Support NeoGAF

[Jam Dingo]

New poster here, first post in this topic, which I've been following for months while my account awaited verification.

Just got a PS5 Pro for Christmas so thought I'd give a run down of my thoughts. Overall have been much more impressed than I expected: PSSR is so much better than FSR 2, for example, that it's not even funny. Night and day difference. For me it's been a bigger difference than the PS4 Pro, but that could be partly due to my having a much bigger TV these days and low resolutions just being that much less acceptable. The updates fall into 2 broad categories imo: first party games which already looked great and now look spectacular, and third party games which looked quite/very compromised but which now look great. The latter ones are, for me, more impressive and much more vital. I'll try to list them in order of the size of the improvement (I play virtually everything on performance mode, or at worst, 40fps. 30fps belongs in the past, obviously):

1. Star Wars Jedi Survivor: the RT helps tremendously, and the IQ now looks crisp and clean in pretty much every area I've explored. Was a good looking game before with quite serious IQ issues and very uneven: open world looked great but bases were a bit of a mess. Now everything looks fantastic. I'd say it's one of the absolute most beautiful games on the Pro now.

2. Avatar Frontiers of Pandora: the game simply looked a complete mess with FSR 2. Fizzle and grainy noise everywhere - I only bought it for the graphics and was shocked at how ugly it was. PSSR completely transforms the IQ and really lets the game shine. I still think the graphics are a bit overrated compared to the best on the system, but it's a beautiful game and an absolutely fantastic upgrade.

3. Star Wars Outlaws: was already beautiful on the base system but just had some absolutely ABYSMAL image quality problems. There was one part in particular that genuinely had the worst IQ I think I've EVER seen in a game. Literally - worse than the Sega Saturn. PSSR cleans all that shit up very well: it's certainly not pristine but it's basically fine and attractive. So it turns a game that was maybe 40% beautiful and 60% ugly to more like 90% beautiful and 10% okish. Major improvement.

4. Astro Bot. I'd always found the IQ on the base system quite poor. Lots of jaggies and not that sharp, really. Well, for me PSSR just totally cleans it up: almost faultless IQ now. Gorgeous game.

5. Horizon FW. I think all the hype about this one is justified. Honestly the game just looks ludicrously clean and beautiful now. It was already great, but yeah it's still a huge difference.

6. Spider-Man 2. Good upgrade. The extra RT effects are nice. The IQ looks close to the base system's 30fps mode. I'm playing on fidelity mode but with frame rate unlocked to get ~50fps, but I'm not sure if the internal res drops lower than the base system's 30 mode. It may do, but I can't really tell. Anyway, looks much better than the base system and still one of the most beautiful games on the system.

7. Demon's Souls: good clear upgrade. Basically fidelity mode at 60fps: it's a significant upgrade from 1440p IF you're close enough to the screen (ie very close). Otherwise just a bit sharper, but all good.

8. TLOU games: surprisingly significant: the performance modes on the base system were pretty far from 4k quality for me. Either method of just unlocking fidelity or using PSSR gets great results and high frame rates, so all good really.

9. Returnal - probably should be higher. Major improvement, much sharper, just not played it much.

10. Ratchet and Clank: much like Spider-Man 2, only less so. Solid improvement, but was already spectacular with great IQ. Now even more.

11. Alan Wake 2: improves IQ from very bad to just bad. I don't rate this game's graphics - I don't get it. Maybe just me I guess. Significantly cleaner IQ but still lots of jaggies and noise.

12. GT7: the worst one of all. The RT is laughably irrelevant. I can't even notice when it's on or off. Pointless.

I've played DS2 as well, but only got that since Christmas so not tried base. Looks good, if a bit disappointing. Seems to need the brightness turning way down, for one, because it was all washed out on my display.

 

[SlimySnake]

You should play "Keeper". The gameplay is worse, but the art style is equally beautiful. Play in HDR if you can.

I did. After 20 mins of walking i gave up. I can't do these basic games anymore. Decent visuals though.

Just enable it globally my friend.

Nah. I don't like the performance hit and i also don't care for the artifacts it adds in foliage. And no, disabling sharpening doesn't fix it entirely. I do it on a game by game basis and only if i have the performance headroom.

 

[SlimySnake]

New poster here, first post in this topic, which I've been following for months while my account awaited verification.

Just got a PS5 Pro for Christmas so thought I'd give a run down of my thoughts. Overall have been much more impressed than I expected: PSSR is so much better than FSR 2, for example, that it's not even funny. Night and day difference. For me it's been a bigger difference than the PS4 Pro, but that could be partly due to my having a much bigger TV these days and low resolutions just being that much less acceptable. The updates fall into 2 broad categories imo: first party games which already looked great and now look spectacular, and third party games which looked quite/very compromised but which now look great. The latter ones are, for me, more impressive and much more vital. I'll try to list them in order of the size of the improvement (I play virtually everything on performance mode, or at worst, 40fps. 30fps belongs in the past, obviously):

1. Star Wars Jedi Survivor: the RT helps tremendously, and the IQ now looks crisp and clean in pretty much every area I've explored. Was a good looking game before with quite serious IQ issues and very uneven: open world looked great but bases were a bit of a mess. Now everything looks fantastic. I'd say it's one of the absolute most beautiful games on the Pro now.

2. Avatar Frontiers of Pandora: the game simply looked a complete mess with FSR 2. Fizzle and grainy noise everywhere - I only bought it for the graphics and was shocked at how ugly it was. PSSR completely transforms the IQ and really lets the game shine. I still think the graphics are a bit overrated compared to the best on the system, but it's a beautiful game and an absolutely fantastic upgrade.

3. Star Wars Outlaws: was already beautiful on the base system but just had some absolutely ABYSMAL image quality problems. There was one part in particular that genuinely had the worst IQ I think I've EVER seen in a game. Literally - worse than the Sega Saturn. PSSR cleans all that shit up very well: it's certainly not pristine but it's basically fine and attractive. So it turns a game that was maybe 40% beautiful and 60% ugly to more like 90% beautiful and 10% okish. Major improvement.

4. Astro Bot. I'd always found the IQ on the base system quite poor. Lots of jaggies and not that sharp, really. Well, for me PSSR just totally cleans it up: almost faultless IQ now. Gorgeous game.

5. Horizon FW. I think all the hype about this one is justified. Honestly the game just looks ludicrously clean and beautiful now. It was already great, but yeah it's still a huge difference.

6. Spider-Man 2. Good upgrade. The extra RT effects are nice. The IQ looks close to the base system's 30fps mode. I'm playing on fidelity mode but with frame rate unlocked to get ~50fps, but I'm not sure if the internal res drops lower than the base system's 30 mode. It may do, but I can't really tell. Anyway, looks much better than the base system and still one of the most beautiful games on the system.

7. Demon's Souls: good clear upgrade. Basically fidelity mode at 60fps: it's a significant upgrade from 1440p IF you're close enough to the screen (ie very close). Otherwise just a bit sharper, but all good.

8. TLOU games: surprisingly significant: the performance modes on the base system were pretty far from 4k quality for me. Either method of just unlocking fidelity or using PSSR gets great results and high frame rates, so all good really.

9. Returnal - probably should be higher. Major improvement, much sharper, just not played it much.

10. Ratchet and Clank: much like Spider-Man 2, only less so. Solid improvement, but was already spectacular with great IQ. Now even more.

11. Alan Wake 2: improves IQ from very bad to just bad. I don't rate this game's graphics - I don't get it. Maybe just me I guess. Significantly cleaner IQ but still lots of jaggies and noise.

12. GT7: the worst one of all. The RT is laughably irrelevant. I can't even notice when it's on or off. Pointless.

I've played DS2 as well, but only got that since Christmas so not tried base. Looks good, if a bit disappointing. Seems to need the brightness turning way down, for one, because it was all washed out on my display.

Were you playing these games at 60 FPS on the base ps5? These games look just fine in the 30 fps modes. Fsr doesn't break at 1440p internal resolution but Star Wars was dropping below 640p in the 60 fps mode

 

[Jam Dingo]

Were you playing these games at 60 FPS on the base ps5? These games look just fine in the 30 fps modes. Fsr doesn't break at 1440p internal resolution but Star Wars was dropping below 640p in the 60 fps mode

I never play anything at 30fps now, I can't handle it anymore. Games look so much better to me even at 40fps, that the trade off in resolution etc is always worth it. Although I usually at least try them out just to see the difference.

Jedi Survivor looked good at 30fps (other than the crucial factor of looking like a slideshow, of course) but Avatar and Outlaws didn't. They both looked crap whatever the mode imo. FSR2 is just a shit upscaler. Yeah it looks fine "at rest" but only idiots like DF would care about how a game looks when you're not playing it. As soon as you pan the camera the whole image just fizzles like old TV static.

 

[SlimySnake]

I never play anything at 30fps now, I can't handle it anymore. Games look so much better to me even at 40fps, that the trade off in resolution etc is always worth it. Although I usually at least try them out just to see the difference.

Jedi Survivor looked good at 30fps (other than the crucial factor of looking like a slideshow, of course) but Avatar and Outlaws didn't. They both looked crap whatever the mode imo. FSR2 is just a shit upscaler. Yeah it looks fine "at rest" but only idiots like DF would care about how a game looks when you're not playing it. As soon as you pan the camera the whole image just fizzles like old TV static.

I used to play several games with fsr2 on PC back when amd was paying devs for exclusivity. It was fine at quality, not great but not terrible.

 

[Jam Dingo]

I used to play several games with fsr2 on PC back when amd was paying devs for exclusivity. It was fine at quality, not great but not terrible.

Can only go by my own experience really. I mostly play first party games really, so don't have THAT much experience with it. I know those 3 are FSR 2 and they all look quite bad to me. Oh Alan Wake 2 was another - again, very messy, but still doesn't look very good with PSSR.

Outlaws I played through in the 40fps mode. It has very severe jaggies etc in like half of all scenes. There was one scene (on that green planet, at night, in the rain) where the image was so bad - it literally looked like static - that I just had to laugh. And I was regularly switching to 30fps just to experiment - it barely made any difference. It's my honest opinion that in games like these they should just have targeted native resolutions at 1080p or so and accepted the softness.

Avatar was the same but even uglier, at least on average. I tried all the different modes repeatedly but nothing looked much better than anything else. Everything was grainy and noisy in the jungle and the whole image fizzled blatantly whenever I panned the camera. It looked awful. It was just as bad in bases etc, with jaggies etc everywhere. I simply did not find it to be the case that it looked good at 30fps. It just looked very slightly less bad.

 

[Bojji]

I used to play several games with fsr2 on PC back when amd was paying devs for exclusivity. It was fine at quality, not great but not terrible.

Can only go by my own experience really. I mostly play first party games really, so don't have THAT much experience with it. I know those 3 are FSR 2 and they all look quite bad to me. Oh Alan Wake 2 was another - again, very messy, but still doesn't look very good with PSSR.

Outlaws I played through in the 40fps mode. It has very severe jaggies etc in like half of all scenes. There was one scene (on that green planet, at night, in the rain) where the image was so bad - it literally looked like static - that I just had to laugh. And I was regularly switching to 30fps just to experiment - it barely made any difference. It's my honest opinion that in games like these they should just have targeted native resolutions at 1080p or so and accepted the softness.

Avatar was the same but even uglier, at least on average. I tried all the different modes repeatedly but nothing looked much better than anything else. Everything was grainy and noisy in the jungle and the whole image fizzled blatantly whenever I panned the camera. It looked awful. It was just as bad in bases etc, with jaggies etc everywhere. I simply did not find it to be the case that it looked good at 30fps. It just looked very slightly less bad.

To me FSR2/3 only looks good when upscaling from 1440p to 4K output, but with anything less image gets really ugly...

Console games are often below 1080p in native res.

 

[Jam Dingo]

To me FSR2/3 only looks good when upscaling from 1440p to 4K output, but with anything less image gets really ugly...

Console games are often below 1080p in native res.

I can only think that this idea that DF promotes that the IQ "at rest" ie when you're just looking at a static scene is the true measure of a game's visuals has taken hold across the industry more generally. Now, to me, that's one of the stupidest ideas I've ever heard. Not least because photo mode already exists for people who want that and that solves any IQ problems anyway. But perhaps that's just me. Maybe people genuinely do enjoy graphics like that: moving from one static image to another and just staring at it for a minute. I don't know. Seems bizarre to me.

If otoh you enjoy graphics while traversing the world and panning the camera etc, taking it all in, like I do, then FSR2 is basically just shit.

 

[Bojji]

I can only think that this idea that DF promotes that the IQ "at rest" ie when you're just looking at a static scene is the true measure of a game's visuals has taken hold across the industry more generally. Now, to me, that's one of the stupidest ideas I've ever heard. Not least because photo mode already exists for people who want that and that solves any IQ problems anyway. But perhaps that's just me. Maybe people genuinely do enjoy graphics like that: moving from one static image to another and just staring at it for a minute. I don't know. Seems bizarre to me.

If otoh you enjoy graphics while traversing the world and panning the camera etc, taking it all in, like I do, then FSR2 is basically just shit.

I agree to some extend but Olvier (or Alex?) explained their reasoning in one of the videos:

- typically DRS drops res when moving the camera, the whole idea was about not noticing it in motion that much
- LCD screens (OLEDs too to a lesser extend) will blur moving image anyway
- Most games have some forms of camera and/or object motion blur.
- people notice most issues with IQ when camera is not moving (or moving very slowly)

I can't find the video right now. I personally hate aliasing present with slow camera movements the most.

 

[Jam Dingo]

Well firstly there's a great deal of difference between the entire screen becoming a fizzing mess and a blurred and less clear image. One is hard to notice and the other is impossible to ignore.

Also it doesn't really get to the core of the issue. Aliasing and all these problems occur when the image is moving AT ALL. It's NOT just panning the camera. It's the slightest movement of any kind. Just walking forward in a straight line is enough to turn a clean edge into a flickering stair stepped one that looks ugly as sin. Image quality issues, except for very occasional flickering of very fine lines etc, are practically nonexistent in still images. Therefore they're a problem of dynamic scenes. And therefore assessing IQ in terms of static images is completely moronic. IMHO.

 

[Bojji]

Well firstly there's a great deal of difference between the entire screen becoming a fizzing mess and a blurred and less clear image. One is hard to notice and the other is impossible to ignore.

Also it doesn't really get to the core of the issue. Aliasing and all these problems occur when the image is moving AT ALL. It's NOT just panning the camera. It's the slightest movement of any kind. Just walking forward in a straight line is enough to turn a clean edge into a flickering stair stepped one that looks ugly as sin. Image quality issues, except for very occasional flickering of very fine lines etc, are practically nonexistent in still images. Therefore they're a problem of dynamic scenes. And therefore assessing IQ in terms of static images is completely moronic. IMHO.

In games you rarely see completely static camera or environments even when not moving the camera at all. Characters breathing, camera swaying, movements in environment etc. Most aliasing and image quality defects are noticeable in this scenario (or for example slow walking in TPP games).

But with fast movement/heavy action players most likely won't notice resolution drops and aliasing (that much...).

 

[Jam Dingo]

In games you rarely see completely static camera or environments even when not moving the camera at all. Characters breathing, camera swaying, movements in environment etc. Most aliasing and image quality defects are noticeable in this scenario (or for example slow walking in TPP games).

But with fast movement/heavy action players most likely won't notice resolution drops and aliasing (that much...).

I just don't believe that's how most people enjoy graphics. I could be wrong but I'd be shocked if I was. I think even people who really love good graphics, like us, are simply not doing so by finding a nice scene, and stopping entirely and just looking at it for a significant amount of time like it's a photograph. And then moving or panning the camera and stopping again.

I certainly don't do that and I'd be amazed if anyone else does either. I'll be walking slowly and slowly panning the camera to try to take in the whole world as much as possible. That just seems the obvious way to try to capture these large environments. And, if you do that, the camera is very definitely not close enough to being "at rest" for any analysis of the image done "at rest" to be of any relevance whatsoever.

But like I've said, maybe that's just me?

 

[Bojji]

I just don't believe that's how most people enjoy graphics. I could be wrong but I'd be shocked if I was. I think even people who really love good graphics, like us, are simply not doing so by finding a nice scene, and stopping entirely and just looking at it for a significant amount of time like it's a photograph. And then moving or panning the camera and stopping again.

I certainly don't do that and I'd be amazed if anyone else does either. I'll be walking slowly and slowly panning the camera to try to take in the whole world as much as possible. That just seems the obvious way to try to capture these large environments. And, if you do that, the camera is very definitely not close enough to being "at rest" for any analysis of the image done "at rest" to be of any relevance whatsoever.

But like I've said, maybe that's just me?

Everyone plays differently for sure. In games with really good graphics I often stop the camera and look at textures, art, models etc, vistas etc.

In most games I swing the camera pretty heavily during gameplay. I mentioned why DF finds static scenes more important but personally motion clarity IS important to me and FSR2 completely sucks in this aspect (with disocclusion artifacts). PSSR1 is stable in motion (AA) but often produces many weird artifacts on foliage/AO.

 

[Jam Dingo]

Everyone plays differently for sure. In games with really good graphics I often stop the camera and look at textures, art, models etc, vistas etc.

In most games I swing the camera pretty heavily during gameplay. I mentioned why DF finds static scenes more important but personally motion clarity IS important to me and FSR2 completely sucks in this aspect (with disocclusion artifacts). PSSR1 is stable in motion (AA) but often produces many weird artifacts on foliage/AO.

Yeah all I can I really say is that for how I personally play games, FSR2 is shit and PSSR is great. And, to push back slightly - for close examination of a static scene, which I do sometimes enjoy... isn't that what photo modes are for? And obviously superior for?

The DF idea that the PRIORITY should be image quality at rest just seems mental. But each to his own.

 

[Luipadre]

I decided to reinstall AC shadows again. After i finished the game at launch i uninstalled. Now im doing the "free" DLC and goddamn... game looks absolutely gorgeous still and lots of the DLSS4 problems are gone. Fog can still look weird until it clears out after a few seconds, but most of the ghosting is gone now.

 

[Gonzito]

I decided to reinstall AC shadows again. After i finished the game at launch i uninstalled. Now im doing the "free" DLC and goddamn... game looks absolutely gorgeous still and lots of the DLSS4 problems are gone. Fog can still look weird until it clears out after a few seconds, but most of the ghosting is gone now.

Black Flag is going to look amazing in that engine although I am scared that they will butcher the cutscenes and facial animations

 

[SlimySnake]

I decided to reinstall AC shadows again. After i finished the game at launch i uninstalled. Now im doing the "free" DLC and goddamn... game looks absolutely gorgeous still and lots of the DLSS4 problems are gone. Fog can still look weird until it clears out after a few seconds, but most of the ghosting is gone now.

What do we think? Has Cyberpunk Path Tracing been topped on PC as the best looking game this gen?

Different style visuals, but I am curious where people rank Cyberpunk on PC nowadays. To me, Avatar, AC Shadows, Wukong, Hellblade 2 are all up there with Cyberpunk PT.

 

[GymWolf]

To me even forbidden west is superior (especially on pc) but i never had the highest opinion about cyberpunk to begin with.

 

[Alex11]

What do we think? Has Cyberpunk Path Tracing been topped on PC as the best looking game this gen?

Different style visuals, but I am curious where people rank Cyberpunk on PC nowadays. To me, Avatar, AC Shadows, Wukong, Hellblade 2 are all up there with Cyberpunk PT.

I drool every time for Cyberpunk, but I think overall Shadows has it beat. CP suffers a lot with draw distance and is a bit less polished, especially those horrible cardboard cars from a distance and terrain just disappearing.

Though I still think that the highs are a bit higher in CP, the lighting is blowing my mind every time I play it, you can take a screen to a boring room with just a chair and a rug and it looks amazing.
Between these all, IMO Hellblade 2,- however people see it, tech, walking simulator, whatever, don't care - is above all.

But again, you have to see all these games for what they are visually and let your personal feelings towards the devs, genre, art style at the door.

 

[Pharaoh 117]

To me even forbidden west is superior (especially on pc) but i never had the highest opinion about cyberpunk to begin with.

Same here. Other than lighting the rest of the game is firmly in last gen territory.

 

[analog_future]

What do we think? Has Cyberpunk Path Tracing been topped on PC as the best looking game this gen?

Different style visuals, but I am curious where people rank Cyberpunk on PC nowadays. To me, Avatar, AC Shadows, Wukong, Hellblade 2 are all up there with Cyberpunk PT.

Cyberpunk has been long surpassed by many games IMO. Too inconsistent of a presentation, even with PT.

 

[Critical Hit]

 

[SlimySnake]

Cyberpunk has been long surpassed by many games IMO. Too inconsistent of a presentation, even with PT.

I agree its inconsistent yes, but like Alex said, the highs are so high. when you get a chance, just roam around at night and hope it rains. everything is reflective and its like those fake GTA5 demos from last gen, only better.

I drool every time for Cyberpunk, but I think overall Shadows has it beat. CP suffers a lot with draw distance and is a bit less polished, especially those horrible cardboard cars from a distance and terrain just disappearing.

Though I still think that the highs are a bit higher in CP, the lighting is blowing my mind every time I play it, you can take a screen to a boring room with just a chair and a rug and it looks amazing.
Between these all, IMO Hellblade 2,- however people see it, tech, walking simulator, whatever, don't care - is above all.

But again, you have to see all these games for what they are visually and let your personal feelings towards the devs, genre, art style at the door.

yeah, hellblade 2 is just insane. it literally looks like a movie at times and a true showcase for what UE5 is capable of.

 

[Luipadre]

What do we think? Has Cyberpunk Path Tracing been topped on PC as the best looking game this gen?

Different style visuals, but I am curious where people rank Cyberpunk on PC nowadays. To me, Avatar, AC Shadows, Wukong, Hellblade 2 are all up there with Cyberpunk PT.

Dunno but AC shadows looks so fucking good in motion after the DLSS4 issues are mostly gone. Cant stop taking pictures

 

[CowboyLou]

AC Shadows has absolutely gorgeous fidelity overall but the scene composition and the general effect of the overall image still leaves a lot to be desired. Despite all the advances it still feels like a traditional Ubisoft game in how the landscapes don't fully come together into something that feels "real" to me. Truncated sightlines everywhere, exaggerated terrain, etc. Ghost of Yotei is an embarrassment in many ways but at its best it presents more pleasing and less "game-y" landscapes than Shadows.

This is a topic that's tough to discuss but goes beyond sheer fidelity. Someone posted RDR2 above and that game still delivers more striking and "real"-looking landscapes that almost any game since. I think Massive still has a big lead over the other Ubi studios on this front since Avatar and SW Outlaws do a much better job selling a sense of scale with landscapes that don't look as game-y as Shadows. I hope Ubi Montreal and the other studios eventually catch up. KCD2 is another one where despite being less technically advanced than recent heavy hitters, its landscapes look REAL (especially the forests) thanks to sheer artistry (plus excellent color grading). I also play Arma Reforger which is an ugly, primitive game in most regards, but its landscapes can present as surprisingly realistic at times. Death Stranding also nails this.

That first Shadows screenshot above looks incredible but the second, yeesh, those rocks still look terrible, like fake plastic landscaping rocks or something, but regardless it just doesn't come together as a "realistic" scene to my eyes. I remember the first time I got bothered about bad-looking rocks in a game, it was in Far Cry Primal. Which released the same year as Battlefield 1 and its amazing material work and rock formations. Frostbite was ahead of the curve with presenting convincing natural-looking scenes. What will the next big releases be from the core Ubisoft studios, Far Cry and Ghost Recon? I hope they eventually nail this issue but it's something that's plagued most of their games since they settled on their current formula with Far Cry 3. GR Wildlands was kind of an exception but that game really focused on scale at the expense of detail (and I definitely appreciated it).

Editing just to say that I'm not advocating for abandoning distinct art styles, and I definitely don't want everything to aim for photorealism. I just want more attention paid to the general landscape composition of these giant game worlds. The level of fidelity we have now practically demands it. It's weird seeing AC Shadows fidelity over a map that really isn't that different from the open world games of 10+ years ago.

 

[SlimySnake]

they did an excellent job with vistas and draw distance. The framing when galloping is really good. I wish other games pulled the camera back a bit but with most games struggling with draw distance nowadays, i understand its more expensive on the GPU and why pulling back the camera might not be feasible with all the tech other games are pushing. Maybe when nanite foliage becomes a reality, it will become more common.

I am definitely curious to try the game, but I just detest the last gen lighting and animations. the animations were dated in 2018 when it debuted alongside TLOU2, and its a shame that 7 years later, they failed to add motion matching or improve their canned animations. AC shadows doesnt get enough credit for its slick animations despite them not using motion matching. Sucker Punch didnt even need to switch to motion matching, just better mocap animations even if canned wouldve sufficed.

its interesting that the founder of the studio was forced out and replaced with two guys. i wonder if sony is unhappy with the sales or the DLC look and feel of the game. But its safe to assume that if the game was a success, the studio head would still be there. Sony did give them five plus years, and no cross gen mandate so it's understandable they too might be upset at how samey the game feels. Both in terms of presentation and gameplay.

 

[SlimySnake]

AC Shadows has absolutely gorgeous fidelity overall but the scene composition and the general effect of the overall image still leaves a lot to be desired. Despite all the advances it still feels like a traditional Ubisoft game in how the landscapes don't fully come together into something that feels "real" to me. Truncated sightlines everywhere, exaggerated terrain, etc. Ghost of Yotei is an embarrassment in many ways but at its best it presents more pleasing and less "game-y" landscapes than Shadows.

This is a topic that's tough to discuss but goes beyond sheer fidelity. Someone posted RDR2 above and that game still delivers more striking and "real"-looking landscapes that almost any game since. I think Massive still has a big lead over the other Ubi studios on this front since Avatar and SW Outlaws do a much better job selling a sense of scale with landscapes that don't look as game-y as Shadows. I hope Ubi Montreal and the other studios eventually catch up. KCD2 is another one where despite being less technically advanced than recent heavy hitters, its landscapes look REAL (especially the forests) thanks to sheer artistry (plus excellent color grading). I also play Arma Reforger which is an ugly, primitive game in most regards, but its landscapes can present as surprisingly realistic at times. Death Stranding also nails this.

That first Shadows screenshot above looks incredible but the second, yeesh, those rocks still look terrible, like fake plastic landscaping rocks or something, but regardless it just doesn't come together as a "realistic" scene to my eyes. I remember the first time I got bothered about bad-looking rocks in a game, it was in Far Cry Primal. Which released the same year as Battlefield 1 and its amazing material work and rock formations. Frostbite was ahead of the curve with presenting convincing natural-looking scenes. What will the next big releases be from the core Ubisoft studios, Far Cry and Ghost Recon? I hope they eventually nail this issue but it's something that's plagued most of their games since they settled on their current formula with Far Cry 3. GR Wildlands was kind of an exception but that game really focused on scale at the expense of detail (and I definitely appreciated it).

Editing just to say that I'm not advocating for abandoning distinct art styles, and I definitely don't want everything to aim for photorealism. I just want more attention paid to the general landscape composition of these giant game worlds. The level of fidelity we have now practically demands it. It's weird seeing AC Shadows fidelity over a map that really isn't that different from the open world games of 10+ years ago.

I think it's a design choice to not have those sprawling vistas like in Ghosts or RDR2. They are still there if you explore enough, but i feel like they designed the game world to be dense, full of hills (that i do agree hide sightlines) and focused more on pushing detail up close and mid distance. I feel like this screenshot kinda encapsulates that design philosophy. I dont think its an engine issue since AC Origins and Unity were mostly very wide open areas that didnt feel as closed off as Shadows does.

I think it does a far better job than Avatar and Outlaws in rendering those vistas. Avatar especially breaks down when you get on a flying mount and start traversing the second and third areas. It's like the artists just gave up and decided against making the game look nice from above. Thats not the case with AC shadows which looks amazing even if you get on top of a castle or mountain and synchronize a viewpoint. I dont know, i just didnt feel the general composition of the world was lacking. Avatar's third area yes. But while Ghosts definitely has better scene composition and art direction when it comes to rendering those massive vistas, AC shadows has its own strengths in rendering these beautiful lush jungles, temples and cities where the art direction goes toe to toe with RDR2, Ghosts 2, and HFW.

Far Cry 7 is being built on snowdrop, they dropped their own Dunia engine. And that is probably next. Black Flags is built on this version of Anvil, but its mostly a collection of small islands.

 

[CowboyLou]

I think it's a design choice to not have those sprawling vistas like in Ghosts or RDR2. They are still there if you explore enough, but i feel like they designed the game world to be dense, full of hills (that i do agree hide sightlines) and focused more on pushing detail up close and mid distance. I feel like this screenshot kinda encapsulates that design philosophy. I dont think its an engine issue since AC Origins and Unity were mostly very wide open areas that didnt feel as closed off as Shadows does.

I think it does a far better job than Avatar and Outlaws in rendering those vistas. Avatar especially breaks down when you get on a flying mount and start traversing the second and third areas. It's like the artists just gave up and decided against making the game look nice from above. Thats not the case with AC shadows which looks amazing even if you get on top of a castle or mountain and synchronize a viewpoint. I dont know, i just didnt feel the general composition of the world was lacking. Avatar's third area yes. But while Ghosts definitely has better scene composition and art direction when it comes to rendering those massive vistas, AC shadows has its own strengths in rendering these beautiful lush jungles, temples and cities where the art direction goes toe to toe with RDR2, Ghosts 2, and HFW.

Far Cry 7 is being built on snowdrop, they dropped their own Dunia engine. And that is probably next. Black Flags is built on this version of Anvil, but its mostly a collection of small islands.

Shadows usually creates a really pleasing and coherent image that does a good job drawing your eye to the fantastic near/mid detail while not skimping too much on distance. I think my hangups concern the terrain itself at various scales. It still feels like the generic rolling hills/valleys I've been seeing for well over a decade. It's conducive to Ubi's typical gameplay loop which is itself well beyond long in the tooth. I shelved Avatar in the second area (need to get back to it) and while it breaks down easier than Shadows from a fidelity and distant detail perspective, I still vastly prefer its landscape variety and the way the world is put together.

It's a hard topic to put into words though, because it's not just about huge vistas and macro scale, but also how low level detail helps scenes resolve at a micro level. I'm an earth scientist by training so maybe a lot of this stuff sticks out to me more than it should, and really I don't want to sound too nitpicky. but then again games like RDR2 and KCD show us what can be done. When I look at those games I feel like the artists actually studied real landscapes, maybe even how terrain features form, etc. Rivers and lakes and cliffs and hills and boulders that feel deliberate and hand-placed and for whatever reason(s) feel more real, more immersive to me than the procgen rolling hills sensation I get from loading up most Ubisoft games (and imitators, like Horizon).

I'm looking forward to Far Cry 7 on Snowdrop but I hope the game itself is a lot better than 5 and 6 were. Although I'd say 6 had a much improved map compared to previous entries, despite still being a last-gen title.

 

[Gonzito]

This channel is a joke

 

[SlimySnake]

NX Gamer is out with his own top ten. He picked Indy last year. This year? Death Stranding 2.

I feel like these guys are all taking crazy pills. AC Shadows is at 4 behind Ghosts of Yotei and Doom.

 

[CowboyLou]

People really like character faces and animations. KojiPro being top-tier in that area counts for a lot. AC Shadows being kind of shitty in that regard (the usual terrible Ubisoft NPCs etc.) probably made a lot of people less charitable to all the things Shadows did right.

 

[nemiroff]

NX Gamer is out with his own top ten. He picked Indy last year. This year? Death Stranding 2.

I feel like these guys are all taking crazy pills. AC Shadows is at 4 behind Ghosts of Yotei and Doom.

Yeah... None of these guys are infallible even though they know how to speak tech. But that's ok, we all live in a heavily subjective world I guess.

People really like character faces and animations. KojiPro being top-tier in that area counts for a lot. AC Shadows being kind of terrible in that regard (the usual terrible Ubisoft NPCs etc.) probably made a lot of people less charitable to all the things Shadows did right.

Thats actually a fair point.

 

[SlimySnake]

People really like character faces and animations. KojiPro being top-tier in that area counts for a lot. AC Shadows being kind of terrible in that regard (the usual terrible Ubisoft NPCs etc.) probably made a lot of people less charitable to all the things Shadows did right.

thats what i figured but if you watch the video, you will see him vax lyrical about the level of detail, lighting, rock textures and other visuals during gameplay.

 

[CowboyLou]

Didn't watch but if someone found DS2 the more visually pleasing game, more power to them (I did). But there's no need to glaze every individual element over the competition, if that what he actually does. It's perfectly fine to prefer the less graphically advanced game over the more advanced one (I often do), whether it's down to the ever-subjective "art style", mood, atmosphere, content, whatever. But if these guys are talking graphical fidelity then they should talk about graphical fidelity.

I did watch DF's vid and didn't have too much issue with it. Obviously Linneman loves to fill his year-end lists with hipster choices but at least he can go through his reasoning semi-eloquently even if we want to disagree with his takes or his premise of grading on a curve. I'm more positive on Doom's visuals than a lot of people here, and felt it was a valid pick for #1 in a year of slim pickings. I had more mixed feelings on Indy.

 

[Bojji]

Fuck, at lest top 3 should be reserved for best tech in graphics, not "I like art" type od choices (that can be in the bottom top 10 if they want). DS2 and Yotei don's deserve to be in the top 3.

 

[SlimySnake]

Fuck, at lest top 3 should be reserved for best tech in graphics, not "I like art" type od choices (that can be in the bottom top 10 if they want). DS2 and Yotei don's deserve to be in the top 3.

I dont mind it if someone takes into account cutscenes, animations especially facial animations, and art direction when evaluating graphics. To me RDR2 isnt just great because it did one thing right, it came together so well because so many different visual elements all combined to make it a stunning visual masterpiece. Same goes for TLOU2 which was so far ahead of the pack in cutscenes and animations that its minor visual flaws didnt quite detract from the overall presentation. But thats the difference between DS2 and TLOU. The visual flaws do detract from the overall presentation. 90% of TLOU2 is set outdoors where it looks magnificent to this day. 99% of DS2 is set outdoors where it looks dated filled with low quality assets. TLOU2 was also pushing some insane animations, NPC reactions, and setpieces which DS2 just doesnt. So no, i dont think it all comes together quite like TLOU2 did back in the day despite the extraordinary cutscenes and facial animations.

I feel like NX gamer and John are still stuck in that PS4 era where Sony studios were in a league of their own when it came to cutscenes and setpieces while keeping up with the lighting and level of detail of their competition. I dont think thats true anymore. They are lagging behind in lighting and level of detail for the first time in two generations, and that gap is so wide, no amount of cutscene mastery can close it. Include them in the top ten sure, but top 3 aint it.

At least he included KCD2 and BF6, and made fun of DF including Metroid Prime. So he's not a total lost cause.

 

[Jam Dingo]

I haven't played either game yet but from YT videos I can understand someone finding Ghost of Yotei more attractive than AC Shadows.

Shadows is probably the most technically advanced game I've ever seen (I don't count Hellblade 2), but Yotei wows me almost every time I see it. Like someone said above, the design of the world and the sightlines just make it LOOK next gen in an instantly recognisable way like almost no other game I've seen. Shadows looks like a PS4 game with insanely detailed assets and brilliant lighting. It's objectively gorgeous on any close examination, but it doesn't necessarily always "wow" me like Yotei does.

From what I've seen Yotei really does deserve very high praise for its graphics, especially considering SP aren't really top tier graphics wizards. The one I'm less convinced about is DS2, which imo really is a bit disappointing. It looks a lot better than the first game, but it's not a generational upgrade. And it's nowhere near the best of the generation. At least from what I've played so far.

 

[SlimySnake]

Marathon seems to have gotten a massive visual upgrade. Looks really good imo.

Ignore the Jackfrags ramblings and enjoy the visuals in the first few minutes. I really like the lighting, volumetric effects, the GI light bounces in the interiors, weather effects, and the overall art design is way more appealing than it was just a few months ago at the reveal. Very clean presentation too.

 

[CowboyLou]

Marathon won't be pushing any cutting-edge features but in terms of artistic direction/style I haven't been this hyped for a game since... well, maybe ever. Upgraded version of Destiny's tech, I assume. Always found Destiny ugly and incoherent from the start. Something Bungie stumbled their way into and have kind of fumbled along for over a decade now. Glad their artists are have finally gotten the chance to work on something else.

 

[Bojji]

I haven't played either game yet but from YT videos I can understand someone finding Ghost of Yotei more attractive than AC Shadows.

Shadows is probably the most technically advanced game I've ever seen (I don't count Hellblade 2), but Yotei wows me almost every time I see it. Like someone said above, the design of the world and the sightlines just make it LOOK next gen in an instantly recognisable way like almost no other game I've seen. Shadows looks like a PS4 game with insanely detailed assets and brilliant lighting. It's objectively gorgeous on any close examination, but it doesn't necessarily always "wow" me like Yotei does.

From what I've seen Yotei really does deserve very high praise for its graphics, especially considering SP aren't really top tier graphics wizards. The one I'm less convinced about is DS2, which imo really is a bit disappointing. It looks a lot better than the first game, but it's not a generational upgrade. And it's nowhere near the best of the generation. At least from what I've played so far.

Personally I don't find Yotei impressive at all. Game is small, uncomplicated, no big towns, large numbers of npcs etc. Textures are mediocre, lighting is PS4 quality + light pass of RTGI, character models are ok (better than in Shadows) but not close to the best looking games. Art is subjective.

I think what happened to Yotei was limited budget, Sony was burning cash in GaaS fails during the last few years. I mean looking at this...

RTGI isn't helping much when core visual features are lacking.

 

[CowboyLou]

Helldivers 2 probably covered the costs of Sony's canceled titles (many of which were only in pre-pro or early development) and then some. I think it's largely a question of dev ambition and skill. The fruits of Californian studio culture.

 

[Bojji]

Helldivers 2 probably covered the costs of Sony's canceled titles (many of which were only in pre-pro or early development) and then some. I think it's largely a question of dev ambition and skill. The fruits of Californian studio culture.

I don't know the numbers HD2 generate but Concord alone was ~400 million. And they cancelled multiple games that some studios were making for years, that couldn't be cheap...

And we have another 2 flops on horizon...

 

[Senua]

NX Gamer is out with his own top ten. He picked Indy last year. This year? Death Stranding 2.

I feel like these guys are all taking crazy pills. AC Shadows is at 4 behind Ghosts of Yotei and Doom.

It's NXgamer. He likes PlayStation, a lot. But yea people are definitely stuck in the PS4 mindset when Sony punched above their weight, I guess it's hard to admit the truth when you have fanboy blinders on.

 

[CowboyLou]

I don't believe Concord was $400 million for a second.

 

[SlimySnake]

Helldivers 2 probably covered the costs of Sony's canceled titles (many of which were only in pre-pro or early development) and then some. I think it's largely a question of dev ambition and skill. The fruits of Californian studio culture.

Marathon, helldivers, arc raiders and concord are all $40 titles. Even if they sell millions, they are only making half of what a $70 game would bring in. Just a silly business model imo.

Bf6 shows that there is still a market for traditional mp games. Had Sony stuck with socom, mag, Warhawk, resistance, killzone, instead of giving billions to untested devs who knows they might have had a hit or two without even trying.

 

[Bojji]

I don't believe Concord was $400 million for a second.

Hmmm...

 

[CowboyLou]

Marathon, helldivers, arc raiders and concord are all $40 titles. Even if they sell millions, they are only making half of what a $70 game would bring in. Just a silly business model imo.

Bf6 shows that there is still a market for traditional mp games. Had Sony stuck with socom, mag, Warhawk, resistance, killzone, instead of giving billions to untested devs who knows they might have had a hit or two without even trying.

Over half of Helldivers 2's revenue is from microtransactions.

 

[SlimySnake]

Personally I don't find Yotei impressive at all. Game is small, uncomplicated, no big towns, large numbers of npcs etc. Textures are mediocre, lighting is PS4 quality + light pass of RTGI, character models are ok (better than in Shadows) but not close to the best looking games. Art is subjective.

I think what happened to Yotei was limited budget, Sony was burning cash in GaaS fails during the last few years. I mean looking at this...

RTGI isn't helping much when core visual features are lacking.

lol the footage in nx gamer's video made me want to impulse buy the game but holy shit. Thank you for saving me $70.

Still waiting for a discount.

 

[Bojji]

lol the footage in nx gamer's video made me want to impulse buy the game but holy shit. Thank you for saving me $70.

Still waiting for a discount.

Game looks nice when the weather clears up, but for some reason what was rare when I played:

 

[CowboyLou]

I just don't buy that the live-service push from Sony had much effect on the fidelity of their single-player output this gen. We had numerous cross-gen titles to start with and statements like the God of War devs saying something to the effect of not wanting PS4 owners to feel like they were missing out (someone correct me if I'm misremembering). Their big single-player studios are still massive with massive headcounts, and we've seen more impressive games this gen from smaller teams and smaller timelines. As for Yotei I always felt Sucker Punch was a second-rate studio, GoT felt pretty budget even back in 2019 compared to its peers.