in 2013 were absolute staggering visually and a huge evolution from PS3/360 games visually even if the games were not so good.
My PS5 is arriving today and I didn't play yet, but watching for videos, not even demon souls look a drastically step above what we had in PS4/Xbox one.
I really hope developers really use this so glorified CPUs/SSD in much more interesting ways than this super acclaimed native 4K or 120fps marketing.
This is not a very interesting evolution in my opinion.
mcruz79
I hear you and feel the same way, because graphically PS3 vs PS4 was a bigger jump than PS4 vs PS5 for launch games. I think this will change however and I think we saw some insane footage already (Horizon, FM, ...). Having said that the biggest leap will be seen in gameplay (interaction with the world, physics, ...) and for those we probably have to wait ~2 years as Ryan or someone at Sony said. Of course Ratchet is the first glimpse.
I hear you and feel the same way, because graphically PS3 vs PS4 was a bigger jump than PS4 vs PS5 for launch games. I think this will change however and I think we saw some insane footage already (Horizon, FM, ...). Having said that the biggest leap will be seen in gameplay (interaction with the world, physics, ...) and for those we probably have to wait ~2 years as Ryan or someone at Sony said. Of course Ratchet is the first glimpse.
exactly.
and honestly I have the impression that some people lost a little sense over the years at how much the difference is between PS3 and PS4 games.
Of course there's some beautiful games in the PS3/360 era but man, I've been play some games in the back compatibility on One X like Alice Madness, Dead Space and some others and oh boy!!!
Texture quality, models, effects even amount of assets, geometry , and many other things is a really really huge difference with PS4One era.
Even if you compare linear games of that gen with open worlds this gen the difference is abysmal.
Even with remasterized versions of super powerful games like uncharted series doesn't hold a candle with the PS4/One games.
I really hope developers amaze us with more than this FPS/resolution/Ray Tracing trend.
I kinda wish I could turn ray tracing off on PS5. The amount of shimmering is really distracting and doesnt looks good.
yes, not consistent as even in your shots it drops below 100fps. Some sections can strain the CPU and GPU so at the moment a locked 100fps would not be that easy without some further cuts.Are you certain? A 3080 at console settings (well actually higher since the denoiser is much better here) at 1440p with 1.0 frame scale (for full native):
The GPU ends up actually being CPU limited on the 10900K (typical 80-90% GPU utilisation):
Compare launch Xbox One and PS4 games to late gen 360 and PS3 games. You'll see a bigger leap soon. We're still in the cross gen phase.
I think they will. GT7 showed better foliage, lightning and more. I was impressed by it. However I can't make a direct comparison, because they've showed a track not available in GTS. Thus I take FM knowing it's in engine and not gameplay footage. But T10 already said this is the track detail we can expect and it looks absolutely insane. If you want to take a different game, then take Horizon for example. Looks insane aswell, but I didnt find a good comparisons for that either.
FM7 vs FM
GTS vs FM
I was speechless, when I saw the difference and imo that's in huge parts down to the I/O capabilities of the new consoles. You can load in much more detail and with the speeds of the cars I am certain HDD were a even bigger headache, because you can't suddenly slow down cars to load the rest of a track. These and other streaming tricks were used in open world games like Horizon ZD. I don't know how Forza or GT took care of the issue, but Mario Kart iirc simply loaded everything into RAM beforehand. Now with those next gen bandwidth you can load everything into RAM in a few seconds. Should help a lot.
Anyways, I think games in 1-2 years will show a huge graphical leap and really wow us. I expect insane thing's from franchises like Uncharted, Gears, Forza, GT and many more. Don't get me wrong, the likes of Ratchet, Spiderman or DS are already good looking games. But I tend to agree with you that graphically those don't have the same WOW factor as Ryse and Killzone had in the past.
I think they will. GT7 showed better foliage, lightning and more. I was impressed by it. However I can't make a direct comparison, because they've showed a track not available in GTS. Thus I take FM knowing it's in engine and not gameplay footage. But T10 already said this is the track detail we can expect and it looks absolutely insane. If you want to take a different game, then take Horizon for example. Looks insane aswell, but I didnt find a good comparisons for that either.
FM7 vs FM
GTS vs FM
I was speechless, when I saw the difference and imo that's in huge parts down to the I/O capabilities of the new consoles. You can load in much more detail and with the speeds of the cars I am certain HDD were a even bigger headache, because you can't suddenly slow down cars to load the rest of a track. These and other streaming tricks were used in open world games like Horizon ZD. I don't know how Forza or GT took care of the issue, but Mario Kart iirc simply loaded everything into RAM beforehand. Now with those next gen bandwidth you can load everything into RAM in a few seconds. Should help a lot.
Anyways, I think games in 1-2 years will show a huge graphical leap and really wow us. I expect insane thing's from franchises like Uncharted, Gears, Forza, GT and many more. Don't get me wrong, the likes of Ratchet, Spiderman or DS are already good looking games. But I tend to agree with you that graphically those don't have the same WOW factor as Ryse and Killzone had in the past.
yes!!
really hope you are right and maybe in the end of next year or beginning of 2022 we Star to see some games with insane techs and truly leaps from what we had on PS4/One.
Playing on PS5 and due to the lower quality RT, buildings just constantly shimmer through the city, looks very distracting . PC doesn't have this .
It's really obvious and and as I said very distracting. Reflections are a big part of this game and sometimes I'd rather them to switch to the old style,SSR, Cube Maps, etc.
Anyone else find the reflections on buildings to be of poor quality?
Not just that, but the overall RT quality, like when it's raining and the streets are completely wet, very bad looking.
It's really obvious and and as I said very distracting. Reflections are a big part of this game and sometimes I'd rather them to switch to the old style,SSR, Cube Maps, etc.
Anyone else find the reflections on buildings to be of poor quality?
Not just that, but the overall RT quality, like when it's raining and the streets are completely wet, very bad looking.
I came in this thread just to speak about this. It's a shimmery mess when things are in motion. I'm with you, they need to disable it. The quality itself is very poor, low resolution, almost like an oil painting. I'm not sure if there's another issue with shader aliasing because things like buildings shimmer as well.
It is distracting. I'd take out of the RT ( or improve the quality like on PC) and use the extra resources on FPS and get it to hit 60fps.
( I'm so stupid. I didn't realise I made a post about this not that long ago! I just made a search for this game and RT and came to this thread)