Amish Prince
Member
Can't wait for this fucking game. The wait is killing me. Give me a demo ITSUNOOOO
Hideaki Itsuno: Dragon's Dogma 2 will release with an uncapped framerate!
Shake Your Rump
Banned
PS5 is currently limited to 48-120hz with VRR.
I'm guessing this game is a hint that PS5 pro is on the way.
Borowski_1
Member
Well, Rise of the Ronin it is
Bernardougf
Member
Ps5 pro it is
DonkeyPunchJr
World’s Biggest Weeb
60? Bro time to upgrade your monitor and/or GPU
NightmareFarm
Member
I'd unironically take uncapped 30-60 that varies wildly than locked 30. Still far from ideal.
Feel Like I'm On 42
Member
The question I want to know is WHY couldn't they get this running at a locked 60 fps to begin with?? You know, the old 4k/30 and 1440p/60 routine (lower res and settings for Performance mode)?
SlimeGooGoo
Banned
Physics + collision calculations, me thinks
Plus, lots of things on screen like enemies, explosions, particles, etc.
Bojji
Member
Yeah, they don't care.
Most PS5 games are forced into 60hz mode and with that tiny 48-60hz windows VRR usually can't do shit. Developers don't really care and make everyone suffer if their game doesn't have locked frame rate without any option to have better experience with modern tv. EQUALITY.
It can but only depends on how much Capcom devs care about players.
Last edited:
coffinbirth
Member
Welp, looks like I won't be touching it for a minute then...
Anchovie123
Member
This could either be good news or bad news.
Game needs to run above 48fps for VRR to work correctly. However as some studios have shown a advanced custom LFC solution can be implemented to allow lower framerates to work with VRR.
However since this is Capcom, i doubt they've figured this out and im pretty sure none of their other games support this. So thats a RIP.
Game needs to run above 48fps for VRR to work correctly. However as some studios have shown a advanced custom LFC solution can be implemented to allow lower framerates to work with VRR.
However since this is Capcom, i doubt they've figured this out and im pretty sure none of their other games support this. So thats a RIP.
Link? Not as far as I know. It's a fucking incredible upgrade.
My experience is that 30 - 40 fps in vrr feels as smooth as a locked 60 without vrr. If not smoother, eliminating frame pacing does so much.
Last edited:
Mister Wolf
Member
VRR also wont do anything about massive instant drops in framerate.
S0ULZB0URNE
Member
Last edited:
Mister Wolf
Member
This game aint shit. No way my 4090/5800X3D combo doesn't tear through it.
I don't think we will get much more.
S0ULZB0URNE
Member
You test and tell.
Bojji
Member
If you are talking about PS5 then it's just placebo effect, VRR doesn't do anything to PS5 games operating in frame rates you described when games are outputting 60hz.
Hudo
Member
Just buy a PC powerful enough so that there aren't any jumps, man.
S0ULZB0URNE
Member
Impossible as both of the fps you mentioned are out of the PS5's VRR range.
Zuzu
Gold Member
This will be ok most likely on my Series X and LG C1 since the VRR range between the two goes down to 20fps or possibly even lower. Still if it's sub 40fps a lot of the time that's not going to be great regardless of VRR. Motion clarity will be pretty bad at sub-40fps. This might not be good for people buying on PS5 however due to the limited VRR range. Not sure if I'll even buy it though tbh.
Gandih42
Member
I much prefer stable 60 FPS over improved visual fidelity /30 FPS graphics modes, but as long as the game still plays good at a lower framerate I'm not that bothered. I certainly don't get people who'd skip a good game entirely if there's no 60 FPS. All that being said, hopefully the game plays good both at 30 and unlocked framerates (and is good). I'm just a filthy console peasant though, so I don't have the standards of all you PC master race people 
I played through FFXVI on both the highly fluctuation performance mode and graphics mode, and both felt fine to me. In that case, I think the 30 FPS option worked best due to its stability, even though I didn't notice a massive visual upgrade. Also had no problems with Elden Ring on PS5 even though the 60 FPS wasn't rock solid (although maybe that was worse at launch?).
I played through FFXVI on both the highly fluctuation performance mode and graphics mode, and both felt fine to me. In that case, I think the 30 FPS option worked best due to its stability, even though I didn't notice a massive visual upgrade. Also had no problems with Elden Ring on PS5 even though the 60 FPS wasn't rock solid (although maybe that was worse at launch?).
FoxMcChief
Gold Member
PS5 Pro will still be only 30fps. It'll just have a more consistent locked 4k resolution.
Zathalus
Member
That is without DLSS though. Since the game comes with DLSS3 getting far higher FPS on a 4090 shouldn't be a problem. 60FPS+ with DLSS Quality on a 4090 should be possible, 100+ with frame generation.
I don't think we will get much more.
Mister Wolf
Member
When DF breaks this game down we will see that the Ultra PC settings will be diminishing returns and not worth maxing out. Especially things like shadows.
Zathalus
Member
Probably, I think it might include the RT features as well.
Mister Wolf
Member
Raytraced Shadows and Ambient Occlusion are never worth it. With the setting this game has RT Reflections aren't worth it neither.
Senua
Member
I have one, I'm talking about consoles
Jinzo Prime
Gold Member
It's silly that consoles don't have that capability built in, but Steamdeck somehow does.
S0ULZB0URNE
Member
So with a 4090 we can get fake resolution,fake fps with added input lag.
It needs to natively do the above(minus the input lag) with a 4090.
Last edited:
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
To an extent, yes. VRR owners will have a better experience with this.
Hudo
Member
Don't worry, everything will be fixed with PS5 Pro. Just buy one, bro. You certainly don't want to belong to the vanilla PS5 peasantry.
Senua
Member
Zathalus
Member
The 'native' argument is stupid, DLSS quality is comparable to native 4k and I doubt the consoles would be anything near a native resolution anyway. If native truly matters that much just drop the settings down to console equivalent and enjoy that. I'd rather take DLSS + better performance over native.
Last edited:
Clear
CliffyB's Cock Holster
Its because of the extreme cpu/gpu load variances during gameplay. The only way it could be hard-capped is to either (1) ensure the worst cases aren't sustained, which would require a re-design, or (2) lock permanently to the worst-case load scenario which would mean the game would have to look/perform worse all the time, even when load isn't severe.
Most games don't offer the same range of options and behaviours as DD for this very reason. Everything that happens has a cost, so games are generally designed with this in mind by ensuring that only x thing can happen at y location with z entities involved.
Optimization has its limits, you can make things more efficient but you cannot completely mitigate cost. The only way to do this is to ensure that worst-case scenarios happen infrequently/momentarily and even then within strict paramaters on resources. It requires constraints on the in-game action.
S0ULZB0URNE
Member
Native is superior saying otherwise is you lying to yourself and others.
Before you get it twisted I do very much like the ability to fake the resolutions and add fake fps that's why I went with the 4090.
It shouldn't need tricks to run these games is my point.
Who mentioned consoles?
You do often with these discussions lmao.
Mister Wolf
Member
Blame Capcom why this game needs that stuff. Nothing about this game looks impressive from a technical standpoint. Just like there is no excuse for act 3 in Baldur's Gate 3 to run as poorly as it does. In both cases it's the failings of their in house engine.
Last edited:
Bojji
Member
Native is superior if TAA implementation is good, if it's not then DLSS quality can look better.
Zathalus
Member
DLSS quality at 4k has been compared to native by many tech outlets over quite a large variety of games, all the conclusions have agreed while that DLSS quality is not necessarily better in every metric the overall image quality is comparable.
As for 'tricks' or the console comparison I mentioned that as the two are directly related. The consoles are roughly ~2080 in power while the 4090 is only 3-3.5x as powerful in rasterization, so if the consoles/2080 are doing 1080p (or higher interlaced as RE engine games often do) and 30fps, expecting the 4090 to do two times the framerate and four times the resolution with higher settings is silly. If the consoles were doing native 4k at 30 fps then you would indeed have a point about the 4090 not doing native 4k at 60 fps.
S0ULZB0URNE
Member
I blame all the devs who use DLSS as a crutch instead of pulling more power out of these cards.
I don't agree