• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Tomb Raider: Definitive Edition |OT| Lara shot first

GribbleGrunger

Dreams in Digital
Damn, between these 2 Tomb Raider Threads, my sarcasm joke meter has been petered out. It is dead. I just cannot tell anymore with some of the stuff people are saying.

lol, I am just going to have to continue to reply to people I know and trust from my years on NeoGaf, cause I don't even know what is the truth, what is a joke, and what is......

Anyways, I am finally going to play the game now. I got it earlier, but was playing Skylanders with my daughter. We found StinkBomb and she was really excited to play with him. I bought Tomb Raider on PS4, I cannot wait to check out the game. I have never played it at all

I don't think sarcasm can live in this current climate. I played Tombraider on the PS3. You're in for a treat.

If you stream it, stick the link up and I'll watch for a while.
 

IvorB

Member
Back to impressions of the game...

Audio: Comparing it to the PS3 version, the PS4 version is quieter in some channels (7.1). I have my PS4 set to PCM, and it is running through the same receiver as my PS3. I can't quite figure it out, but I get the sense the sounds of thunder are not as clean. In addition, the voices may be quieter and get a smidge out of sync on PS4 during the cutscenes.

None of this is a deal breaker, but I do think the PS3 version sounds better, if just slightly. Anyone else notice this?

I've been very disappointed with audio on PS4. Killzone sound is muddy and rough. After the super audio on Super Stardust HD I was hoping Resogun would sound great but it just doesn't. I really hope this is not a trend.
 

Tsundere

Banned
Optimization happens all the time with consoles. But to decrease something that drastically, in such a short amount of time? I have no idea what they could have done to achieve something like that. If there's zero difference on the UI side in terms of "downgrading" snap or something, I'll be seriously impressed.

They will probably implement some restrictions when it comes to Snap and such to free up some memory for actual games.
 
According to the latest tweet by famousmortimer, xbone GPU reservation will go from 10% down to 2% soon.
How the fuck did MS manage to do that?

What could that mean for tomb raider framerate in xbone?


Are we really going back to famousmortimer tweets? I'll take it more seriously when he legitimately posts it on GAF.
 

GribbleGrunger

Dreams in Digital
I've been very disappointed with audio on PS4. Killzone sound is muddy and rough. After the super audio on Super Stardust HD I was hoping Resogun would sound great but it just doesn't. I really hope this is not a trend.

Have you got your TV set on volume levelling? I had no problem with volume on any of my games after I turned it off.
 

Skeff

Member
We have no concrete numbers on the framerate, only what has been said by PR, reviewers, and my leak. Performance is yet to be measured, and most reports floating around online seem to be about the PlayStation 4 build.

Based on what I was told, I expect the frame difference to be on average ~20fps, give or take a few frames.

EDIT: I will say, the witch hunt against reviewers who may not mark down the Xbox One build for performing worse brings me back to the last generation when the Wii was getting the odd port here and there. It's not something I really agree with.

With Regards to your edit, i don't think it's a witchhunt (or at least it shouldn't be), I'd personally Just like to see consistency from a site/publication on whether or not technical details affect the review of the game and whether or not that sites reviews should take into account these technical issues or not. There are times in the Tomb Raider combat where a higher framerate will affect gameplay, I feel if a site or publication has previously reviewed technical aspects in games to differentiate the scores for each platform it should continue.
 

chubigans

y'all should be ashamed
Sweet, thanks Chubs! After reading that, the only thing I can think of is they have been working on it for a while or their engineers are somehow better than we think?
hoping for the latter, but leaning toward the former...

It could be that 2% was the original target in the first place but was rushed like everything else in the OS. Should be interesting to see.

They will probably implement some restrictions when it comes to Snap and such to free up some memory for actual games.

MS has stated before how each game has their own OS to use in a sense. So that all launch games and launch window games could use snap normally, but future games like Halo would have some restrictions in favor of graphics. But really who knows. Hopefully this is a result of optimization.
 

IvorB

Member
Have you got your TV set on volume levelling? I had no problem with volume on any of my games after I turned it off.

Audio is coming through a receiver via HDMI in Linear PCM. Should be the best there is. It's not the volume but just the overall quality. Super Stardust HD had amazing audio but Resogun I can't even really hear that it's surround. Killzone actually sounds pretty rough, especially the gunshots.
 

Skeff

Member
With regards to 10% to 2% I believe the 10% was both Snap and GPGPU for the Kinect so that developers did not have to reserve any GPU for kinect functions so that more games would use Kinect (I don't understand the logic there either) I would imagine that now this change removes the GPGPU reservation for Kinect from future games and allows developers to specify kinect or no kinect and the system will reserve 10% or 2% depending on if Kinect is being used in a game.

That's my theory anyway.
 

chubigans

y'all should be ashamed
With regards to 10% to 2% I believe the 10% was both Snap and GPGPU for the Kinect so that developers did not have to reserve any GPU for kinect functions so that more games would use Kinect (I don't understand the logic there either) I would imagine that now this change removes the GPGPU reservation for Kinect from future games and allows developers to specify kinect or no kinect and the system will reserve 10% or 2% depending on if Kinect is being used in a game.

That's my theory anyway.
That does sound plausible. Kinect still has to be on to pick up voice commands; I wonder how much that takes up.
 

LowerLevel

Member
With regards to 10% to 2% I believe the 10% was both Snap and GPGPU for the Kinect so that developers did not have to reserve any GPU for kinect functions so that more games would use Kinect (I don't understand the logic there either) I would imagine that now this change removes the GPGPU reservation for Kinect from future games and allows developers to specify kinect or no kinect and the system will reserve 10% or 2% depending on if Kinect is being used in a game.

That's my theory anyway.

That makes great sense to my uninformed eyes as well, thanks.

Man, I just want to see if, and by how much, does the Xb1 version dips below 30...
 
With regards to 10% to 2% I believe the 10% was both Snap and GPGPU for the Kinect so that developers did not have to reserve any GPU for kinect functions so that more games would use Kinect (I don't understand the logic there either) I would imagine that now this change removes the GPGPU reservation for Kinect from future games and allows developers to specify kinect or no kinect and the system will reserve 10% or 2% depending on if Kinect is being used in a game.

That's my theory anyway.

Kinect voice and gesture functions still need to work even in games that don't use it, though, but it's a good theory.
 

GribbleGrunger

Dreams in Digital
With regards to 10% to 2% I believe the 10% was both Snap and GPGPU for the Kinect so that developers did not have to reserve any GPU for kinect functions so that more games would use Kinect (I don't understand the logic there either) I would imagine that now this change removes the GPGPU reservation for Kinect from future games and allows developers to specify kinect or no kinect and the system will reserve 10% or 2% depending on if Kinect is being used in a game.

That's my theory anyway.

That's the first thing that crossed my mind. I recall a developer asking if they could use some of that reserve and MS refusing. Perhaps they're getting a lot of negative reports back and have decided to allow devs to pick and choose which features to include. If that's the case though, I can see more negativity that positivity coming out of this regardless of better game performance.
 

Skeff

Member
Kinect voice and gesture functions still need to work even in games that don't use it, though, but it's a good theory.

Yes, But I suppose it depends on what it used for GPGPU, I strongly Doubt voice is GPGPU, and I actually have no ideas about what the OS gestures are, so I wouldn't e able to speculate on that.
 
That's the first thing that crossed my mind. I recall a developer asking if they could use some of that reserve and MS refusing. Perhaps they're getting a lot of negative reports back and have decided to allow devs to pick and choose which features to include. If that's the case though, I can see more negativity that positivity coming out of this regardless of better game performance.

Negativity? Why? This is good news especially with Titanfall coming.
 
I bought a Tomb Raider Steam Key the other day for $16. I played the game on PC at ultra settings getting an average of a about 60 fps. If the PS4 matches those settings then it's a beast indeed.

That being said, the xbox One is getting about 35 fps at native 1080P. While that doesn't sound like much comparatively, if you considering just 6-8 weeks ago certain insiders were saying the box would generally do 720P-900P over it's lifetime and 1080P would be a diamond in the rough, it's speaks volumes about the Xbox One version of the game, especially if you consider the fact that Tomb Raider is the best looking game on console.
 
Back to impressions of the game...

Audio: Comparing it to the PS3 version, the PS4 version is quieter in some channels (7.1). I have my PS4 set to PCM, and it is running through the same receiver as my PS3. I can't quite figure it out, but I get the sense the sounds of thunder are not as clean. In addition, the voices may be quieter and get a smidge out of sync on PS4 during the cutscenes.

None of this is a deal breaker, but I do think the PS3 version sounds better, if just slightly. Anyone else notice this?

Noticed some uneven audio at times myself. Don't know if they're pushing some of the SFX to the controller channel entirely as some hits have come off as too soft.
 

Skeff

Member
Negativity? Why? This is good news especially with Titanfall coming.

I think the Negativity could come from early adopters who have bought the XB1 with Kinect under the understanding that Developers will add Kinect features because it requires no extra reservations from the developer to do so.

Personally I think it's a good thing for everyone, even people who own PS4's, Improving the baseline for next gen games.

EDIT: Sorry WiiU.
 
Anyone who has played both the XB1 and PS4 versions of Ghosts know that its total bullshit to say that the "frame-rate inconsistencies" caused problems with the gameplay. The game plays exactly the same on both consoles.

I have played both versions extensively, and I would definitely say the framerate is a problem on PS4.

However, I still disagree with Polygon's decision to give the PS4 version a lower score because I think the 1080p resolution is a huge advantage over the XB1's 720p. IMO they deserve the same score.
 

Pennywise

Member
That being said, the xbox One is getting about 35 fps at native 1080P. While that doesn't sound like much comparatively, if you considering just 6-8 weeks ago certain insiders were saying the box would generally do 720P-900P over it's lifetime and 1080P would be a diamond in the rough, it's speaks volumes about the Xbox One version of the game, especially if you consider the fact that Tomb Raider is the best looking game on console.

It's still just an beefed up last gen game.
If TR would have been 900-720p, hell would have breaken loose here.
We'll see about the rest when more exclusives and multiplattform titles hit that aren't just last gen games with a workaround.
 

TAJ

Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.
Did not realize how bad the ps4 screenshot feature compresses it D:

I used the PS4 screenshot feature here. (I don't have Tomb Raider for PS4.) It's pretty much a worst-case scenario for compression. The background would have more artifacts than the Smithsonian through Twitter or Facebook, but I think this looks sorta ok hosted through minus.com
iCaqwsN3enytA.jpg
 

Finaika

Member
Back to impressions of the game...

Audio: Comparing it to the PS3 version, the PS4 version is quieter in some channels (7.1). I have my PS4 set to PCM, and it is running through the same receiver as my PS3. I can't quite figure it out, but I get the sense the sounds of thunder are not as clean. In addition, the voices may be quieter and get a smidge out of sync on PS4 during the cutscenes.

None of this is a deal breaker, but I do think the PS3 version sounds better, if just slightly. Anyone else notice this?

The PS4 outputs lower volume than my PS3 in general.

Which is weird...
 
I bought a Tomb Raider Steam Key the other day for $16. I played the game on PC at ultra settings getting an average of a about 60 fps. If the PS4 matches those settings then it's a beast indeed.

That being said, the xbox One is getting about 35 fps at native 1080P. While that doesn't sound like much comparatively, if you considering just 6-8 weeks ago certain insiders were saying the box would generally do 720P-900P over it's lifetime and 1080P would be a diamond in the rough, it's speaks volumes about the Xbox One version of the game, especially if you consider the fact that Tomb Raider is the best looking game on console.

Have you looked at Uncharted3 or even The Last of Us?? These two are easily the best looking games on a console.
 

Harp

Member
Back to impressions of the game...

Audio: Comparing it to the PS3 version, the PS4 version is quieter in some channels (7.1). I have my PS4 set to PCM, and it is running through the same receiver as my PS3. I can't quite figure it out, but I get the sense the sounds of thunder are not as clean. In addition, the voices may be quieter and get a smidge out of sync on PS4 during the cutscenes.

None of this is a deal breaker, but I do think the PS3 version sounds better, if just slightly. Anyone else notice this?

Funny because on my sound system the quality of the surround sound is excellent. Everything is High quality. And all sound is highlighted by the controller speaker. Which I find odd you didnt mention when talking about sound.
 
It's still just an beefed up last gen game.
If TR would have been 900-720p, hell would have breaken loose here.
We'll see about the rest when more exclusives and multiplattform titles hit that aren't just last gen games with a workaround.

Last gen or not it's the best looking game on console and certainly top 5 on PC.
 

DenogginizerOS

BenjaminBirdie's Thomas Jefferson
Funny because on my sound system the quality of the surround sound is excellent. Everything is High quality. And all sound is highlighted by the controller speaker. Which I find odd you didnt mention when talking about sound.
I find the controller sound to be out of place and is like pumping RCA audio through my clock radio and then declaring it a part of surround sound.
 

Harp

Member
I find the controller sound to be out of place and is like pumping RCA audio through my clock radio and then declaring it a part of surround sound.

Blends very will for me what is your current setup and what type of receiver do you have? My main speakers are much louder then the controller so it just a added effect.
 
Funny because on my sound system the quality of the surround sound is excellent. Everything is High quality. And all sound is highlighted by the controller speaker. Which I find odd you didnt mention when talking about sound.

I turned off that speaker a long time ago.
 

DenogginizerOS

BenjaminBirdie's Thomas Jefferson
Blends very will for me what is your current setup and what type of receiver do you have? My main speakers are much louder then the controller so it just a added effect.
My current setup is fine. I have no interest in critiquing the controller's speaker.
 

Y2Kev

TLG Fan Caretaker Est. 2009
Yeah, so, I deleted the entire last page of posts. No more derails. I don't care what you think about XB1 or PS4 or hardware rumors or whatever. Go post on Major Nelson's blog, and neither should anyone else playing Tomb Raider. It has NOTHING TO DO with tomb raider.
 

ANDS

King of Gaslighting
I used to be in the whole "I can't tell 30 vs. 60" camp of folks. Once you see 60 frames, you can absolutely tell when something is and is not. Now I can't gauge intermediate frames, but to say that 30 and 60 is indistinguishable from your eye - come on. That's a load of malarkey. 60 just has this fluidness about it that makes you feel like it's "there". 30 doesn't like bad but it definitely has a different "feel" than 60.

That being said, you can absolutely tell that TR is in 60FPS. Everything just feels so silky (except the actual controls - zing!).
 

R3TRODYCE

Member
I noticed that they didn't redo the grass, it really sticks out in a pretty good looking game. I think I'm going to start my third playthrough to clear some trophies since I finished the game with like 13.
 

LowerLevel

Member
I just really want to know if the frames drop significantly on the Xb1 version to where it becomes a "slide show" or something similar during heavy areas. 30 frames doesn't bother me. Is 60 better? Hell yes, but I do not own a Ps4 at the moment and my PC can't quite do Ultra settings. I want to buy this, but i will skip if, say, during the shanty town the framerate turns into a chore to complete the game... The Gif from Kotaku looks nice but doesn't show me anything other than that.
 

FrankT

Member
I just really want to know if the frames drop significantly on the Xb1 version to where it becomes a "slide show" or something similar during heavy areas. 30 frames doesn't bother me. Is 60 better? Hell yes, but I do not own a Ps4 at the moment and my PC can't quite do Ultra settings. I want to buy this, but i will skip if, say, during the shanty town the framerate turns into a chore to complete the game... The Gif from Kotaku looks nice but doesn't show me anything other than that.

There is no slide show at all. It holds very well and I've been playing it since yesterday. Only time I noticed a weird judder type effect was in a couple of the early cut scenes. It keeps 30 plus easily.

It is the graphical showcase so far and it holds a very respectable framerate.
 

LowerLevel

Member
There is no slide show at all. It holds very well and I've been playing it since yesterday. Only time I noticed a weird judder type effect was in a couple of the early cut scenes. It keeps 30 plus easily.

Thanks J!
why aren't you on my friends list?
 

pelican

Member
Originally had by the PS4 version preorderd but swapped it over to thee Bone release.

Don't care about the possible fps variation. Played the original on the PS3 so this time xboxen time. Can't wait, TR was one of my favourite games last year. Perfect? No, but I loved it.
 
Top Bottom