🤣720p Fantasy XVI, 40FPS

[Tears of the Cows 1,209]

 

Visuals:

- "Exceptionally detailed character models" re: micro-details, fabrics etc.
- Hairs use standard alpha coverage, not a higher res strand system
- Shadows have characteristics of RT but John could not nail it 100%.

- Cut-scenes can show gap in quality between main character scenes and regular NPC chatter
- A-tier cut-scenes are exceptionally detailed and beautiful with high quality bokeh
- Some cut-scenes switch to videos with high quality
- B and C tier scenes are reasonably well animated but lack the polish and can feel a little jarring

- Character animations can feel odd at first but you get used to it
- Transitioning between game play and cut-scene is 'awesome'

- The motion blur is subjective and while John likes it, there is feedback from other players who don't because of its intensity.
- Environmental detail variation is praised

- No dynamic time of day but baked lighting allows developers to present a cohesive vision
- Liberal use of geometry and fine details
- Wind simulation and scripted explosions/destruction adds to the atmosphere
- More lighting and shadow praising

- The visuals are best in dim areas, brightly lit areas look like FFXIV, a little cross-geny.
- Larger bodies of water look nice but smaller ones look mediocre due to SSR cut-off

- Larger Eikon battles praised and compared with God of War for missing set pieces like this.


Audio:

- DF praised the music, audio quality and voice acting of the game.
- But noted that the lip sync is only calibrated for English, if you play any other language, it will not sync with the facial animations.



Performance:

- Quality mode: DRS 1080p to 1440p upscaled to 4K
- Performance: DRS 720p to 1080p upscaled to 1440p. Combined with TAA 'doesn't look great'.
- The game seems to be using FSR 1, not FSR2

- Quality mode looks fine but Performance mode is 'kind of a mess'
- Shadow quality is dropped and has more dithering in Performance mode
- Distant enemies run at lower frame rate in both modes

- DF tested with day 1 300MB patch
- DF recommends playing in Quality mode. 99% lock with properly paced frames
- Patch does not fix the performance, only negligible changes
- Performance mode often falls below VRR range to low 40s.

- As soon as you enter battles, the performance often maintains 60 because the game drops internal resolution to 720p

- All cut-scenes are locked to 30 regardless of which mode is chosen.

- DF recommendation: start the game with Quality mode so you don't have the jarring transition from 60 to 30.

[-GD-X★ 7,740]

meanwhile, new xbox AAA exclusives are running at 0P, 0FPS.

[lynux3 2,089]

More reason for a PS5 Pro to be released. Don't expect anything from Xflop.

 

Quote

“Microsoft told us this back when we saw the Series X for the first time that the Series X is their mid gen refresh. They just decided to do it, ahead of time, I guess you could say.”

They continued, “The Series S is what they consider the standard machine and then Series X is, you know, that's getting ahead of the cart there and this is what you might get from a mid gen console.”

 

Not only do you have worse running games on Series L now, it'll be even worse since the Series L is the mid-gen refresh. A worse machine right out of the gate... it's like Xflop dOne all over again.  

[Twinblade★ 3,921]

Normally I think 60FPS should be the standard for games with action based combat, but the demo actually felt quite good at 30FPS. It was definitely leaps and bounds better than Jedi Survivor, which was a sluggish & input lag filled mess at 30.

[-GD-X★ 7,740]

10 minutes ago, Twinblade said:

Normally I think 60FPS should be the standard for games with action based combat, but the demo actually felt quite good at 30FPS. It was definitely leaps and bounds better than Jedi Survivor, which was a sluggish & input lag filled mess at 30.

Yeah, it felt pretty damn smooth. 

[JonDnD 2,628]

I think some of the good looking cross gen games are as good if not better looking than what the demo showed (while hitting 60fps at higher res) , so im not sure why this game runs so bad in performance mode. This definitely looks like a game that could be done on PS4 if they wanted to. 

 

Its not open world and seems pretty linear. I feel they could put in some work and gets this to 60fps. The IQ was booty for sure but ill still be playing in the performance mode when i get it.

[madmaltese★ 2,567]

How does this compare to the other systems it's on? 

[JonDnD 2,628]

7 minutes ago, madmaltese said:

How does this compare to the other systems it's on? 

So who cares about how it runs just because its not on Xbox? Yall dumb.

 

 

[-GD-X★ 7,740]

3 hours ago, madmaltese said:

How does this compare to the other systems it's on? 

It’s 1080p on the Series X via YouTube. 

[Substatic 421]

Yeah apparently this game is very good, so I'm not gonna play it at 30-40 fps on low/medium (PS5). PC it is, hopefully it isn't delayed too long.

[Substatic 421]

On 2023-06-22 at 7:57 PM, JonbX said:

So who cares about how it runs just because its not on Xbox? Yall dumb.

 

 

 

The worst part is it's not even some leaked NVIDIA document, it's a officially confirmed timed multiplat.

[The Mother Fucker 26]

Visually the game doesn't look any better than Forspoken

[Twinblade★ 3,921]

3 hours ago, The Mother Fucker said:

Visually the game doesn't look any better than Forspoken

 

Yeah, while the game has a very pleasant art style I don't think its technically impressive outside of the big scripted boss battles. The world is also a bit restrictive, there's platforms you can climb down but you can't climb back up them. Also, you can't traverse shallow bodies of water and need to go around them. This is a bit jarring because you could do that in XV and there were water physics that reacted to the characters when doing so.

[Playstation Tablet 1,725]

Makes the PS5 Pro all that more welcome.