Support NeoGAF

[YeulEmeralda]

Nobody here on neogaf ever reads the Steam hardware surveys.

Spoiler: 4090 owners are a statistical anomaly.

 

[Seider]

Lets see how this game runs on Ps5 Pro.

 

[Dorfdad]

So your saying my 600.00 ps5 pro will play this better than 90% of the pc masterrace gamers than??

I’m getting it on ps5 even though my 4090 can handle it

 

[Gaiff]

Lets just say it how it is.

Console players are not behind in power or games when it comes to the overall market.
And this is why games are mostly made with consoles in mind therefor without consoles there would be a lot less AAA games out there.

The days of pc superiority are over. Every game runs on every hardware just with different visual settings.
I remember the good old ps2 days where splinter cell was chopped into several pieces or return to wolfenstein levels were missing or just very different to make it work on the hardware.

Or far cry on the xbox was a totally different game than on pc.

A game drops to 720p on PS5, it has absolutely shit IQ and still runs like ass even with this low resolution, dropping to the 30s anyway. Your conclusion is that "the days of PC superiority are over"? Strange lol.

 

[proandrad]

Even people with 4090s use DLSS, what point are they trying to make showing benchmarks without any upscaling. Upscaling is the norm in triple AAA games for consoles and pc whether you like it or not. Showing native resolution performance is pointless for modern games.

 

[poppabk]

So your saying my 600.00 ps5 pro will play this better than 90% of the pc masterrace gamers than??

I’m getting it on ps5 even though my 4090 can handle it

The pro got a $100 price cut before it even launched? Even Concord managed to launch at full price.

 

[lachesis]

Looks like it's just dev laziness/incompetence? Why fault the users?

 

[kevboard]

A game drops to 720p on PS5, it has absolutely shit IQ and still runs like ass even with this low resolution, dropping to the 30s anyway. Your conclusion is that "the days of PC superiority are over"? Strange lol.

it is indeed a weird conclusion to get to.

that down there is the game running on a mid range GPU btw. using dynamic resolution DLSS at a nearly locked 60fps on PS5's quality mode settings as laid out by Digital Foundry (aside from the ones where the PS5 uses a custom setting of course, where I instead used the middleground)

I should have turned off chromatic aberration and the lens effect as that distorts the image towards the edges a bit hard now looking at it in still images lol

I really wonder now how this compares to the PS5 version in performance mode and in quality mode. what I do know is that the performance mode on PS5 doesn't even try to reach 60fps outside of combat. it instead prioritises resolution which leads to a completely unstable framerate outside of combat, at a basically locked 720p and still somewhat unstable 60fps during combat.

 

[Crayon]

^^^ It's true you really do have to take the upscaling into account these days. 720p>1080p with fsr2 is not comparable to the same with dlss. Native 1080 is.

Counting the native resolution is becoming academic. When other hardware finally catches up to dlss, it'll be set in stone. There might even need to be some more useful metric to compare image quality.

 

[Pasta la Vista]

The early parts of the game look very very good, even on PS5 (like the first 8-10 hours), After, the quality seems to drop and be very inconsistent through most of the game.

 

[SKYF@ll]

photo mode is not representative of the image quality during gameplay, especially during combat.

the moment you go into photo mode the game locks to 30fps and increases its dynamic resolution as high as it can.

These are screenshots during gameplay.
If FF16 has higher image quality on PS5 Pro, I'd like to play it again from the opening.

 

[kevboard]

it is indeed a weird conclusion to get to.

that down there is the game running on a mid range GPU btw. using dynamic resolution DLSS at a nearly locked 60fps on PS5's quality mode settings as laid out by Digital Foundry (aside from the ones where the PS5 uses a custom setting of course, where I instead used the middleground)

I should have turned off chromatic aberration and the lens effect as that distorts the image towards the edges a bit hard now looking at it in still images lol

I really wonder now how this compares to the PS5 version in performance mode and in quality mode. what I do know is that the performance mode on PS5 doesn't even try to reach 60fps outside of combat. it instead prioritises resolution which leads to a completely unstable framerate outside of combat, at a basically locked 720p and still somewhat unstable 60fps during combat.

oh what the hell,
here you go...

PS5 performance mode.
to note is that barely a single moment I captured you see below ran at 60fps.
Outside of combat the game is basically below 60fps 100% of the time, even the corridor shot.

while walking around the game constantly dropped below 48fps as well, which disadvantages VRR of courde and introduces stuttering galore.

generally the framerate outside of combat is basically between <48fps and ~52fps
during combat it is 52fps to 60fps

this scene here in the tutorial was 52fps for example.

either way, here are shots I tried to match to my quoted post:

(this last shot I couldn't match perfectly of course)

 

[kazuyamishima]

So much for the Master Race huh.

 

[Zathalus]

As DF pointed out the game is designed around using DRS due to the widely fluctuating GPU load. Just enabling that setting and the amount of people who can play it at 1080p output minimum jumps up significantly.

Throw in DLSS as well and problem solved for the far majority of players.

 

[Senua]

proud to be a console player.Cerny you the man.

Lets just say it how it is.

Console players are not behind in power or games when it comes to the overall market.
And this is why games are mostly made with consoles in mind therefor without consoles there would be a lot less AAA games out there.

The days of pc superiority are over. Every game runs on every hardware just with different visual settings.
I remember the good old ps2 days where splinter cell was chopped into several pieces or return to wolfenstein levels were missing or just very different to make it work on the hardware.

Or far cry on the xbox was a totally different game than on pc.

Similar posts occured when the Xbox One X/PS4 pro were launching. They were just as preposterous then. I don't know why you guys are so desperate for PC to fail to to be seen as lesser than console. If you don't care about PC then just...ignore it?

 

[digital_ghost]

Damn.

Thought my RTX 4060 PC would last longer than that.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

Meanwhile, 100% of PS5 players were able to run it at 1080p/30fps more than a year ago now

 

[MMaRsu]

So?

 

[Zathalus]

Damn.

Thought my RTX 4060 PC would last longer than that.

Just enable DLSS quality and DRS and you’ll have a locked 60fps experience with minimal resolution drops.

It will both perform and look better vs the PS5 version.

 

[Haint]

Bruh a drunk meth head could have a $20/hour job by the end of the day tomorrow. Every restaurant chain in town putting up 20 foot wider banners like a used car lot advertising $20/hour grunt wages and $110K manager wages. Literally drove by a Panda Express with one spanning the entire parking lot width a few hours ago. Anyone who wants a $600 GPU can afford one.

 

[buenoblue]

But you can use DLSS or FSR. Game is heavy for sure but like people have said it was low base res on PS5

 

[buenoblue]

Even people with 4090s use DLSS, what point are they trying to make showing benchmarks without any upscaling. Upscaling is the norm in triple AAA games for consoles and pc whether you like it or not. Showing native resolution performance is pointless for modern games.

Exactly. Native 4k image has much more aliasing than DLSS Quality.

 

[Vroadstar]

PCMR

PC MidRange Race.

nothing wrong but is true.

Actually surprised it. When you hear PCMR talking down console peasants, you would think 90% are using 4080's or 4090's, then find out only 6% are using 4070. I wonder what GPU most PCMR users are rocking then?

 

[ChorizoPicozo]

Actually surprised it. When you hear PCMR talking down console peasants, you would think 90% are using 4080's or 4090's, then find out only 6% are using 4070. I wonder what GPU most PCMR users are rocking then?

according to steam, 3060s. there is not a single 4090 in the top 30 or even more. I don't remember.

edit:I should've said 60s series Nvidia cards

 

[Stu_Hart]

They saved themselves the sheer boredom.

 

[Peroroncino]

Actually surprised it. When you hear PCMR talking down console peasants, you would think 90% are using 4080's or 4090's, then find out only 6% are using 4070. I wonder what GPU most PCMR users are rocking then?

It's always funny to see how disproportional these kind of stats are to the PCMR sperging.

 

[Braag]

I knew my 4090 would come in clutch.

Though I have no idea why this game is so heavy. It looks decent enough, but the areas are fairly small and not that much is going on in them, apart from the boss battles.
There are way better looking games out there that run much better.

 

[captainnapalm]

'Native' being the key issue here, Devs now account for image reconstruction methods. Console games will probably never run at native resolutions again.

 

[TheDarkPhantom]

BRB, going to build a $700 PC to get the Premium Experience™

 

[CrustyBritches]

I really wonder now how this compares to the PS5 version in performance mode and in quality mode. what I do know is that the performance mode on PS5 doesn't even try to reach 60fps outside of combat. it instead prioritises resolution which leads to a completely unstable framerate outside of combat, at a basically locked 720p and still somewhat unstable 60fps during combat.

Played it at launch on PS5 in performance mode so I have a decent idea of what it looks and plays like. Running a 4060Ti 16GB on my rig, playing on a 32" 1440p 165Hz monitor. Settings I tested were 1440p, Medium settings, High textures, AO on, and DLSS/FSR3. Using the FFXVI Fix mod from Nexus. Tested with and without DLSS/FSR3 FG.

I played the intro up through the flashback combat tutorial. Used FRAPS to get min/max/avg of the first flashback Eikon fight segment up until the campfire scene. It's a decently heavy scene.

1440p(DLSS 'Perf'), FG 'off' = 82fps avg, 101fps max, and 48fps min
1440p(DLSS 'Perf), FG 'on' = 105fps avg, 139fps max, and 65fps min
1440p(FSR3 'Balanced'), FG 'off' = 72fps avg, 95fps max, and 42fps min
1440p(FSR3 'Balanced'), FG 'on' = 100fps avg, 133fps max, and 68fps min

Side-by-Side comparison:

The improvement in image quality even at 1440p(DLSS 'Perf')/(FSR3 'Bal') with FG active is easily noticeable. Much smoother gameplay as well. The PS5 version has kind of a flat, washed out look in this scene.
---
Source images:

PS5('Perf'):

DLSS('Perf')+FG:

FSR3('Bal')+FG:

 

[The Cockatrice]

Square Enix doesn’t seem to have put too much effort into optimization

They never do. Its why it looks like absolute horse shit on PS5 as well if you play in performance mode.

 

[kazuyamishima]

They brag, they laugh but most players use a GPU inferior to the PS5.

The truly PC Mid Range Race

 

[Gamer_By_Proxy]

why you guys still talking about old games?

I don't even remember what mode I played it on way back when.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

why you guys still talking about old games?

I don't even remember what mode I played it on way back when.

I mean, you're right. I played the game more than a year ago, I barely remember anything about it now TBH

PC gamers are weird, they love playing games more than a year (sometimes many years!) after they come out on other platforms and complaining about the quality of the port compared to how it runs on consoles

I say this as someone who has a gaming PC with a 3090

 

[Calverz]

Kind of a misrepresentation of the reality of modern graphics tech on PC, but whatever.

Yea I can’t wait until the game runs 60fps on the pro using pssr and we have some people on here thinking it’s better than 90% of pc’s lol

 

[Sw0pDiller]

Just get a ps5 pro

 

[Cyberpunkd]

Coding is hard.

 

[Zathalus]

Actually surprised it. When you hear PCMR talking down console peasants, you would think 90% are using 4080's or 4090's, then find out only 6% are using 4070. I wonder what GPU most PCMR users are rocking then?

The most popular GPU is a 3060, which will give you a roughly similar experience to a PS5 in terms of graphics performance. But even that is only 5% of Steam users. If you set a baseline of PS5/XSX tier performance that is around 37% of Steam users.

I mean, you're right. I played the game more than a year ago, I barely remember anything about it now TBH

PC gamers are weird, they love playing games more than a year (sometimes many years!) after they come out on other platforms and complaining about the quality of the port compared to how it runs on consoles

I say this as someone who has a gaming PC with a 3090

What’s wrong with complaining about poor ports? Do you think nobody on consoles complain about poor performing games? FF16 runs quite badly on PS5 for example and plenty of people complained about the performance mode.

 

[Jigsaah]

I haven't tried it at 1080p, but with DLSS3 (no option for frame generation, so I don't know if it's active or not....I'm assuming not) I get 4k 70ish fps. I am not complaining. I have a 4090 and a 5800x

 

[MMaRsu]

Also LOL PCMR doesnt mean THE BEST SPECS available.

It means you have an amazingly huge choice of what to build

 

[Comandr]

it is indeed a weird conclusion to get to.

that down there is the game running on a mid range GPU btw. using dynamic resolution DLSS at a nearly locked 60fps on PS5's quality mode settings as laid out by Digital Foundry (aside from the ones where the PS5 uses a custom setting of course, where I instead used the middleground)

I should have turned off chromatic aberration and the lens effect as that distorts the image towards the edges a bit hard now looking at it in still images lol

I really wonder now how this compares to the PS5 version in performance mode and in quality mode. what I do know is that the performance mode on PS5 doesn't even try to reach 60fps outside of combat. it instead prioritises resolution which leads to a completely unstable framerate outside of combat, at a basically locked 720p and still somewhat unstable 60fps during combat.

This is ps5 quality mode equivalent? Because holy shit this scene looks much better on PS5.

oh what the hell,
here you go...

Texture resolution, volumetric clouds, foliage density, shadows, and geometric complexity are all vastly superior on PS5 in these shots.

Too bad there isn't a way to turn "fun" past mid.

 

[BlackTron]

No ff14
No ff15
No ff16
No ff7 remake anynof them.

Flinging 20 year old games like ff10 etc is not what we are talking about here.

Switch 2 is probably getting all of these games. Not 60FPS in FF16 of course.

 

[Comandr]

Switch 2 is probably getting all of these games. Not 60FPS in FF16 of course.

The whole topic of this thread is how 90% of PC owners can't run this game at 1080/60, and many people talking about how it ran poorly, often unable to hit 60 on PS5, the 209 watt TPD system it came out for. How much cutting down to you have to do to get this thing playable on 5-8 watts on a handheld? No fuckin' way.

 

[BlackTron]

The whole topic of this thread is how 90% of PC owners can't run this game at 1080/60, and many people talking about how it ran poorly, often unable to hit 60 on PS5, the 209 watt TPD system it came out for. How much cutting down to you have to do to get this thing playable on 5-8 watts on a handheld? No fuckin' way.

Witcher 3 came out for Switch 1 lol. They will put more effort when the install base calls for it.

 

[N30RYU]

 

[Heisenberg007]

"Just get a PC instead."

 

[Skifi28]

Square Enix doesn’t seem to have put too much effort into optimization.

It was an extremely GPU-heavy game on console so many of us have been "warning" that the PC version would be no different and would require decent hardware. I don't think it's a "lazy devs" situation, it seens to be in line with the PS5 version more or less. They'd have to go back to the drawining board and make everything from scratch again.

 

[TintoConCasera]

 

[Jakk]

To con the phrase.....

90% of PC gamers can't even run this game at 1080p@60fps.

Remember when they were saying that about the game running on PS5. Then that was an underpowered console.

Now lets hear the poor optimization and lazy devs talk....

Who is "they"? Nice generalization there. And yes, if a game like FF16 barely runs at 60 FPS average at 1080p, medium settings on a 4090, it is most definitely poorly optimized.

 

[Comandr]

Witcher 3 came out for Switch 1 lol. They will put more effort when the install base calls for it.

The Witcher 3 is a great example of why you shouldn't go that far.

Docked

• 720p max, 540p lowest
• 30fps with drops
• Settings lower than PC low, select animations missing
• 720p cutscenes, with compression artifacts
• Pop-in more noticeable than PS4 (cutscenes most problematic)
• Textures, sound, LODs (foliage) pared back/compressed
• Water rendering looks good
• NPC count is similar to PS4
• AO, light shafts, motion blur (can be toggled), AA
• Grass doesn’t animate

Handheld

• 540p max, 810×456 lowest
• 30fps with drops, more drops than docked

Sure there are miracle ports out there... But should you pay full price for a compromised experience?

Nintendo has made it clear that they don't want to compete with Microsoft and Sony. Fine. They're at their best when they stay in their lane anyway. But then consumers shouldn't be expected to pay full price for the gimped ass games. Frankly, this is a post Steam Deck world now, and it can play all of the games pictured with better performance, and you can still take it to the bathroom with you. Playing on the Switch is no longer the only option if you wanted to play these games anywhere but at home.

And who is they? Square Enix? They couldn't even be bothered to put the effort in on their target platform or the next one they wanted to squeeze money from. You think they're going to bend over backwards to cram FF16 into a platform that's 1/10th the power envelope?

What install base? Let's do math. The Witcher 3 sold 700,000 units on Switch. Out of a total of around 28 million across all platforms, that's about 2.5%. At the time of TW3's switch launch, Nintendo had sold 41,670,000 Switches. That makes the attach rate about 1.68%. I don't think the install base was demanding anything. Certainly not a crippled port of an otherwise great game.

Switch 2 has an install base of zero. One of the biggest draws of FF16 was the massive spectacle of its combat. Who is going to want to play a massively gimped version of that? It totally goes against the design philosophy of the game itself.