Support NeoGAF

[rofif]

No my guy lol, this is Norman Reedus

This is a cross gen abomination version of him:

what;s that screenshot?!
At least use cutscene model. In-game you never look at the guy this close.
ds2 got the best looking character models ever.
Put the nonsense agenda back in your ass where you found it.

This is how the game looks. Don't cherry pick in-gameplay models and zoom on them. Thats not fair

Copy link
...

Add image

 

[Msamy]

The only Good thing I can like about death stranding in terms of graphics is cutscenes characters models

that's because lack of exclusives.
Yes, DS2 is exclusive but it's using decima. A tech made for ps4.... because studio that made this engine have not yet made a ps5 game... because every game takes 17 years to make.

good enough is perfect... Why reinvent the graphics wheel with every new game?
Do we really need games looking better than uc4? because this looks better than uc4 already (maybe... no... a bit?)
If all they can do is take Decima and spend all the time on USING the tools that exist and making a game? perfect.
The game still took almost 6 years to make. It's a failure in my opinion under that front.
It's using the same tech, adjusted to more ps5 power and still took 6 years. Without r&d and reinventing graphics we always blame for long dev times.
So either Kojima stalled or he really put a lot of other stuff in this game.

Spending 2 more years to ultramodernize the graphics etc is a fools errand.
Slimy, I love you but you've gotten really obsessive in last year or two. You were always more positive.
Now you became very demanding and impossible to impress. maybe it's time for break?
I know you feel obligated to be THE GUY in this thread or on gaf, to push graphics but I think you are loosing the plot.

I actually don't want all games looking like ue5 renders... even if it's objectively way better looking.
Game slike og re4, remake re4, ff16, death stranding, horizon etc etc - have a distinc visual and technical feel. These still feel like games.
We are going to loose that soon. I replayed og re4 and it's so genius how well they use the hardware for most primitive tricks lol. It adds another layer of appreciation....

THAT SAID - I WOULDNT MIND 40FPS MODE WITH THAT SWEET AC SHADOWS RTGI hoooooly that fucking game.
SORRY I HAVE TO POST AC SHOTS ITS SO GOOD LOOKING. Not a bad game too. So yes. I am very eager to see if DS2 impresses me even a bit like ac shadows graphically

Copy link
...

Add image

Dude we are on a graphics thread we demand a games to look good and at least used available tech, if you still accept ps4 visuals on this gen then you don't need to buy ps5 and the same goes for developers if they gonna release games with last gen graphics then why not make them cross gen then release for ps4, also graphics tech doesn't always mean hyper realism, better lighting,,reflection, and shadows can give great looking graphics like Pixar approach, and finally we here don't accept uc4 graphics anymore we want games like wukong, avatar, ac shadows, gta vi, fable and real message and witcher 4 demo, lol even game like pragmata it's not gameplay graphics looks better than all sony first party offers this, just we don't like those uc4 12 years old graphics anymore

 

[MidGenRefresh]

what;s that screenshot?!
At least use cutscene model. In-game you never look at the guy this close.
ds2 got the best looking character models ever.
Put the nonsense agenda back in your ass where you found it.

This is how the game looks. Don't cherry pick in-gameplay models and zoom on them. Thats not fair

Copy link
...

Add image

Damn good character models. Tip, Google "YouTube screenshots" extension.

 

[Alex11]

I would like to take a moment to point out some hilarious inconsistences in John's DS2 review:

- Right at the start of the video, he bemoans this generation's cross gen focus.
- Literally a minute later, compares DS2 to HFW and says its not as big of a leap as HFW was to HZD. HFW was cross gen...
- Compares rock detail to Nanite.
- ten minutes later, points out how details are low res for objects not directly in front of you, and doesnt look great. i mean isnt the entire point of nanite is to handle LODs more gracefully? anyone can push detail right in front of you.

Overall, its a good review pointing out the strengths and weaknesses of this game, but as always he refuses to compare these games to other games this gen that have produced far better visuals choosing instead to compare it to the previous entry. Thats fine for a review, but an incomplete assessment of the game's technical shortcomings.

I've said it before, I'll say it again, DF stopped being trustworthy a long time ago, their videos and reviews shouldn't be taken to heart anymore.

I don't know what happened, they are either just don't want to upset anyone too much or they just simply let their emotions and preferences interfere with their objective thoughts, just like it happens here.

 

[GymWolf]

The ingame model face look somehow worse than the first game in that comparison, the cutscene closeup look better but they still have that light waxy/lucid effect that i don't like.

 

[SlimySnake]

Jesus Christ Norman Reedus looks amazing in cutscenes.

I still remember the very first trailer he looked last gen while Lea Seydoux looked next gen. Must have been a placeholder.

 

[GymWolf]

Jesus Christ Norman Reedus looks amazing in cutscenes.

I still remember the very first trailer he looked last gen while Lea Seydoux looked next gen. Must have been a placeholder.

Too bad he looks worse than aloy ingame...

 

[Edder1]

what;s that screenshot?!
At least use cutscene model. In-game you never look at the guy this close.
ds2 got the best looking character models ever.
Put the nonsense agenda back in your ass where you found it.

This is how the game looks. Don't cherry pick in-gameplay models and zoom on them. Thats not fair

...

Add image

I already said multiple times that cutscenes look good, you dimwit. It's the actual game that looks like cross gen garbage.

 

[Lethal01]

DS2 is looking fantastic, really can't wait to play and see the new gameplay systems.

 

[Jesb]

These guys after D2 gotta be considered with the greats like Naughty Dog and others in terms of realistic characters. Including the voice syncing which looks top tier as well to me.

 

[SlimySnake]

Too bad he looks worse than aloy ingame...

Hero lighting seems to be missing here. cant believe that thing didnt take off. I get that it might be expensive but it cant be that expensive. Especially considering this game is already running at 1440p 60 fps.

 

[RetroGamingUK]

 

[rofif]

I already said multiple times that cutscenes look good, you dimwit. It's the actual game that looks like cross gen garbage.

garbage? ehhh we will see.
probably a bit better

 

[roosnam1980]

its running on quality mode on base ps5 in that vid
looks excellent

 

[Audiophile]

My main gripe is less to do with absolute graphical quality and more relative quality between the Pro and base system. They're charging $699 for the Pro vs $429 for the PS5 Slim Digital and for that I'd expect Sony to give their own-published titles such as Death Stranding 2 an extra push. Freedom for devs is good up to a point, but there comes a point where you need to enforce certain standards for your customer. And having your customer pay an extra 63% to have a perceptibly minor resolution bump in a flagship title isn't much of a standard.

PSSR was largely half-cooked and underwhelming in all but a few cases, they wasted some of the BoM on new Wi-Fi, a 2TB drive (just lower the barrier of entry with 1TB or reallocate the cost for better perf; and allow customers to upgrade if they need it). They didn't even bother to provide full 48Gbps HDMI 2.1 (or even just DSC 1:2) while touting '8K' modes [and you still can't even do full fat 4K]. The Pro should've been clocked 10% higher, be smaller 54/60CU instead of 60/64 and had ~32MB of L3 via MALL/Infinity Cache on the APU die to significantly increase effective bandwidth, reduce latency and even offset power consumption a little.

Yet, even for the largely underwhelming spec along with poor allocation of budget, the games coming out for it as it is still have mostly underwhelming upgrades.

I think the Pro is honestly a bit of a shit show and the imbalance between GPU & Memory Bandwidth has made getting feature upgrades more of a pain than it should be, so devs are just unlocking DRS / setting higher fixed resolutions, maybe loosening up a few dials if you're lucky and calling it a day. I get that with third party titles, but in the past at least I'd have expected more of an effort first/second party/Sony-published stuff.

I wouldn't be surprised if pushing the price up to 699 -- while also failing to provide much to be excited about -- has also resulted in significantly lower sales than they would have had at 599, in turn leaving a smaller base and less incentive for devs to bother with the thing. And with that; a vicious circle.

 

[hussar16]

guess the fidelity i expect wont come on the reg until ps6, gta 6 is exception tho

 

[Msamy]

I really like Ds2 character models on cutscenes

 

[sncvsrtoip]

what;s that screenshot?!
At least use cutscene model. In-game you never look at the guy this close.
ds2 got the best looking character models ever.
Put the nonsense agenda back in your ass where you found it.

This is how the game looks. Don't cherry pick in-gameplay models and zoom on them. Thats not fair

Copy link
...

Add image

In terms of character models probably best I've seen in any game

 

[Edder1]

garbage? ehhh we will see.
probably a bit better

Look, I'm obviously exaggerating. The game looks fine for a 60fps game, but at 60fps on RTX 2080 equivalent GPU (yes, games are made for base console as target hardware) you not gonna get anything except cross gen looking game unless it's a corridor shooter, fighting game or any game with limited scope. Cutscenes are another thing, any studio with big enough budget can do very impressive cutscenes, we all know that by now.

I think next gen consoles will be powerful enough for 60fps and state of the art visuals (fsr4, ai, frame generation all will help), but current gen machines are not capable of pushing fidelity to the max at 60fps.

 

[rofif]

Look, I'm obviously exaggerating. The game looks fine for a 60fps game, but at 60fps on RTX 2080 equivalent GPU (yes, games are made for base console as target hardware) you not gonna get anything except cross gen looking game unless it's a corridor shooter, fighting game or any game with limited scope. Cutscenes are another thing, any studio with big enough budget can do very impressive cutscenes, we all know that by now.

didn't the trailer few months ago dropped everyones jaws?
I think what matter is how the game looks in general. Some poor details don't make a game bad looking obviously

 

[Edder1]

didn't the trailer few months ago dropped everyones jaws?
I think what matter is how the game looks in general. Some poor details don't make a game bad looking obviously

I was one of the few ones here saying how unimpressive the game looks in gameplay when that trailer dropped. I also got a lot of hate for saying that. Even back then I said cutscenes look top tier, but it didn't take a genius to see that the in-game bits were not looking like a big upgrade over the first game.

 

[March Climber]

You guys learn nothing. These pro machines are almost useless, it was the same with PS4 pro. You just get slightly better visuals/performance, it's definitely not worth the price. Sony doesn't care about Pro users, they're a minority anyway.

Agreed. Never buy the half-step console.

 

[SlimySnake]

My main gripe is less to do with absolute graphical quality and more relative quality between the Pro and base system. They're charging $699 for the Pro vs $429 for the PS5 Slim Digital and for that I'd expect Sony to give their own-published titles such as Death Stranding 2 an extra push. Freedom for devs is good up to a point, but there comes a point where you need to enforce certain standards for your customer. And having your customer pay an extra 63% to have a perceptibly minor resolution bump in a flagship title isn't much of a standard.

PSSR was largely half-cooked and underwhelming in all but a few cases, they wasted some of the BoM on new Wi-Fi, a 2TB drive (just lower the barrier of entry with 1TB or reallocate the cost for better perf; and allow customers to upgrade if they need it). They didn't even bother to provide full 48Gbps HDMI 2.1 (or even just DSC 1:2) while touting '8K' modes [and you still can't even do full fat 4K]. The Pro should've been clocked 10% higher, be smaller 54/60CU instead of 60/64 and had ~32MB of L3 via MALL/Infinity Cache on the APU die to significantly increase effective bandwidth, reduce latency and even offset power consumption a little.

Yet, even for the largely underwhelming spec along with poor allocation of budget, the games coming out for it as it is still have mostly underwhelming upgrades.

I think the Pro is honestly a bit of a shit show and the imbalance between GPU & Memory Bandwidth has made getting feature upgrades more of a pain than it should be, so devs are just unlocking DRS / setting higher fixed resolutions, maybe loosening up a few dials if you're lucky and calling it a day. I get that with third party titles, but in the past at least I'd have expected more of an effort first/second party/Sony-published stuff.

I wouldn't be surprised if pushing the price up to 699 -- while also failing to provide much to be excited about -- has also resulted in significantly lower sales than they would have had at 599, in turn leaving a smaller base and less incentive for devs to bother with the thing. And with that; a vicious circle.

Sony has turned into a profit first company. They no longer sell consoles at a loss or even breaking even. Hence, the complete lack of discounts five years into the gen. They charge $70 for cross gen games. $10 for literal config file changes increasing resolution or removing framecaps that literally everyone else did not bother charging for. They have increased the price of PS+ by well over 50% in five years. Of course, they were going to release an expensive console and get the most out of the suckers (me included) who want the latest and the greatest. No different from what nvidia is doing. Or Apple or MS for that matter. It's the sign of the times.

The console was probably designed as a $499 console. Similar to how the PS4 Pro was a $399 console just like the base PS5 at launch. But then some suit probably came in and said we need more profits. Their profits this gen have eclipsed all their profits from their previous 4 generations combined. They are cleaning up and they still keep raising prices lol.

Like you said, a lot of different combination of CUs, clock speeds, and infinity cache wouldve allowed them to at least get the 67% performance boost for their 67% more compute power. But they didnt even get that because they probably cant clock that high because Cerny wasnt allowed to go with a more expensive cooling solution like vapor chamber cooling. 9070xt goes up to 3.2 Ghz while Sony is still stuck with 2.2 ghz they had on a much bigger 7nm chip.

So yeah, he couldnt do more than 45% and devs just cant do a lot with just 45% more power. It takes 50% just to go from 1440p to 1800p and they dont even have that.

 

[vpance]

I'd expect Sony to give their own-published titles such as Death Stranding 2 an extra push

This is the problem, having expectations of Sony in a gen where they went full on Moby Dick for DEI GAAS shooters. There's no one at the helm that cares enough to look after these second line concerns anymore.

 

[TheRedRiders]

Sony has turned into a profit first company. They no longer sell consoles at a loss or even breaking even. Hence, the complete lack of discounts five years into the gen. They charge $70 for cross gen games. $10 for literal config file changes increasing resolution or removing framecaps that literally everyone else did not bother charging for. They have increased the price of PS+ by well over 50% in five years. Of course, they were going to release an expensive console and get the most out of the suckers (me included) who want the latest and the greatest. No different from what nvidia is doing. Or Apple or MS for that matter. It's the sign of the times.

The console was probably designed as a $499 console. Similar to how the PS4 Pro was a $399 console just like the base PS5 at launch. But then some suit probably came in and said we need more profits. Their profits this gen have eclipsed all their profits from their previous 4 generations combined. They are cleaning up and they still keep raising prices lol.

Like you said, a lot of different combination of CUs, clock speeds, and infinity cache wouldve allowed them to at least get the 67% performance boost for their 67% more compute power. But they didnt even get that because they probably cant clock that high because Cerny wasnt allowed to go with a more expensive cooling solution like vapor chamber cooling. 9070xt goes up to 3.2 Ghz while Sony is still stuck with 2.2 ghz they had on a much bigger 7nm chip.

So yeah, he couldnt do more than 45% and devs just cant do a lot with just 45% more power. It takes 50% just to go from 1440p to 1800p and they dont even have that.

I think there's many factors involved, although I believe the PS5 hardware is fine, the reason being is that so far all we've seen most developers do especially first party is have cross-engine games with setting cranked to high, a more performant PS5 would have just resulted in just higher IQ games, the lack of implementation of truely next-generation features is more down to studio time and investment.

I suspect Sony's first party studios were already stretched thin because of the pathetic GAAS push from Jim which turned out to be a disaster, and this resulted in them making cut backs to other departments in their studios, most notable being programming, graphics and that kind of thing.

If it was a result of the hardware being the true limiting factor then we wouldn't have things like GTA 6, or Witcher 4 and the latter is truly a technical masterpiece because they've managed to pull it off at 60 FPS, not taking away anything from GTA 6 of course but I'm just a big Witcher fan. That also does remind me, that the CDPR developers did kind of allude to Nanite's new fast geometry system being sensitive to SSD I/O which makes sense of course.

It might sound like I'm making excuses for Sony's first parties studios, but that's not the case, I think they fumbled this generation in the visual department, I'm hoping by the time the PS6 launches they'll have thir shit togethor and ditched the GAAS push, and we may see them putting efforts back into visuals again.

 

[wafflecioccy]

If it was a result of the hardware being the true limiting factor then we wouldn't have things like Witcher 4 and the latter is truly a technical masterpiece because they've managed to pull it off at 60 FPS

Witcher 4 footage first off isn't really Witcher 4 footage but just Unreal Engine tech demo showing off the increased performance and efficiency of the engine, with a Cirilla character model and horse with muscles thrown in and a couple small Witcher themed areas.

That's all it is. The impressive thing about it is the RT (RTGI?) running faster and nanite foliage finally working which Epic had been working on for years.

What you saw is not indicative at all of how actual Witcher 4 would run when you have all the additional gameplay related things to simulate.

 

[TheRedRiders]

Witcher 4 footage first off isn't really Witcher 4 footage but just Unreal Engine tech demo showing off the increased performance and efficiency of the engine, with a Cirilla character model and horse with muscles thrown in and a couple small Witcher themed areas.

That's all it is. The impressive thing about it is the RT (RTGI?) running faster and nanite foliage finally working which Epic had been working on for years.

What you saw is not indicative at all of how actual Witcher 4 would run when you have all the additional gameplay related things to simulate.

Yes I'm familiar with it being a technical demo, however it's entirely possible that the final game may look better, it is still years out and there's further headroom for optimizations.

Let's take the worst case scenario, they begin implementing the deeper gameplay systems and it begins to effect the frame time - knock that demo down to 30 FPS and it's still offering bleeding edge visuals on relatively moderate base console hardware.

 

[BlownUpRich]

That lack of RTGI in Death Stranding 2 is so painfully obvious, if it had RTGI & RT Reflections, my God it'll look MILES better, even in cutscenes, the lack of lighting definition is painfully apparent, the game doesn't look cohesive enough for it to deem itself as a current-gen game, the game is exposing the limits of Rasterization rendering very blatantly. I am sorry.

Doom The Dark Ages looks much more cohesive & consistent lighting-wise than this, it looks like it belongs to this generation than DS2.

GTA 6 may have less detailed character models likely less polygons (outside of hair of course), but the RTGI lighting makes them look lifelike, of course it also has better animations than DS2.

 

[analog_future]

Agreed. Never buy the half-step console.

Xbox One X was incredible and still holds up today.

 

[Crayon]

Started playing indiana jones. Wow, what great environments. Super-static environments, but still great.

The game makes a really good case for required rt. Doesn't slow the game down much, and the lighting is up there with the best baked setups.

 

[Msamy]

This gameplay segment is the only part on ds2 that have current gen true graphics

 

[Gonzito]

Lol some of the posts here are not going to age well when they play Death Stranding 2 on a 4k screen and look at the quality of the graphics

 

[pulicat]

DS2 doesn't look that particularly great in comparison to a cross-gen game like HFW.

 

[SamuraiEdge]

Lol some of the posts here are not going to age well when they play Death Stranding 2 on a 4k screen and look at the quality of the graphics

Why I am waiting for PC version like I did with FF7: Rebirth. Happy to wait for that full insane leap to experience.

Game looks really damn nice with the models.

 

[MidGenRefresh]

Xbox One X was incredible and still holds up today.

I got mine for €70 (about $81) a while back, and it's become my go-to console when I don't feel like dealing with my PC. It still holds up surprisingly well in 2025, and getting a whole system for the price of a single AAA game is just crazy. I played Assassin's Creed Origins on it recently, and it still looks fantastic.

 

[powder]

This gameplay segment is the only part on ds2 that have current gen true graphics

You've played the rest of the game?

 

[ZehDon]

didn't the trailer few months ago dropped everyones jaws?
I think what matter is how the game looks in general. Some poor details don't make a game bad looking obviously

It's one of the reasons I don't really respect cut-scene screenshots. It's easy to make things look good in a non-interactive, controlled environment. But they employ ludicrous amounts of trickery to make those happen. What registers as "good graphics" to me is: what does the game look like when I'm playing the game. Probably worth noting: fluidity doesn't translate in screenshots, but it adds a lot for me in making the game feel impressive. I'd register a great looking 60 FPS title above a fantastic looking 30 FPS title, in terms of "good graphics".

 

[MidGenRefresh]

So cutscenes don't count because they're not gameplay, but somehow close-up photomode shots are a fair representation of what the game actually looks like while playing?

 

[Critical Hit]

What you saw is not indicative at all of how actual Witcher 4 would run when you have all the additional gameplay related things to simulate.

On the consoles? Maybe, On PC it would look better, as W3 and CP2077 are now.


I don't understand all this raving about the graphics in DS2 – AC: Shadows looks better. The only thing that stands out is the character models in cutscenes.

 

[GymWolf]

Is this supposed to be impressive in 2025?

 

[mrMUR_96]

Is this supposed to be impressive in 2025?

Yeah exactly, this a perfect example of where RTGI and Nanite type tech would literally fix the inconsistencies and weaknesses of this game. Asset quality and overall graphics quality is excellent, it just gets caught out with outdated tech. Cutscenes look great because they can manually tweak the lighting as they need, but that's not possible in dynamic gameplay so there will always be parts where it looks flat when just using last gen techniques. Some sort of nanite type geometry using mesh shaders would run great on base PS5 so wouldn't affect performance while looking better, RTGI could maybe be limited to the pro or used in quality mode.

 

[GymWolf]

Yeah exactly, this a perfect example of where RTGI and Nanite type tech would literally fix the inconsistencies and weaknesses of this game. Asset quality and overall graphics quality is excellent, it just gets caught out with outdated tech. Cutscenes look great because they can manually tweak the lighting as they need, but that's not possible in dynamic gameplay so there will always be parts where it looks flat when just using last gen techniques. Some sort of nanite type geometry using mesh shaders would run great on base PS5 so wouldn't affect performance while looking better, RTGI could maybe be limited to the pro or used in quality mode.

I'm not impressed by the assets neither...

 

[Audiophile]

Kojima did say DS2 would have been out two years earlier if it wasn't for Covid. Can't help but think it was a cross-gen game, but they eventually dropped the PS4 knowing they're coming in in ~2025 (and that a lot of that extra time was focused more on pushing up the cutscene side of things rather than gameplay).

There are moments where it looks very nice for sure, but overall it looks like a top tier PS4 Pro game with existing systems just cranked on PS5. I look at it and can't help but think it should be on PS4 too. Would've said the same of Spidey 2 if it wasn't for the super-fast traversal.

I think we're still seeing what were essentially PS4 games, with a limited and selective allocation of resources to bring the games up to PS5 in some ways and then the 60fps target as standard further compounding that. Or, perhaps that 60fps being present so often is itself a sign of these fundamentally being PS4 games.

If the game isn't first person, a racer or a competitive twitchy game, then a solid 30fps & 40fps with good frame pacing and tasteful motion blur should be enough for a flagship first party title at launch (especially slow-paced third person), with 60fps being a feature of a next gen version or PC version. Otherwise, by cutting frame times in half you're essentially throwing away half of your generational leap, not just in terms of visual systems but in terms of scope, complexity, simulation etc. And in regards to the latter, a game will likely always be limited in that respect, whereas framerate can always be scaled later.

 

[GymWolf]

nanite level tech guys:

|OT|  Post in thread 'Death Stranding 2: On the Beach |OT| Ain't That A Beach'

Tuesday at 12:23 PM

One thing is really disappointing about the graphics are the mid range details. It looks so bad. Like the things close to you looks good, things far away like mountains looks amazing, but then you look at the ground and its like a ps2 textures. They should've focus on improving that thing, because it really sticks out

• Luipadre

 

[Senua]

Man rofif went full rofif itt. Posting "PS4 graphics are good enough" in a graphical fidelity thread. What a legend

 

[analog_future]

Ya'll remember this thread?

https://www.neogaf.com/threads/whic...ics-hellblade-2-or-death-stranding-2.1666651/

 

[KXVXII9X]

cutscenes look great, what are we complaining about here??

People here seem to equate stylization with bad graphics even though the lighting in this game looks way better than most and doesn't look as flat as other games that have so much detail but flat lighting. This style makes everything much more consistent. The animations also seem good enough.

 

[Myuni]

Well, DS2 has its shortcomings:

• Motion blur cannot be deactivated.
• Ambient occlusion is not the best (some U4 titles look better in this regard).
• Texture quality is sketchy at times if you get too close (but never as shitty as, e.g., in worst-case UE5 Wukong scenarios).
• The lighting at nighttime doesn't look too good.

But... the performance is superb. Locked 30/60 FPS, no hiccups, no stutter, nothing so far.

And when it shines, it shines.
I'm constantly stuck in photo mode, hardly making any progress

PS5 Quality:

 

[BlownUpRich]

Ya'll remember this thread?

https://www.neogaf.com/threads/whic...ics-hellblade-2-or-death-stranding-2.1666651/

I remember when that DS2 trailer dropped, it didn't look better than Hellblade 2, in fact it didn't come close, the graphics were impressive but that's it, IDK what people were smoking that day lol, maybe just Kojima hype? I was perturbed by it that's for sure.

 

[BlownUpRich]

Well, DS2 has its shortcomings:

• Motion blur cannot be deactivated.
• Ambient occlusion is not the best (some U4 titles look better in this regard).
• Texture quality is sketchy at times if you get too close (but never as shitty as, e.g., in worst-case UE5 Wukong scenarios).
• The lighting at nighttime doesn't look too good.

But... the performance is superb. Locked 30/60 FPS, no hiccups, no stutter, nothing so far.

And when it shines, it shines.
I'm constantly stuck in photo mode, hardly making any progress

PS5 Quality:

While I may have criticized DS2's graphics for lack of Nanite-like geometry system & RTGI (and it shows), it still looks stunning!