Support NeoGAF

[akira__]

I (and others) have already explained the difference in perceived image detail to you, as well as what the lower texture detail refers to. I’m not going to repeat myself if you can’t be bothered to reread.

The issue at hand is, that you and others speculate why there is a difference. But in the video they say it's the same.
When they clearly are not, you and others who have no background in computer graphics, computer science. All graphics are perceived, it's all smoke and mirrors. Especially if you turn on frame generation, at that point it's the wild west.

But you come in with a narrative, my point was not only was that image not the same, but he even said its worse.

So the person who is missing the point is not me, but you and others. Who think that sharpening can somehow lead to worse image quality of the giant.

Your standpoint is: DF is right, the difference is because of sharpening or whatever but there is no difference at the same time just like DF said, its exactly the same.

You already said the image is not the same, at that moment you were at odds with DF. Yet you twist that into a standpoint as if you actually agree with DF.

You can't choose both

 

[PaintTinJr]

Zathalus

I didn't say the fog wasn't dynamic, I was referring to the quality of the fog and the quality of the rendering of the objects behind the fog.

So I can reply - directly - to your last comment, try replacing the videos with stills on the DF equivalent RX 6700 PC that you think are high quality fog examples on that system compared to the PS5 reference shot I'll stick with that was at 6:03.

From that we'll find out how much you know about fog and depth cueing, and how good the volumetric fog can be on those PC settings. To make it easier don't worry if the example you use has the models looking blurry - like they've been dipped in Vaseline - or if the textures don't look as good, I'm happy to focus entirely on the issue of the fog for this part of the comparison with the image/s you choose.

 

[SyedDanishAnwar]

How dare they pointing that the better looking and running PC version looks and runs better.

The game may look better on high spec PCs. But the difference is marginal.

DF videos are overly subjective making it look like PC games are like hyper real in comparison to PS5/XBox versions, which they arent. They use critical words like aweful and bad even when the images look great on consoles. There is a clear subjective bias in DF videos since they are obviously sponsered by Nvidia.

 

[Zathalus]

Zathalus

I didn't say the fog wasn't dynamic, I was referring to the quality of the fog and the quality of the rendering of the objects behind the fog.

So I can reply - directly - to your last comment, try replacing the videos with stills on the DF equivalent RX 6700 PC that you think are high quality fog examples on that system compared to the PS5 reference shot I'll stick with that was at 6:03.

From that we'll find out how much you know about fog and depth cueing, and how good the volumetric fog can be on those PC settings. To make it easier don't worry if the example you use has the models looking blurry - like they've been dipped in Vaseline - or if the textures don't look as good, I'm happy to focus entirely on the issue of the fog for this part of the comparison with the image/s you choose.

Nah it’s fine, I’ll think I’ll ignore your attempt as gaslighting and stick to what my own eyes see and what NXGamer (who has extensive experience in the field) has analyzed. Keep believing that this poorly optimized game has super special fog on PS5 that even a 4090 can’t handle.

 

[adamsapple]

But Richard said on top of that ps5 had lower textures...

These narratives have real effects on people working on these games. That was the reason of this thread.

?????????????

What in the blue hell are you talking about. The people who worked on the game are the one's who selectively chose settings for the console platform to optimize and maximize visuals : performance to their liking.

Why would a DF article stating the obvious that the PC's higher settings has higher quality textures have any effect on them?

 

[Cakeboxer]

Breaking news: They are all biased, one way or the another.

 

[akira__]

How dare they pointing that the better looking and running PC version looks and runs better.

You clearly didn't read the thread, nor did you watch the video, nor did you look at the framerate counters or looked at the giant.

The best version of the game is on pc, we know that because that is the version the devs send out for review.

This is not pc vs ps5, this is weirdly build pc, which they say runs the same. When it clearly doesn't run the same.

The last few pages has been full of posters who disagree with the premise of thread, and try to agree with DF yet at the same time rationalise away the obvious difference.

Thus they hold 2 positions at the same time:
- DF is correct it's the same.
- it's not the same because x,y,z.

 

[akira__]

?????????????

What in the blue hell are you talking about. The people who worked on the game are the one's who selectively chose settings for the console platform to optimize and maximize visuals : performance to their liking.

Why would a DF article stating the obvious that the PC's higher settings has higher quality textures have any effect on them?

As usual you are confused. The thread is not about pc vs ps5... read the thread, watch the actual video...

The video is about benchmark between what they call Frankenstein pc, of which they say. That it runs the same(which it clearly doesn't).

Learn to understand before you make post. Read the thread, and understand the context. Might help you with removing that thing that is constantly stuck in your throat.

 

[adamsapple]

As usual you are confused. The thread is not about pc vs ps5... read the thread, watch the actual video...

The video is about benchmark between what they call Frankenstein pc, of which they say. That it runs the same(which it clearly doesn't).

Learn to understand before you make post. Read the thread, and understand the context. Might help you with removing that thing that is constantly stuck in your throat.

My guy, you are the one making frankly bizarre and nonsensical posts about how these DF comparisons will have 'real effects' on people working on the game.

The people working on the game are more than likely smart enough to know PC specs and not get bothered by DF's own jury rigged PC.

And you've been making incorrect assertions since the OP:

Anyone with working eyes can see it's not nearly the same image quality, and the framerate is 10% behind.
Yet they keep acting as if it's the same performance, which is really bizarre.

Anyone with working ears, or working eyes reading the captions, can see that he directly acknowledges the 10% slower part.

A

 

[akira__]

My guy, you are the one making frankly bizarre and nonsensical posts about how these DF comparisons will have 'real effects' on people working on the game.

The people working on the game are more than likely smart enough to know PC specs and not get bothered by DF's own jury rigged PC.

Let me post some excerpts from the video, since clearly are tired from your second job.

There are real people working on those games. They work overtime, and have to skip vacations, to make the tight deadlines.

So you quickly added another stupid take. But here are the images, where they call that pc like for like.

Edit: now you found that part where they acknowledge it's running with 10% slower, yet they still call it the same. Anyone with basic math skills could deduct that from the frame counter on those images. But the discussion is not about only performance also the image quality.

Edit 2: But what happened to that energy big dog, you said PC was better but now it's 10% worse?

 

[adamsapple]

Let me post some excerpts from the video, since clearly are tired from second job.

There are real people working on those games. They work overtime, and have to skip vacations, to make the tight deadlines.

So you quickly added another stupid take. But here are the images, where they call that pc like for like.

What even is your point here? It just seems like you're bitter for some reason.

They're comparing their jury rigged PC with settings at High because that's what most PS5 equivalent settings are, minus textures which are between medium / low. They covered the low quality textures in the dedicated PS5 video and made a point to show that usually UE5 games don't have that kind of a difference. Some other previous games like Remnant 2 or Hellblade, which use Nanite etc, are closer to PC's higher presets.

DF have posted a dedicated chart of all the PS5 settings and their PC equivalents. You can see that most settings come out equivalent to PC's High presets, except Textures, which they specifically pointed out in 2 different videos as well.

DF-optimised: the best PC settings for Black Myth: Wukong

Digital Foundry's best settings choices for the PC version of Black Myth: Wukong, along with PS5 equivalent settings too.

www.eurogamer.net

Now, just *HOW* any of this information will have a 'real effect' on the people working on the game, especially considering they are the ones who made these pre-sets, is beyond me.

 

[Zathalus]

Anyone still doubting mere sharpening can do the change we see in the video:

 

[akira__]

They're comparing their jury rigged PC with settings at High because that's what most PS5 equivalent settings are, minus textures which are between medium / low.

DF have posted a dedicated chart of all the PS5 settings and their PC equivalents. You can see that most settings come out equivalent to PC's High presets, except Textures, which they specifically pointed out in 2 different videos as well.

So for anyone else reading this, those settings are estimations. They try out different settings on pc and look on their ps5 if it looks the same.

Those are estimates, and if the estimates have been made while there is such a large delta between both versions, then those estimates are not worth much.

If you would take a look at the belt of the giant, and the armor character. posted in the thread.

Then it's clearly not the same image quality.
Many posters have throughout the thread tried to explain that difference.
Thus also acknowledging the difference.

Only the devs, and playstation know the settings, until someone datamines the game and find ps5 settings.
Both consoles and pc are not like for like, they have shared memory, ps5 has hardware asset streaming for UE5(is it enabled?), etc

 

[akira__]

Anyone still doubting mere sharpening can do the change we see in the video:

But ps5 has lower textures, you said Richard was right. But now it's sharpening...

Look it's not the same image, until they get the same image you can say it's kinda the same. Until that point you can't.

You are still holding 2 positions:
- it's the same, just like DF said
- it's not the same let explain

 

[Zathalus]

But ps5 has lower textures, you said Richard was right. But now it's sharpening...

Look it's not the same image, until they get the same image you can say it's kinda the same. Until that point you can't.

You are still holding 2 positions:
- it's the same, just like DF said
- it's not the same let explain

DF nor myself never claimed that the image in video was the same, it’s clearly sharper on the PS5 footage. The settings are the same though, with the difference in sharpening almost certainly the reason why the difference in perceived image quality exists. The photo Alex is proof enough that a sharpening change can make the difference.

You keep mentioning texture quality, but the differences in the video have got nothing to do with the texture quality setting.

 

[akira__]

DF nor myself never claimed that the image in video was the same, it’s clearly sharper on the PS5 footage. The settings are the same though, with the difference in sharpening almost certainly the reason why the difference in perceived image quality exists. The photo Alex is proof enough that a sharpening change can make the difference.

You keep mentioning texture quality, but the differences in the video have got nothing to do with the texture quality setting.

They did claim it's the same, and top of that claimed the texture quality on the ps5 is worse.

I have posted those images of their commentary atleast 3 times now. In which Richard (not me) mentions that ps5 has lower texture quality.

But this is great, you have admitted there is a difference between both versions. We are making progress.

You are now at odds with all those posts saying that only sony fanboy would see any difference. But carry on.

 

[Zathalus]

They did claim it's the same, and top of that claimed the texture quality on the ps5 is worse.

I have posted those images of their commentary atleast 3 times now. In which Richard (not me) mentions that ps5 has lower texture quality.

But this is great, you have admitted there is a difference between both versions. We are making progress.

You are now at odds with all those posts saying that only sony fanboy would see any difference. But carry on.

The textures are worse. Not sure what to tell you. The difference you see in the video has got nothing to do with the texture quality setting though, because the texture quality setting doesn’t impact the characters, it is only for some environmental detail such as rocks or certain ground textures. It’s amazing how you get so bent out of shape over something that is not even present. Also I notice you continue to ignore the difference in the image Alex posted, or are you going to claim it looks the same?

 

[Kataploom]

I don't see anything biased from them, it looks like to be like people get personally attacked because they see their identity attached to a toy compromised whenever DF just say whatever

 

[akira__]

The textures are worse. Not sure what to tell you. The difference you see in the video has got nothing to do with the texture quality setting though, because the texture quality setting doesn’t impact the characters, it is only for some environmental detail such as rocks or certain ground textures. It’s amazing how you get so bent out of shape over something that is not even present. Also I notice you continue to ignore the difference in the image Alex posted, or are you going to ignore that and claim it looks the same?

So the thread started with this image, the way that have called texture is with texture quality, there could be post processing making look worse.
Certainly with FSR on, but look at the belt of the giant and the armor.

And call them the same. That is a wild take.

I'll post the conservation again for you.

It's clearly not the same, as the image quality differs too much. You can come with reasons why. That is fine, but that acknowledges the fact that it's not the same. While they state its the same, and call the ps5 being worse...

 

[Zathalus]

So the thread started with this image, the way that have called texture is with texture quality, there could be post processing making look worse.
Certainly with FSR on, but look at the belt of the giant and the armor.

And call them the same. That is a wild take.

I'll post the conservation again for you.

It's clearly not the same, as the image quality differs too much. You can come with reasons why. That is fine, but that acknowledges the fact that it's not the same.

Same settings =/= it looks the same. Remove the sharpening from the PS5 or add sharpening to the PC version and both will end up looking the exact same with no change in performance on either side. Anyone with a PC can easily test this. I’m not at home right now but when I’ll get home I’ll take screenshots to show the difference, however Alex already posted something similar that I linked previously.

You’re getting upset with something that has zero impact on the conclusions of the video, namely that the PS5 and 6700 perform similarly with the PS5 taking an up to 10% lead.

Should DF picked up the difference in sharpening between the two? Yes, that is absolutely an oversight on their part. But to try and twist that into something malicious is a stretch.

 

[akira__]

Same settings =/= it looks the same. Remove the sharpening from the PS5 or add sharpening to the PC version and both will end up looking the exact same with no change in performance on either side. Anyone with a PC can easily test this. I’m not at home right now but when I’ll get home I’ll take screenshots to show the difference, however Alex already posted something similar that I linked previously.

You’re getting upset with something that has zero impact on the conclusions of the video, namely that the PS5 and 6700 perform similarly with the PS5 taking an up to 10% lead.

Should DF picked up the difference in sharpening between the two? Yes, that is absolutely an oversight on their part. But to try and twist that into something malicious is a stretch.

Could you explain in your view, when looking at those why someone say ps5 has even worse texture quality?

Also that just the cop out of going for settings, when we don't know the settings...

Only the dev and playstation know that, or when it get mined. But still then it won't be same as PC, as PC and consoles are not the same. Shared memory, API'S, etc

 

[Zathalus]

Could you explain where in those images the ps5 has worse texture quality?

It doesn’t. Because as mentioned a dozen times now, the texture quality setting impacts items not shown off in that video. Dropping the texture quality setting doesn’t worsen textures across everything, it only impact certain objects. You won’t notice the difference between medium and even cinematic (the highest PC setting) in that video.

 

[akira__]

It doesn’t. Because as mentioned a dozen times now, the texture quality setting impacts items not shown off in that video. Dropping the texture quality setting doesn’t worsen textures across everything, it only impact certain objects. You won’t notice the difference between medium and even cinematic (the highest PC setting) in that video.

And thus you are disagreeing with Richard. Let me show you the conversation again.

 

[PaintTinJr]

Nah it’s fine, I’ll think I’ll ignore your attempt as gaslighting and stick to what my own eyes see and what NXGamer (who has extensive experience in the field) has analyzed. Keep believing that this poorly optimized game has super special fog on PS5 that even a 4090 can’t handle.

This is a discussion on technical merit, whether your delicate feelings consider my previous comment gaaslighting - which just so happens to then be a convenient dodge - to avoid having to defend an argument you made, and doubled down on and now don't want to support with evidence specific to that DF RX6700 based PC, and want to side step your own point with scattershot Nvidia RTX card videos is pretty disingenuous of you.

You mention what your eyes see, but most of your points are proxying for others that aren't seeing things correctly in their supposed analysis, and it is interesting you deflect about DF to bring in NXGamer to the discussion. You all(DF acolytes) took issue with him in the past running his PC with games for extra hours before doing benchmarks - like the matrix demo - because they lowered PC performance numbers. Can I assume DF did follow his fairer testing methodology for this, or are these numbers going to be even lower on the DF RX6700 PC after running the game for hours?

 

[Zathalus]

And thus you are disagreeing with Richard. Let me show you the conversation again.

Holy fucking shit dude, he is referring to the PC setting in general, not that the scene displayed has worse textures. This is reading comprehension 101.

This is a discussion on technical merit, whether your delicate feelings consider my previous comment gaaslighting - which just so happens to then be a convenient dodge - to avoid having to defend an argument you made, and doubled down on and now don't want to support with evidence specific to that DF RX6700 based PC, and want to side step your own point with scattershot Nvidia RTX card videos is pretty disingenuous of you.

You mention what your eyes see, but most of your points are proxying for others that aren't seeing things correctly in their supposed analysis, and it is interesting you deflect about DF to bring in NXGamer to the discussion. You all(DF acolytes) took issue with him in the past running his PC with games for extra hours before doing benchmarks - like the matrix demo - because they lowered PC performance numbers. Can I assume DF did follow his fairer testing methodology for this, or are these numbers going to be even lower on the DF RX6700 PC after running the game for hours?

Running a PC with extra hours leading to lower PC performance numbers only happens if your PC has a cooling problem. As long as your GPU and CPU is kept cool you are not going to get big differences in performance runs. I can run 3D Mark on a 10 hour loop and get a tiny variance in runs. It’s clear you know jack shit about modern PC gaming, especially when previously you claimed Elden Ring had way worse loading on PC vs PS5 and when pointed out to you with multiple points of evidence you simply doubled down and blamed such a niche issue that has near zero impacts on modern PCs.

I suppose I can link various AMD cards playing the game with zero change to fog quality from the PS5 or Nvidia counterparts but you’d just find a way to disagree with that as well. I linked a 4060, that card performs similar to a 6700 in this game.

 

[akira__]

Holy fucking shit dude, he is referring to the PC setting in general, not that the scene displayed has worse textures. This is reading comprehension 101.

He referred to ps5, and it's a video so no reading. But that's okay buddy, you already said he was incorrect. You keep flip flopping between that is and isn't correct at the same time.

 

[Zathalus]

He referred to ps5, and it's a video so no reading. But that's okay buddy, you already said he was incorrect. You keep flip flopping between that is and isn't correct at the same time.

No, my position is quite clear. You’re the one that think medium textures means something completely different from what the setting actually does.

 

[rodrigolfp]

images look great on consoles.

No, they don't.

Maybe in screenshots in photo mode. Hell, even with DLSS some few games IQs don't look great.

 

[rodrigolfp]

You clearly didn't read the thread, nor did you watch the video, nor did you look at the framerate counters or looked at the giant.

The best version of the game is on pc, we know that because that is the version the devs send out for review.

This is not pc vs ps5, this is weirdly build pc, which they say runs the same. When it clearly doesn't run the same.

The last few pages has been full of posters who disagree with the premise of thread, and try to agree with DF yet at the same time rationalise away the obvious difference.

Thus they hold 2 positions at the same time:
- DF is correct it's the same.
- it's not the same because x,y,z.

My quotes were not in response for the thread.

And I read the thread where you keep crying that over sharpening looks better and don't understand that the textures on PC are better.

 

[adamsapple]

My quotes were not in response for the thread.

And I read the thread where you keep crying that over sharpening looks better and don't understand that the textures on PC are better.

 

[rodrigolfp]

And that is even with DLSS performance. Imagine with DLAA.

 

[akira__]

My quotes were not in response for the thread.

And I read the thread where you keep crying that over sharpening looks better and don't understand that the textures on PC are better.

Ah yes, that world where we shouldn't trust our eyes. But instead believe what DF says. It look worse, clearly but according to you actually it's better. Based on sharpening that is making it look worse. Thanks for your input makes allot sense...

The issue is frame generation is on, as such(if you would understand that technology) it becomes almost impossible to compare.

 

[rodrigolfp]

Ah yes, that world where we shouldn't trust our eyes. But instead believe what DF says. It look worse, clearly but according to you actually it's better. Based on sharpening that is making it look worse. Thanks for your input makes allot sense...

The issue is frame generation is on, as such(if you would understand that technology) it becomes almost impossible to compare.

We can force oversharpness on that PC through reshade or Radeon/Nvidia driver if we want to "match" the PS5 setting. But DF don't do that also to not hurt the feelings of some console warriors.

 

[Braag]

Unless they tamper with the data they are showing, I don't know how they can be biased. Their opinions on different platforms or Alex talking smack about PC ports has nothing to do with the raw data being shown.

 

[SKYF@ll]

No, they don't.

Maybe in screenshots in photo mode. Hell, even with DLSS some few games IQs don't look great.

What console and mode is that terrible quality capture in?

 

[Freelance Yakuza]

It was fun the watch the transition from 360 vs PS3 to PS4 vs Xone.

If the Xbox 360 version of any game had 2 more FPS or 4 more pixels than the PS3 version, it would be considered the definitive, must-buy, 'as God intended' edition.

Meanwhile, the PS4 could have 50% higher pixel count and 20 more FPS, and it would be considered barely noticeable

 

[adamsapple]

If the Xbox 360 version of any game had 2 more FPS or 4 more pixels than the PS3 version, it would be considered the definitive, must-buy, 'as God intended' edition.

Meanwhile, the PS4 could have 50% higher pixel count and 20 more FPS, and it would be considered barely noticeable

Wanna share some example(s) where this happened?

What console and mode is that terrible quality capture in?

Jedi Survivor PS5/SX performance mode IIRC.

 

[akira__]

We can force oversharpness on that PC through reshade or Radeon/Nvidia driver if we want to "match" the PS5 setting. But DF don't do that also to not hurt the feelings of some console warriors.

Yeah, they just say it's exactly the same, and then make pc run worse. Because they want to look like clowns.

Your points make zero sense.

 

[rodrigolfp]

Yeah, they just say it's exactly the same, and then make pc run worse. Because they want to look like clowns.

Your points make zero sense.

They said the SETTINGS are PRETTY MUCH same in game. It is in YOUR OWN screenshots.

 

[akira__]

They said the SETTINGS are PRETTY MUCH same in game. It is in YOUR OWN screenshots.

That is the point of this thread. It's more fun if you actually make good points.

They say it's the same, but the performance and image quality are clearly not thus it's not the same.

That is what the whole thread is about...

 

[rodrigolfp]

That is the point of this thread. It's more fun if you actually make good points.

They say it's the same, but the performance and image quality are clearly not thus it's not the same.

That is whole thread...

Pretty much the same =/= the same. Do you even english? And performance has nothing to do with graphics settings as they never said the performance is the same as clearly it is not.

 

[PaintTinJr]

Pretty much the same =/= the same. Do you even english? And performance has nothing to do with graphics settings.

In context of this being technical analysis pretty much the same is closer to saying : nearly pixel for pixel.

 

[rodrigolfp]

In context of this being technical analysis pretty much the same is closer to saying : nearly pixel for pixel.

Nearly pixel for pixel =/= pixel for pixel.

 

[PaintTinJr]

Nearly pixel for pixel =/= pixel for pixel.

But close enough, certainly not Vaseline covered characters and objects, loss of texture detail and cheaper fog as all seen clearly in the cinematics where the frame-rate is also a whole GPU SKU different to the PS5.

 

[rodrigolfp]

But close enough, certainly not Vaseline covered characters and objects, loss of texture detail and cheaper fog as all seen clearly in the cinematics where the frame-rate is also a whole GPU SKU different to the PS5.

Insert sharpness filters, set the resolution higher, turn fog settings higher. Not problems on PC version.

 

[PaintTinJr]

Insert sharpness filters, set the resolution higher, turn fog settings higher. Not problems on PC version.

All alter everything ,and the fog definitely alters performance because it is tied to draw distance precision. hack with a shader hijacker is hardly analsys comparison worthy

 

[Arsic]

Bold of you to assume that I, or anyone on GAF, actually watch their videos.

We just read the list summary someone posts.

 

[rodrigolfp]

All alter everything ,and the fog definitely alters performance because it is tied to draw distance precision. hack with a shader hijacker is hardly analsys comparison worthy

That's why they didn't do that. Doesn't mean we as consumers can't do that with our game.

 

[PaintTinJr]

That's why they didn't do that. Doesn't mean we as consumers can't do that with our game.

And we as consumers can also say provide real proof that it is nearly pixel accurate - or it didn't happen.

In hindsight they should have done it, as an extra at the end, so we'd have actual video images to process and test the veracity of the claim, which clearly aren't true in that regard because of the fog and the result on frame-rate.

As Topher said earlier in the thread, people cherry pick and even with DF in the position to frame things however they like and cherry pick they still pick poorly at times to support their predetermined conclusions, because they lack the technical knowledge as shown in the comparison example at 6:03. which ends abruptly because it almost certainly shows an even worse comparison at 6:06.

 

[rodrigolfp]

which clearly aren't true in that regard because of the fog

You still didn't prove that the fog is not dynamic.