crispy4000

Give me some Nintendo updates. BotW2, Metroid Prime 4, Switch Pro. I’m not getting my hopes up though.

What other barometer do we have? A cross gen game should be able to push RT plenty. It’s adding to what’s already optimized to run on weaker hardware. Even Control could be described as such. Was it not a fair barometer for RTX cards? ...Of course it is.

It’s more the marketing angle. If everyone else is saying that their games run 4K, even if only when looking at skyboxes, you might as well. Its why it’s so important to wait until release when 4K gets uttered. We’re seeing the same sort of thing with 120fps too.

Did the same. He speaks about the SDK being less ready on Microsoft’s side. But nothing as to RT in specific. And certainly no claims that WD:L is being significantly hamstrung by it. We’ll see RT optimizations and improvements throughout the gen. It can only get better down the road. But I don’t think we’ll be seeing 2080 performance out of these consoles with RT. It’s not being realistic. We’re far from it now.

They said PS5 was 4K too at one point. Your mistake was taking the PR as gospel. There’s a long track record of 4K being fungible to Ubisoft (and most AAA publishers), especially with dynamic drops, sub-4K averages and reconstruction. So yeah. Don’t be so trusting, and you won’t be disappointed.

Operates on the assumption that a driver update will yield the same gains. Remember that DLSS improvements were a huge part of that equation too. Also, what dev said these consoles aren’t RT ready? Source please.

If the config file is to blame, how come it dips dynamically down to 1440p? Keep those blinders on.

The denial here pretty much speaks for itself. Your 2080 comment stands as false. The Series X is performing at 2060 S level (sans DLSS) with RT. It’s even more absurd to think the PS5 is what’s holding it back, with the PC port existing as it does.

Beat Uncharted 3. It's bombastic and consistently fun in the moment. Exactly what I needed after coming off HoB and Hellblade. Which are also good, but more somber. I can see why people think Uncharted 2 is better, but its not by much. The only real flaw with 3 is all the fist fighting, which builds off the bad in Uncharted 2. Oh, and running from spiders so many times. The part where you have to shoot them is sooo jank, it was kind of hilarious. The rusty ship section was by far my favorite part of the game, and I normally dislike those type of environments, but they made it wrap up in an interesting way. Music and writting is also better than Uncharted 2 on the whole, IMO, and there might be a greater variety of set pieces as well. 8/10 popcorn film. Going to miss 60fps when I start Uncharted 4.

Given the choice between 1440p60 or 4k30, I'd go with the former every time. Even more so if 1440p is the bottom point. It gets a bit harder for me if it's between 1080p60 and 30fps at a higher resolution. It depends on the game. I played through Hellblade recently at 1600p30, no regrets.

I think a lot of people do, and are happy to pay the $12 a month for GP (+$3 for Gold). As someone who plays primarily on PC and checks the r/gamedeals subreddit often, it's not worth it to me yet. I spend <$100 on games themselves most years. It's gotten even easier with giveaway fever lately. I'll still buy the odd Microsoft title on the cheap.

Series S wasn't a looking 1440p machine before this either, with how many last gen titles (I can say it now!) opted for 1080p. If Series S can maintain WD:L levels of performance throughout the generation, I'd consider it a good thing! Hardware-wise, you'd still get much more value for your dollar with a PS5 DE. But that comparison might not matter as much with Games Pass being a thing.

It should. Other M is a better Metroid game than Fusion if you can parse the bullshit story out of your mind.

Yep. In the here and now, we're seeing very marginal differences. Maybe that changes when more games leverage the SSD or machine learning features. But we won't know until we get there. My big takeaway isn't that the consoles aren't roughly equal to each other. It's that they won't beat a 2060 Super in raytracing unless AMD's promised upscaling algorithm absolutely nails it. That could change how games are developed and how much RT is embraced this gen.

There was better motion tech avaiable when the Wii launched as well. So it depends on what you want to give credit for. There hadn't been a meaningful update to rumble in decades on consoles. HD Rumble was more of a half step, but at least it pushed forward.

The HD rumble moons in Mario Odyssey actively pissed me off. They tried, but it wasn't clear enough of an aid. Nintendo still deserves credit for advancing the tech somewhat. Rumble hadn't been improved meaningfully in decades. I still think the OG Star Fox 64 had the best rumble until now. It didn't give a fuck about your battery life, lol.

http://www.gog.com//apple-touch-icon.png -100% Teleglitch: Die More Edition on GOG.com WWW.GOG.COM

I could see it. WD:L and Godfall both look a lot more shiny/neon as a whole. That's going to play better with reflections. Given what we now know about the performance, I wonder how much RT will be leaned on in the future. It might make more sense for ground-up next gen games to push other things and use RT reflections more sparingly. Or maybe try more for RT GI and Shadows instead. Until then, lots of puddles and waxed tiles.

The Touryst and Ori 2 as well, if you're interested in downsampling and high FPS.

I think Insomniac made the right call in its implementation by comparison. Reflections in reflections seems excessive while the performance cost is still so high. And those cut off points where it falls back to cube maps, even on PC, look mismatched. I'd rather take a lower LoD reflection on a whole than a mixed bag. There's probably more to it than that, so hopefully its just growing pains. But there is RT in large bodies of water, so that's at least one area where WD:L beats Spider-man decisively.

TIn Yep. Xbox Series X runs raytracing in this game like a 2060 Super without DLSS. Maybe just a tad worse in fidelity, but with dynamic resolution to help framerates along if things dip. (which isn't possible in the PC build) Console settings on Series X (and PS5 too) are below medium RT on PC, the lowest that can be selected in game. But a 2060 Super can also run RT on Ultra settings at similar framerates, using DLSS 2.0 for reconstructed 4k. Obligatory @TomCat quote:

Here it is - the most telling video yet.

PS5 might actually have a performance advantage with Valhalla? It could be its dynamic resolution dropping more intelligently. There's less tearing, but it's still there at points. As said in the Xbox thread, they both average 1368p-1620p, temporally reconstructed to 4K. EDIT: DF confirms as well.

Second source now saying that both consoles use image reconstruction. They found lower bounds and resolution averages than NX gamer, closer in line with the PS4 Pro's typical resolution counts: @TomCat counted his eggs before they hatched. Claims of "4K native" for AAA games should always be taken with a heaping spoonful of salt, until there's evidence of typical resolution / no reconstruction techniques. Its like a developer calling their game 60fps when it averages 50fps or lower. There was reason to be skeptical here anyways, with Ubisoft being wishy-washy on what framerate the game would run at initially. I'm glad they made the development choices they did to get it to 60fps, even if the press release promises were sketch.

Xbox Series S review: next-gen gaming on a budget - and in style WWW.EUROGAMER.NET Digital Foundry presents the definitive verdict on an entirely new type of games console - Microsoft's junior Series machine, which aims to bring you the same games at lower resolutions. Does it work?