Support NeoGAF

[SenjutsuSage]

Secret sauce confirmed? Oh wait...

All in all I hope people aren't expecting any measurable differences with this bump. The latest DF article on Tomb Raider paints a gap wider than most people would like to believe.

I don't know, after seeing that DF article, I would probably take the Xbox One version every single time. I thought the unlocked frame-rate wasn't really much of a big deal going into it, particularly when I thought the PS4 version was pretty much always at or near 60fps during gameplay scenarios, but that isn't the case at all. Sure, it's often in the 50fps range on average, but you've got some seriously wild performance swings there on the PS4 version when more meaningful things are actually occurring on screen (basically 42-60fps ranges). Not much of a deal breaker obviously, since performance close to 100% of the time is still quite playable and obviously much better than what you're getting on the Xbox One version.

However, though the Xbox One version has a much lower overall framerate, it seems to be a far more consistent 30fps experience across the board than can be said of the PS4 version at its various ranges of performance. Now, knowing the power differences between the two systems, that doesn't make much of any sense to me at all even if the PS4 version does have an unlocked framerate, which brings me to the assumption that the PS4 version must be running some type of graphical effect that is either significantly toned down on the Xbox One version, or completely absent altogether, which is what explains the more inconsistent (though obviously still higher) framerate. Hopefully the larger DF article can go into more detail on what precisely that is, but there's no way the PS4 version's performance should vary so wildly with the GPU advantage it has. Could just be a simple optimization related matter, though, as it's obvious they were happy with anything above 30fps, rather than strictly targeting for a consistent 60fps.

Now, let's see how many overreact to this post, and make wild assumptions that I was never suggesting in the first place.

 

[Massa]

I don't know, after seeing that DF article, I would probably take the Xbox One version every single time.

Let me be the first to say this: I'm shocked.

 

[CoG]

All the devs need to do is add an option to lock to 30 ticks and the PS4 version runs at a rock solid 30fps. The Xbox version can never achieve that.

 

[beast786]

I don't know, after seeing that DF article, I would probably take the Xbox One version every single time. I thought the unlocked frame-rate wasn't really much of a big deal going into it, particularly when I thought the PS4 version was pretty much always at or near 60fps during gameplay scenarios, but that isn't the case at all. Sure, it's often in the 50fps range on average, but you've got some seriously wild performance swings there on the PS4 version when more meaningful things are actually occurring on screen (basically 42-60fps ranges). Not much of a deal breaker obviously, since performance close to 100% of the time is still quite playable and obviously much better than what you're getting on the Xbox One version.

However, though the Xbox One version has a much lower overall framerate, it seems to be a far more consistent 30fps experience across the board than can be said of the PS4 version at its various ranges of performance. Now, knowing the power differences between the two systems, that doesn't make much of any sense to me at all even if the PS4 version does have an unlocked framerate, which brings me to the assumption that the PS4 version must be running some type of graphical effect that is either significantly toned down on the Xbox One version, or completely absent altogether, which is what explains the more inconsistent (though obviously still higher) framerate. Hopefully the larger DF article can go into more detail on what precisely that is, but there's no way the PS4 version's performance should vary so wildly with the GPU advantage it has. Could just be a simple optimization related matter, though, as it's obvious they were happy with anything above 30fps, rather than strictly targeting for a consistent 60fps.

Now, let's see how many overreact to this post, and make wild assumptions that I was never suggesting in the first place.

it's like two different people wrote the post.

 

[SenjutsuSage]

All the devs need to do is add an option to lock to 30 ticks and the PS4 version runs at a rock solid 30fps. The Xbox version can never achieve that.

This is true! Sounds like a fairly obvious patch to make that perhaps gives people the choice between unlocked and locked. The Xbox One version, based on the DF analysis, would indeed never be able to compete with that. The PS4 version would be locked at 30fps 100% of the time based on its current performance numbers.

it's like two different people wrote the post.

Saying I would choose the game that is much more consistently at 30fps, as opposed to the one that jumps around more wildly, especially in more important scenes, is really so radical a departure that you somehow can't square the end of the post with the beginning?

 

[Atilac]

I don't know, after seeing that DF article, I would probably take the Xbox One version every single time. I thought the unlocked frame-rate wasn't really much of a big deal going into it, particularly when I thought the PS4 version was pretty much always at or near 60fps during gameplay scenarios, but that isn't the case at all. Sure, it's often in the 50fps range on average, but you've got some seriously wild performance swings there on the PS4 version when more meaningful things are actually occurring on screen (basically 42-60fps ranges). Not much of a deal breaker obviously, since performance close to 100% of the time is still quite playable and obviously much better than what you're getting on the Xbox One version.

However, though the Xbox One version has a much lower overall framerate, it seems to be a far more consistent 30fps experience across the board than can be said of the PS4 version at its various ranges of performance. Now, knowing the power differences between the two systems, that doesn't make much of any sense to me at all even if the PS4 version does have an unlocked framerate, which brings me to the assumption that the PS4 version must be running some type of graphical effect that is either significantly toned down on the Xbox One version, or completely absent altogether, which is what explains the more inconsistent (though obviously still higher) framerate. Hopefully the larger DF article can go into more detail on what precisely that is, but there's no way the PS4 version's performance should vary so wildly with the GPU advantage it has. Could just be a simple optimization related matter, though, as it's obvious they were happy with anything above 30fps, rather than strictly targeting for a consistent 60fps.

Now, let's see how many overreact to this post, and make wild assumptions that I was never suggesting in the first place.

I'm surprised a shill like you is allowed on this board. The extent you downplayed the xbones lousy performance and overstated the ps4s few technical nuisances is simply breathtaking.

 

[HORRORSHØW]

it's like two different people wrote the post.

To be fair, the dude is pretty mental.

 

[Atilac]

This is true! Sounds like a fairly obvious patch to make that perhaps gives people the choice between unlocked and locked. The Xbox One version, based on the DF analysis, would indeed never be able to compete with that. The PS4 version would be locked at 30fps 100% of the time based on its current performance numbers.

Seriously, they should add the option to cripple the ps4 version through a patch, that way you feel better about your purchase and allegiances.

 

[CoG]

This is true! Sounds like a fairly obvious patch to make that perhaps gives people the choice between unlocked and locked. The Xbox One version, based on the DF analysis, would indeed never be able to compete with that. The PS4 version would be locked at 30fps 100% of the time based on its current performance numbers.

That option is in the PC version. My TV even allows it to sync @ 24fps for a "truly cinematic" experience if you opt for it.

 

[ZeroAlpha]

Having just caught up with all this, i guess the take away is anything that can help is good, but i do hope they don't take off snapping entirely i do enjoy its uses.

I don't know why people always worry the XBO will cause games to be made for the lowest common denominator, every other generation the lead console was the best selling one and this time its the PS4 and will continue to be this generation.

So if any assumptions are to be made is the gimped versions of all 3rd party games will be the XBO's.

 

[boredandlazy]

I don't know, after seeing that DF article, I would probably take the Xbox One version every single time. I thought the unlocked frame-rate wasn't really much of a big deal going into it, particularly when I thought the PS4 version was pretty much always at or near 60fps during gameplay scenarios, but that isn't the case at all. Sure, it's often in the 50fps range on average, but you've got some seriously wild performance swings there on the PS4 version when more meaningful things are actually occurring on screen (basically 42-60fps ranges). Not much of a deal breaker obviously, since performance close to 100% of the time is still quite playable and obviously much better than what you're getting on the Xbox One version.

However, though the Xbox One version has a much lower overall framerate, it seems to be a far more consistent 30fps experience across the board than can be said of the PS4 version at its various ranges of performance. Now, knowing the power differences between the two systems, that doesn't make much of any sense to me at all even if the PS4 version does have an unlocked framerate, which brings me to the assumption that the PS4 version must be running some type of graphical effect that is either significantly toned down on the Xbox One version, or completely absent altogether, which is what explains the more inconsistent (though obviously still higher) framerate. Hopefully the larger DF article can go into more detail on what precisely that is, but there's no way the PS4 version's performance should vary so wildly with the GPU advantage it has. Could just be a simple optimization related matter, though, as it's obvious they were happy with anything above 30fps, rather than strictly targeting for a consistent 60fps.

Now, let's see how many overreact to this post, and make wild assumptions that I was never suggesting in the first place.

And I am not surprised one iota.

Does that count as an overreaction?

 

[boredandlazy]

Seriously, they should add the option to cripple the ps4 version through a patch, that way you feel better about your purchase and allegiances.

But then he might prefer the PS4 version.

 

[Atilac]

But then he might prefer the PS4 version.

That is true lol.
He prefers consistent trash, to varying degrees of awesome.

 

[Guymelef]

I'll wait for the Xbox One patch for consistent 18fps.

 

[Chobel]

I don't know, after seeing that DF article, I would probably take the Xbox One version every single time. I thought the unlocked frame-rate wasn't really much of a big deal going into it, particularly when I thought the PS4 version was pretty much always at or near 60fps during gameplay scenarios, but that isn't the case at all. Sure, it's often in the 50fps range on average, but you've got some seriously wild performance swings there on the PS4 version when more meaningful things are actually occurring on screen (basically 42-60fps ranges). Not much of a deal breaker obviously, since performance close to 100% of the time is still quite playable and obviously much better than what you're getting on the Xbox One version.

However, though the Xbox One version has a much lower overall framerate, it seems to be a far more consistent 30fps experience across the board than can be said of the PS4 version at its various ranges of performance. Now, knowing the power differences between the two systems, that doesn't make much of any sense to me at all even if the PS4 version does have an unlocked framerate, which brings me to the assumption that the PS4 version must be running some type of graphical effect that is either significantly toned down on the Xbox One version, or completely absent altogether, which is what explains the more inconsistent (though obviously still higher) framerate. Hopefully the larger DF article can go into more detail on what precisely that is, but there's no way the PS4 version's performance should vary so wildly with the GPU advantage it has. Could just be a simple optimization related matter, though, as it's obvious they were happy with anything above 30fps, rather than strictly targeting for a consistent 60fps.

Now, let's see how many overreact to this post, and make wild assumptions that I was never suggesting in the first place.

Wrong thread?

 

[boredandlazy]

Wrong thread?

Yet, strangely everyone immediately knows what he's talking about.

 

[SenjutsuSage]

Seriously, they should add the option to cripple the ps4 version through a patch, that way you feel better about your purchase and allegiances.

How the hell is giving gamers a choice between unlocked and locked crippling the PS4 version? You're not losing anything. Did you even read the post, or just talking shit? (question is rhetorical)

I'm surprised a shill like you is allowed on this board. The extent you downplayed the xbones lousy performance and overstated the ps4s few technical nuisances is simply breathtaking.

Oh yes, the old "you're a shill if you have the nerve to express a view that might anger the zealots" scare tactic. I haven't seen that one in quite some time. Nothing beats the classics, am I right? Seriously, get over yourselves. If you don't like what I have to say just ignore me, but I'm not going to change to meet your approval. So, sorry? lol

Wrong thread?

No, a response to a post on the previous page. Anyway, I''ve had my fill with the thread. Look forward to seeing more detailed article on the game to see if I was right about possible differences in visual effects between the two games, which I think would better explain the swings on the PS4 version.

 

[RoboPlato]

This is true! Sounds like a fairly obvious patch to make that perhaps gives people the choice between unlocked and locked. The Xbox One version, based on the DF analysis, would indeed never be able to compete with that. The PS4 version would be locked at 30fps 100% of the time based on its current performance numbers.

I think unlocked 60 is going to be common on PS4, there are already quite a few games that do it, and I think that this should happen. The Bioshock games already do it. I'm pretty much immune to judder but it does bother some people and if the framerate varies wildly that can give me headaches (although TR seems consistent enough for me).

 

[buckeye4life]

How the hell is giving gamers a choice between unlocked and locked crippling the PS4 version? You're not losing anything. Did you even read the post, or just talking shit? (question is rhetorical)

Have you played the ps4 version ? You do realize that Ryse isn't locked at a solid 30, or cod is not locked at a solid 60 fps. There will always be frame flucations. But man do u sound silly with your logic.

 

[SwiftDeath]

How the hell is giving gamers a choice between unlocked and locked crippling the PS4 version? You're not losing anything. Did you even read the post, or just talking shit? (question is rhetorical)

To be fair while it would be a nice option, it would require additional dev time as they would likely want both versions locked/unlocked to run as optimally as possibly given their time budget. It's kind of the whole point of consoles after all.

 

[The Mad Draklor]

I don't know, after seeing that DF article, I would probably take the Xbox One version every single time. I thought the unlocked frame-rate wasn't really much of a big deal going into it, particularly when I thought the PS4 version was pretty much always at or near 60fps during gameplay scenarios, but that isn't the case at all. Sure, it's often in the 50fps range on average, but you've got some seriously wild performance swings there on the PS4 version when more meaningful things are actually occurring on screen (basically 42-60fps ranges). Not much of a deal breaker obviously, since performance close to 100% of the time is still quite playable and obviously much better than what you're getting on the Xbox One version.

However, though the Xbox One version has a much lower overall framerate, it seems to be a far more consistent 30fps experience across the board than can be said of the PS4 version at its various ranges of performance. Now, knowing the power differences between the two systems, that doesn't make much of any sense to me at all even if the PS4 version does have an unlocked framerate, which brings me to the assumption that the PS4 version must be running some type of graphical effect that is either significantly toned down on the Xbox One version, or completely absent altogether, which is what explains the more inconsistent (though obviously still higher) framerate. Hopefully the larger DF article can go into more detail on what precisely that is, but there's no way the PS4 version's performance should vary so wildly with the GPU advantage it has. Could just be a simple optimization related matter, though, as it's obvious they were happy with anything above 30fps, rather than strictly targeting for a consistent 60fps.

Now, let's see how many overreact to this post, and make wild assumptions that I was never suggesting in the first place.

Why you prefer the objectively inferior version of Tomb Raider is way beyond my comprehension. The PS4 version performs better than the XBone version. Period.

 

[nib95]

I don't know, after seeing that DF article, I would probably take the Xbox One version every single time. I thought the unlocked frame-rate wasn't really much of a big deal going into it, particularly when I thought the PS4 version was pretty much always at or near 60fps during gameplay scenarios, but that isn't the case at all. Sure, it's often in the 50fps range on average, but you've got some seriously wild performance swings there on the PS4 version when more meaningful things are actually occurring on screen (basically 42-60fps ranges). Not much of a deal breaker obviously, since performance close to 100% of the time is still quite playable and obviously much better than what you're getting on the Xbox One version.

However, though the Xbox One version has a much lower overall framerate, it seems to be a far more consistent 30fps experience across the board than can be said of the PS4 version at its various ranges of performance. Now, knowing the power differences between the two systems, that doesn't make much of any sense to me at all even if the PS4 version does have an unlocked framerate, which brings me to the assumption that the PS4 version must be running some type of graphical effect that is either significantly toned down on the Xbox One version, or completely absent altogether, which is what explains the more inconsistent (though obviously still higher) framerate. Hopefully the larger DF article can go into more detail on what precisely that is, but there's no way the PS4 version's performance should vary so wildly with the GPU advantage it has. Could just be a simple optimization related matter, though, as it's obvious they were happy with anything above 30fps, rather than strictly targeting for a consistent 60fps.

Now, let's see how many overreact to this post, and make wild assumptions that I was never suggesting in the first place.

You are hilarious. You and Gies should create a new blog to give MisterX a run of his money.

Xbox 1 capped at 30

Lowest fps is 40% less than 30
Average fps is 20% less than 30

Playstation 4 capped at 60

Lowest fps is 45% less than 60
Average fps is 15% less than 60

Puts things into perspective doesnt it ? The 33fps low point of ps4 a few percentage more than the x1 percentage drop and the average fps is a few percentage more for ps4 closer to cap than x1

Oh and did I mention there was some tearing in the Xbox One version too? But keep fighting the good fight.

 

[commedieu]

You are hilarious. You and Gies should create a new blog to give MisterX a run of his money.



Oh and did I mention there was some tearing in the Xbox One version too? But keep fighting the good fight.

you're just grinding metal man...ease down... you fought the good fight. But this one is toast.

 

[Gestault]

I'm surprised a shill like you is allowed on this board. The extent you downplayed the xbones lousy performance and overstated the ps4s few technical nuisances is simply breathtaking.

To be fair, the dude is pretty mental.

Seriously, they should add the option to cripple the ps4 version through a patch, that way you feel better about your purchase and allegiances.

That is true lol.
He prefers consistent trash, to varying degrees of awesome.

This conversation just got real ugly, and it wasn't from Senjitsu.

 

[Amir0x]

I'm surprised a shill like you is allowed on this board. The extent you downplayed the xbones lousy performance and overstated the ps4s few technical nuisances is simply breathtaking.

Sometimes mods prefer certain posters to dance for them; look at his title. He's been caught in his hypocrisy like a trillion times and then he tries to run behind the "oh I get it if I don't share a POPULAR opinion I must run away now" comedy gold. He doesn't get how transparent he is. It's really funny though, so there's that bonus.

He's not a shill though. He just really, really believes this shit. Trust me, half the board has gone over this with him. He is a true believer.

 

[Gestault]

you're just grinding metal man...ease down... you fought the good fight. But this one is toast.

"Aliens made this post"

This isn't new, is it? Because that's shockingly appropriate, lol

 

[RoboPlato]

"Aliens made this post"

This isn't new, is it? Because that's shockingly appropriate, lol

He's had that tag for a while now.

 

[SenjutsuSage]

Have you played the ps4 version ? You do realize that Ryse isn't locked at a solid 30, or cod is not locked at a solid 60 fps. There will always be frame flucations. But man do u sound silly with your logic.

No, I haven't. I'm just judging based on the video, but maybe playing it myself I'd have a different view, but the swings seem like they would be a distraction. Also, Ryse is actually a 30fps locked experience, with occasional dips here and there, but nothing serious or distracting from the experience. You don't have wild performance swings in situations where it matters in Ryse. My two playthroughs of the game, I believe, confirm this. The other thing about Ryse is that a major aspect of the gameplay revolves around slo motion executions, which is apparently where most of the slowdown ever seems to occur, but being that they're slo motion and so damn smooth throughout the game, the fact that framerate may dip slightly in those instances is a non issue, as anyone who has played it knows.

I'm not suggesting the PS4 version is somehow unplayable or in bad shape, which is precisely the overly defensive reaction I feared I would get. It's only that, provided a choice, I would much prefer a more stable framerate that does less jumping around. Now, I didn't have an issue with the unlocked framerate when I suspected that it would hang around or near 60fps far more often, even in the busiest scenes, but the DF videos seems to give a different picture. Although, being fair, it is probably best if I find out for myself, because I recall having similar disagreements with people on Ryse, stating that the videos don't tell the whole story and you have to actually play it for yourself to understand why, so the situation could be the same with TR on PS4.

There's no fps counter on screen when you're gaming on a console, either, so the DF video could be one of those things that annoy you more when there's a video focusing on it. For all I know, there's a very good chance I wouldn't even be able to tell if I played it myself, but the DF footage makes it look like a bit of an annoyance.

 

[beast786]

did DF do a min/avg/max FPS on Ryse?

 

[SenjutsuSage]

To be fair while it would be a nice option, it would require additional dev time as they would likely want both versions locked/unlocked to run as optimally as possibly given their time budget. It's kind of the whole point of consoles after all.

This is also very much true. It likely wasn't practical, and unlocked ensures them the most freedom in hitting their target. For example, there was a reason they had to split up the development responsibilities in the first place.

did DF do a min/avg/max FPS on Ryse?

I don't know if they did the same exact practice, but they did do framerate analysis last I saw. It's locked at 30, which it maintains quite well the majority of the game, but, according to videos, there's a dip the very instant you trigger a slo mo execution. But it has literally zero impact on the slo mo executions, which makes it a non issue. The player's ability to get their timing right isn't affected, and executions, speed wise, are quite smooth. There's also bigger drops in situations when the player is overlooking a large group of enemies, firing a big bow gun, but it doesn't hinder the player much. The biggest framerate drop in that sequence (which is one of the heaviest in the game btw) occurs when the player has already completed their objective and their input is no longer vital to the outcome, because it's just about to transfer into a real-time cutscene. All in all, Ryse has quite good performance that is consistently so and rarely, if ever, an issue when you're playing, and I've already beaten the game twice on the two highest difficulty levels.

Basically, the more noticeable drops occur in situations that account for a tiny sliver of the overall experience. Close to 98% of combat in the game is focused, as expected, on third person sword and shield combat, and in those situations, the game delivers quite good and consistent performance in all levels, particularly ones with many more enemies on screen.

 

[beast786]

No, I haven't. I'm just judging based on the video,
but maybe playing it myself I'd have a different view, but the swings seem like they would be a distraction. Also, Ryse is actually a 30fps locked experience, with occasional dips here and there, but nothing serious or distracting from the experience. You don't have wild performance swings in situations where it matters in Ryse. My two playthroughs of the game, I believe, confirm this. The other thing about Ryse is that a major aspect of the gameplay revolves around slo motion executions, which is apparently where most of the slowdown ever seems to occur, but being that they're slo motion and so damn smooth throughout the game, the fact that framerate may dip slightly in those instances is a non issue, as anyone who has played it knows.

I'm not suggesting the PS4 version is somehow unplayable or in bad shape, which is precisely the overly defensive reaction I feared I would get. It's only that, provided a choice, I would much prefer a more stable framerate that does less jumping around. Now, I didn't have an issue with the unlocked framerate when I suspected that it would hang around or near 60fps far more often, even in the busiest scenes, but the DF videos seems to give a different picture. Although, being fair, it is probably best if I find out for myself, because I recall having similar disagreements with people on Ryse, stating that the videos don't tell the whole story and you have to actually play it for yourself to understand why, so the situation could be the same with TR on PS4.

There's no fps counter on screen when you're gaming on a console, either, so the DF video could be one of those things that annoy you more when there's a video focusing on it. For all I know, there's a very good chance I wouldn't even be able to tell if I played it myself, but the DF footage makes it look like a bit of an annoyance.

Let me take that back. it's actually like two people wrote the sentence.

 

[QaaQer]

Sometimes mods prefer certain posters to dance for them; look at his title. He's been caught in his hypocrisy like a trillion times and then he tries to run behind the "oh I get it if I don't share a POPULAR opinion I must run away now" comedy gold. He doesn't get how transparent he is. It's really funny though, so there's that bonus.

He's not a shill though. He just really, really believes this shit. Trust me, half the board has gone over this with him. He is a true believer.

Not a shill, for sure. shills get talking points and are never that verbose.

 

[Amir0x]

No, I haven't. I'm just judging based on the video, but maybe playing it myself I'd have a different view, but the swings seem like they would be a distraction. Also, Ryse is actually a 30fps locked experience, with occasional dips here and there, but nothing serious or distracting from the experience. You don't have wild performance swings in situations where it matters in Ryse. My two playthroughs of the game, I believe, confirm this. The other thing about Ryse is that a major aspect of the gameplay revolves around slo motion executions, which is apparently where most of the slowdown ever seems to occur, but being that they're slo motion and so damn smooth throughout the game, the fact that framerate may dip slightly in those instances is a non issue, as anyone who has played it knows.

We've already had actual technical analysis of Ryse, so there's no use trying to use your anecdotal unscientific eyes.

"Originally touted as a solid 30fps experience, Ryse misses the mark more often than we'd like with frame-rates often fluctuating between 26-28fps and the most challenging situations even seeing the frame-rate drop into the teens."

And here's a video for confirmation. There are entire battles that never hit 30. Check the 3 minute mark and watch how long it averages below 30.

But no I'm sure your hands on playthrough made you experience a game for which your distinct and clearly unique palette was never challenged, unlike this horrifying unlocked 60fps PS4 game! I mean clearly this raised no eyebrows with you, but this PS4 Tomb Raider... you need to get to the bottom of this. Something must be going on there!

 

[TheCloser]

I don't know, after seeing that DF article, I would probably take the Xbox One version every single time. I thought the unlocked frame-rate wasn't really much of a big deal going into it, particularly when I thought the PS4 version was pretty much always at or near 60fps during gameplay scenarios, but that isn't the case at all. Sure, it's often in the 50fps range on average, but you've got some seriously wild performance swings there on the PS4 version when more meaningful things are actually occurring on screen (basically 42-60fps ranges). Not much of a deal breaker obviously, since performance close to 100% of the time is still quite playable and obviously much better than what you're getting on the Xbox One version.

However, though the Xbox One version has a much lower overall framerate, it seems to be a far more consistent 30fps experience across the board than can be said of the PS4 version at its various ranges of performance. Now, knowing the power differences between the two systems, that doesn't make much of any sense to me at all even if the PS4 version does have an unlocked framerate, which brings me to the assumption that the PS4 version must be running some type of graphical effect that is either significantly toned down on the Xbox One version, or completely absent altogether, which is what explains the more inconsistent (though obviously still higher) framerate. Hopefully the larger DF article can go into more detail on what precisely that is, but there's no way the PS4 version's performance should vary so wildly with the GPU advantage it has. Could just be a simple optimization related matter, though, as it's obvious they were happy with anything above 30fps, rather than strictly targeting for a consistent 60fps.

Now, let's see how many overreact to this post, and make wild assumptions that I was never suggesting in the first place.

I honestly don't know how you haven't been perma banned yet. This is just unbelievable and if you truly believe what you wrote, i really worry for you. Its like you're either trolling or you're lost. Either way, wow.

 

[buckeye4life]

No, I haven't. I'm just judging based on the video, but maybe playing it myself I'd have a different view, but the swings seem like they would be a distraction. Also, Ryse is actually a 30fps locked experience, with occasional dips here and there, but nothing serious or distracting from the experience. You don't have wild performance swings in situations where it matters in Ryse. My two playthroughs of the game, I believe, confirm this. The other thing about Ryse is that a major aspect of the gameplay revolves around slo motion executions, which is apparently where most of the slowdown ever seems to occur, but being that they're slo motion and so damn smooth throughout the game, the fact that framerate may dip slightly in those instances is a non issue, as anyone who has played it knows.

I'm not suggesting the PS4 version is somehow unplayable or in bad shape, which is precisely the overly defensive reaction I feared I would get. It's only that, provided a choice, I would much prefer a more stable framerate that does less jumping around. Now, I didn't have an issue with the unlocked framerate when I suspected that it would hang around or near 60fps far more often, even in the busiest scenes, but the DF videos seems to give a different picture. Although, being fair, it is probably best if I find out for myself, because I recall having similar disagreements with people on Ryse, stating that the videos don't tell the whole story and you have to actually play it for yourself to understand why, so the situation could be the same with TR on PS4.

There's no fps counter on screen when you're gaming on a console, either, so the DF video could be one of those things that annoy you more when there's a video focusing on it. For all I know, there's a very good chance I wouldn't even be able to tell if I played it myself, but the DF footage makes it look like a bit of an annoyance.

So you missed the part where the review indicated mostly 60 fps with drops down in the 50 occasionally. That hinders your experience ?

 

[Ishida]

I don't know, after seeing that DF article, I would probably take the Xbox One version every single time.

Holy shit, there's no way you can be serious.

 

[AgentP]

Pet peeve, stock using the word "locked", there is no such thing. You can cap it, but you never "lock" it if it drops frames.

BTW is anyone surprised at SenjutsuSage spin? He is a master, MS should pay him if they are not already.

 

[Gestault]

So you missed the part where the review indicated mostly 60 fps with drops down in the 50 occasionally. That hinders your experience ?

Actually, if the average is around 50, that means half the frames were below that number.

 

[benny_a]

We've already had actual technical analysis of Ryse, so there's no use trying to use your anecdotal unscientific eyes.

"Originally touted as a solid 30fps experience, Ryse misses the mark more often than we'd like with frame-rates often fluctuating between 26-28fps and the most challenging situations even seeing the frame-rate drop into the teens."

And here's a video for confirmation. There are entire battles that never hit 30. Check the 3 minute mark and watch how long it averages below 30.

vs.

I hope the stuff about the clock speed update on the CPU and the focus they seem to be placing on stable frame-rates hold true, because literally nothing would be more annoying than iffy framerate in games.

vs.

Also, Ryse is actually a 30fps locked experience, with occasional dips here and there, but nothing serious or distracting from the experience.

 

[FuturusX]

Pet peeve, stock using the word "locked", there is no such thing. You can cap it, but you never "lock" it if it drops frames.

BTW is anyone surprised at SenjutsuSage spin? He is a master, MS should pay him if they are not already.

You could argue that a "locked" frame rate would effectively be in place when your lowest frame matches your "capped" frame rate.

where a game never dips below 30, you could effectively lock the frame rate at that level.

 

[SenjutsuSage]

I honestly don't know how you haven't been perma banned yet. This is just unbelievable and if you truly believe what you wrote, i really worry for you. Its like you're either trolling or you're lost. Either way, wow.

Yea, backseat moderating is particularly frowned on. So, save your veiled threats.

vs.

vs.

Also, Ryse is actually a 30fps locked experience, with occasional dips here and there, but nothing serious or distracting from the experience. You don't have wild performance swings in

I'm amazed at how much you guys do things like a typical pundit on Fox News. Completely leave out the context that one post refers to an open world game typically known for its framerate challenges with many hundreds of enemies expected on screen quite regularly during typical play. That first post is in reference to Dead Rising 3, meanwhile the second is about a more linear and tightly focused sword and shield combat game, more at home in smaller, more strategic enemy encounters.

I don't know if you guys are trolling the shit out of me or what, but the type of game plays a very big factor in framerate discussions. There's no one set rule that applies to all kinds of games, so do keep desperately attempting to pretend as if it's all the same.

 

[TheCloser]

Actually, if the average is around 50, that means half the frames were below that number.

Nope, do you understand how math works? There are several ways to arrive at an average of 50fps but that does not mean that half the frames were below that number. You know that you can average 50fps by having the game run at 50fps 100% of the time. This is one way to average 50 fps. I'm going to let you figure out how many other ways you can reach an average of 50 fps on 36000 seconds of gameplay which is approximately ~1.8 million frames at 50fps.

 

[TheCloser]

Yea, backseat moderating is particularly frowned on. So, save your veiled threats.

Lol, who is moderating? You are well known troll and i'm pointing that out. If you have a problem with it, you should stop trolling.

 

[Audible Phonetics]

Can someone explain to me how a dip in to the 50's equal a bad gaming experience??

 

[JaggedSac]

It's hinted that Halo 5 is 900p for now.

Oh really? How did I miss this tidbit?

 

[Chobel]

Oh really? How did I miss this tidbit?

Neogaf insiders, not from MS.

 

[Truespeed]

No, I haven't. I'm just judging based on the video, but maybe playing it myself I'd have a different view, but the swings seem like they would be a distraction. Also, Ryse is actually a 30fps locked experience, with occasional dips here and there, but nothing serious or distracting from the experience. You don't have wild performance swings in situations where it matters in Ryse. My two playthroughs of the game, I believe, confirm this. The other thing about Ryse is that a major aspect of the gameplay revolves around slo motion executions, which is apparently where most of the slowdown ever seems to occur, but being that they're slo motion and so damn smooth throughout the game, the fact that framerate may dip slightly in those instances is a non issue, as anyone who has played it knows.

I'm not suggesting the PS4 version is somehow unplayable or in bad shape, which is precisely the overly defensive reaction I feared I would get. It's only that, provided a choice, I would much prefer a more stable framerate that does less jumping around. Now, I didn't have an issue with the unlocked framerate when I suspected that it would hang around or near 60fps far more often, even in the busiest scenes, but the DF videos seems to give a different picture. Although, being fair, it is probably best if I find out for myself, because I recall having similar disagreements with people on Ryse, stating that the videos don't tell the whole story and you have to actually play it for yourself to understand why, so the situation could be the same with TR on PS4.

There's no fps counter on screen when you're gaming on a console, either, so the DF video could be one of those things that annoy you more when there's a video focusing on it. For all I know, there's a very good chance I wouldn't even be able to tell if I played it myself, but the DF footage makes it look like a bit of an annoyance.

How much is this worth in Machinima dollars?

 

[beast786]

Can someone explain to me how a dip in to the 50's equal a bad gaming experience??

because it's not capped at 30.

 

[Amir0x]

Ridiculous. If Senjutsu cannot even notice the consistent sub-30 framerate in Ryse, why should anyone take his word about framerates seriously anywhere?

 

[Gestault]

Nope, do you understand how math works? There are several ways to arrive at an average of 50fps but that does not mean that half the frames were below that number. You know that you can average 50fps by having the game run at 50fps 100% of the time. This is one way to average 50 fps. I'm going to let you figure out how many other ways you can reach an average of 50 fps on 36000 seconds of gameplay which is approximately ~1.8 million frames.

Pardon my lack of clarity. When I responded to the comment "So you missed the part where the review indicated mostly 60 fps with drops down in the 50 occasionally. That hinders your experience ?", I meant to say that the assertion was mathematically impossible. So when I said "half the frames would have to be below the result of the average," I also could have included that it could mean it settles very close to 50 most of the time. We know from the analysis that it wasn't simply settled around 50, which is why I didn't say it originally.

I find it incredibly odd that you'd critcize my statement and not the one I responded to.