Support NeoGAF

[GHG]

Not really, it's not a point that's just made in this video. You can check pretty much any DF Elden Ring coverage and John (who has done most of it) always says he preferred playing the game on Xbox because of the broader VRR coverage.

This thread is about the video in the OP which covers how VRR impacts games (including elden ring), not what John said in 2022.

You can test this out very easily yourself in any 120hz game. If there is a difference, it's so minute that you won't even notice it. I know I've never noticed it. Maybe this is something that's easier to see in the PC sphere.

These kinds of trade-offs have always been there and are clear to see unless you are blind. I've discussed this at length over the years how VRR has an impact on image quality and can result in bugs/glitches dependant on the display (particular so on TV's with VRR).

 

[b0uncyfr0]

Did they ever say VRR was a magic bullet though?

Isnt it common sense that it isnt - especially at lower fps

 

[adamsapple]

I've said for a long time to get the best out of this gen on consoles you need a good TV.

VRR is amazing and I never want to go back , it's not a magic bullet and it was never labeled a magic bullet, but play the likes of Far Cry 6 or Dragons Dogma 2 with out it and it's shocking the difference it makes.

I actually have more issue with the picture in Game Mode than in VRR, since you don't get such a vivid display.

DF are hitting a low with this video IMO

The video mostly covers it from a PC perspective where the more 'power user' kind of person is, so I get why Alex ix pointing out the quirks in it.

As far as consoles go, it is one feature I cannot go without again and I hope all future consoles continue to retain it.

A game like Dragon's Dogma 2 with its terrible fluctuating frame rate becomes a lot more enjoyable with VRR and that is my current game of the year.

Did they ever say VRR was a magic bullet though?

Isnt it common sense that it isnt - especially at lower fps

No, nothing they said in the video is new information or things we didn't know

GHG was just missing Riky

This thread is about the video in the OP which covers how VRR impacts games (including elden ring), not what John said in 2022.

I'm using the one popular game example using consoles that is featured in this very video comparing the PS5 and Xbox's implementation of VRR and 120hz + LFC.

These kinds of trade-offs have always been there and are clear to see unless you are blind. I've discussed this at length over the years how VRR has an impact on image quality and can result in bugs/glitches dependant on the display (particular so on TV's with VRR).

Like I said, if there are any differences, they're mostly imperceptible and I'll personally take all the gains that come with VRR over it

Just find a nearest PS5 or Series X and play Dragon's Dogma 2 without VRR and then with it and the obviously better way to play will be clear.

I wish all consoles were equipped with 40x series GPU's that could overpower deficiencies, but alas they aren't.

 

[tr1p1ex]

didn't see the point once I got it.

 

[Physiognomonics]

LFC blur is almost impossible to spot. It will also only occur the FPS drops below 40fps. It’s also easy to disable by just forcing 120hz off.

You can test it for yourself on PS5 if you have Dragons Dogma 2, compare 120hz on vs off and see which one is better.

I don't have a VRR monitor, and I am perfectly happy with stuttering uncapped framerates, and always has been. But the fact that this would bother John from DF, who loves blur from motion blur, should tell me it's a quite noticeable and ugly problem. I do remember he already talked years ago about the problem of IQ in those LFC enabled games. Knowing me I how partial I am to sharp looking games (and I prefer a 35-45fps non-VRR uncapped framerate vs locked 30fps game), I already know I won't like it.

 

[cireza]

Useless feature, learn how to make proper 30 or 60fps locked games. Same for upscaling features, useless. Learn how to make native 1080p games. Optimize your games.

 

[Zathalus]

I don't have a VRR monitor, and I am perfectly happy with stuttering uncapped framerates, and always has been. But the fact that this would bother John from DF, who loves blur from motion blur, should tell me it's a quite noticeable and ugly problem. I do remember he already talked years ago about the problem of IQ in those LFC enabled games. Knowing me I how partial I am to sharp looking games (and I prefer a 35-45fps non-VRR uncapped framerate vs locked 30fps game), I already know I won't like it.

Then just don’t use it. LFC will only activate with a 120hz refresh rate (on consoles) VRR is perfectly usable in the 40-60 (48-60 for PS5) range without it. Or just use BFI if it is such a bother. As for John liking motion blur, he likes per object motion blur which is entirely different from screen based or movement based motion blur.

 

[adamsapple]

I don't have a VRR monitor, and I am perfectly happy with stuttering uncapped framerates, and always has been. But the fact that this would bother John from DF, who loves blur from motion blur, should tell me it's a quite noticeable and ugly problem. I do remember he already talked years ago about the problem of IQ in those LFC enabled games. Knowing me I how partial I am to sharp looking games (and I prefer a 35-45fps non-VRR uncapped framerate vs locked 30fps game), I already know I won't like it.

John isn't even in this video ...

Also, this is what he specifically said. Running 60hz games in 120hz containers (that don't have native 120hz support) can cause some motion doubling, which can show trails.

He is still positive about the 40~60hz VRR range even if you disable 120hz on a system level.




-


Later he also says that it's something most people wouldn't even notice.


So, I don't think it's anywhere near as big of a deal as you might think.




-


If you're OK with constant judder between 35~45, god speed.

I'll take the remedying option to make it look / feel smoother if given the choice.

 

[GHG]

I'm using the one popular game example using consoles that is featured in this very video comparing the PS5 and Xbox's implementation of VRR and 120hz + LFC.

Of course you are, but as I said I'm my original reply you failed to provide full context surrounding the VRR situation with the game, which of course was convenient for you considering how you attempted to frame it.

Like I said, if there are any differences, they're mostly imperceptible and I'll personally take all the gains that come with VRR over it

Just find a nearest PS5 or Series X and play Dragon's Dogma 2 without VRR and then with it and the obviously better way to play will be clear.

I wish all consoles were equipped with 40x series GPU's that could overpower deficiencies, but alas they aren't.

What you should be asking for is for devs to appropriately optimise their console games so that you don't have to rely on VRR.

John isn't even in this video ...

Also, this is what he specifically said. Running 60hz games in 120hz containers (that don't have native 120hz support) can cause some motion doubling, which can show trails.

He is still positive about the 40~60hz VRR range even if you disable 120hz on a system level.




-


Later he also says that it's something most people wouldn't even notice.


So, I don't think it's anywhere near as big of a deal as you might think.




-


If you're OK with constant judder between 35~45, god speed.

I'll take the remedying option to make it look / feel smoother if given the choice.

Why go through all this when there's a simple option to play at a consistent 60fps while on console?

 

[adamsapple]

Of course you are, but as I said I'm my original reply you failed to provide full context surrounding the VRR situation with the game, which of course was convenient for you considering how you attempted to frame it.

The blur/trail can be easily fixed by setting the system to 60hz instead of 120hz and still retain the benefits of VRR.

The only way I've attempted to frame it is by highlighting the net positive the feature brings.

What you should be asking for is for devs to appropriately optimise their console games so that you don't have to rely on VRR.

This is true but unfortunate that it doesn't happen in most cases.

Why go through all this when there's a simple option to play at a consistent 60fps while on console?

True. But then you're trading performance for visuals, essentially playing the last-gen version of the game.

P Physiognomonics is sensitive to IQ / visual changes per his last post so it'd be a deal breaker for users like that.

 

[Team Andromeda]

Explain. Why does this video and them finally educating people on the facts surrounding the technology make you uncomfortable?

Because I have never ever seen anyone make out that VRR is a magic bullet and give one perfect frame rates no matter what. What next? DF having a go at Game Mode on a TV and making out it's not a magic bullet for controller lag.

The video mostly covers it from a PC perspective where the more 'power user' kind of person is, so I get why Alex ix pointing out the quirks in it.

As far as consoles go, it is one feature I cannot go without again and I hope all future consoles continue to retain it.

A game like Dragon's Dogma 2 with its terrible fluctuating frame rate becomes a lot more enjoyable with VRR and that is my current game of the year.

Well, it should have just been a PC topic then. It does make a huge difference the its all the more apparent when you play on a TV that doesn't support VRR. Also, the video undermined Alex's boss. I remember Rich vid on VRR saying it was a 'game changer' for consoles

 

[GHG]

Because I have never ever seen anyone make out that VRR is a magic bullet and give one perfect frame rates no matter what. What next? DF having a go at Game Mode on a TV and making out it's not a magic bullet for controller lag.

Now you're just lying, nobody is talking about "perfect frames", the discussion is around how people have greatly exaggerated the impact of VRR and how it does not mitigate for performance issues in the way that people have claimed, all of which you were involved in by the way.

Here's you claiming you don't get any frame drops with VRR:

Here's you claiming VRR eliminates stutter:

You claiming there are "no issues" with a game thanks to VRR despite the framerate dropping to 53fps in a game that is supposed to hold 60fps:

You claiming the well documented OLED VRR flicker doesn't exist:

Need I go on?

You were deep in the trenches on this topic along with Riky , supporting each other's nonsensical (and a lot of the time, outright false) posts surrounding the subject of VRR. If I didn't know any better I'd think several of the posts on the topic came from the same person.

So in that context, it's now 100% apparent as to why you're taking issue with this video from digital foundry.

 

[GHG]

The blur/trail can be easily fixed by setting the system to 60hz instead of 120hz and still retain the benefits of VRR.

The only way I've attempted to frame it is by highlighting the net positive the feature brings.

Yeh, while ignoring the issues VRR introduces, which is what the subject is about.

True. But then you're trading performance for visuals, essentially playing the last-gen version of the game.

Trading performance for visuals is what happens on every single console game that offers both performance and visuals modes. It's just that in the case of Elden Ring, the performance mode should have been the "last gen" (whatever that means in this context) version with a solid 60fps.

Either that or they should have offered it as an extra mode so that people could have the option via their "next gen" game installs, including those playing on Xbox. It's the kind of game that benefits greatly from a consistent and stable framerate, a slight uptick in resolution at the expense of framerate stability isn't going to be of great benefit to anyone in a game that relies on the timing of your inputs to such a degree.

 

[cinnamonandgravy]

No you don't get better framepacing.

yes do you.

on a fixed refresh rate display (no vrr), the framerate must divide cleanly into the monitor's refresh rate in order for the time between frames to be the same.
when the time between frames is the same, it feels extra smooth.
this is the whole point of fps caps on a non-vrr display.

so on a 60hz display, your fps needs to divide into 60.
60fps = 1 frame per 1 monitor refresh (each frame 16.67ms apart)
30 fps = 1 frame per 2 monitor refreshes (each frame 33.33ms apart)

but what if your fps doesnt cleanly divide into 60?
every second, you'll either have dropped frames or duplicate frames.
which means not smooth.

for example, let's say you have 59fps.
each frame will be 16.67ms apart, except for one frame which will need to display twice, which introduces a random 33.33ms gap. and you can feel this (some do more than others).

vrr would not have a problem with 59 fps because it automatically changes the refresh rate to 59, so now all 59 frames have the same amount of time between them.

gah this took longer than expected to explain. time for breakfast.

 

[GHG]

yes do you.

on a fixed refresh rate display (no vrr), the framerate must divide cleanly into the monitor's refresh rate in order for the time between frames to be the same.
when the time between frames is the same, it feels extra smooth.
this is the whole point of fps caps on a non-vrr display.

so on a 60hz display, your fps needs to divide into 60.
60fps = 1 frame per 1 monitor refresh (each frame 16.67ms apart)
30 fps = 1 frame per 2 monitor refreshes (each frame 33.33ms apart)

but what if your fps doesnt cleanly divide into 60?
every second, you'll either have dropped frames or duplicate frames.
which means not smooth.

for example, let's say you have 59fps.
each frame will be 16.67ms apart, except for one frame which will need to display twice, which introduces a random 33.33ms gap. and you can feel this (some do more than others).

vrr would not have a problem with 59 fps because it automatically changes the refresh rate to 59, so now all 59 frames have the same amount of time between them.

gah this took longer than expected to explain. time for breakfast.

Try watching the video while eating your breakfast, you might find the discussion educational. VRR factually cannot overcome games that exhibit framepacing issues.

From my experience for you to overcome framepacing issues you'd need to use DLSS frame gen (or similar technology if AMD's solution can overcome it in the same way). But that comes at the expense of latency, so again, there are trade-offs.

 

[Fess]

Of course it’s limited in what in can accomplish, but getting a Gsync monitor for the first time years ago sure felt like magic.

Yeah, bought one of the first ASUS 24 inch gsync screens, think it had a retrofitted gsync module, only had one input, display port, was odd at the time. And everything was butter smooth. I can’t talk about the tech in detail but I trust my eyes.

 

[poppabk]

Try watching the video while eating your breakfast, you might find the discussion educational. VRR factually cannot overcome games that exhibit framepacing issues.

From my experience for you to overcome framepacing issues you'd need to use DLSS frame gen (or similar technology if AMD's solution can overcome it in the same way). But that comes at the expense of latency, so again, there are trade-offs.

It can do better than not VRR though and will make most games look 'smooth' unless the framepacing issues are large.
Also I had to watch this video at 1.75 speed, this guy talks like he is trying to fill dead air.

 

[GHG]

It can do better than not VRR though and will make most games look 'smooth' unless the framepacing issues are large.
Also I had to watch this video at 1.75 speed, this guy talks like he is trying to fill dead air.

Of course it's better than not having VRR, that was never up for dispute.

 

[cinnamonandgravy]

VRR factually cannot overcome games that exhibit framepacing issues.

yeah and i said vrr yields better framepacing, which it does, not that it's a magic bullet, ha.

edit: i should be a bit more clear.
vrr is only monitor tech, and it only resolves the framepacing issues that monitors introduce.
if framepacing issues come from somewhere else (like a game having super janky performance), vrr doesnt do anything for that.

 

[poppabk]

Of course it's better than not having VRR, that was never up for dispute.

So what is the dispute - that some people think all games should be locked at a minimum of 120 FPS with perfect frame timing and others don't?
Everything is a trade-off, VRR is one of the less intrusive and effective ones, which is all anyone I thought was ever claiming.

 

[GHG]

So what is the dispute - that some people think all games should be locked at a minimum of 120 FPS with perfect frame timing and others don't?
Everything is a trade-off, VRR is one of the less intrusive and effective ones, which is all anyone I thought was ever claiming.

The "dispute" is covered in the first couple of minutes of the video which you claimed to watch. But if you need examples closer to home there's examples like this:

This:

This:

And this (your thread by the way):

Why do we still care about 60FPS?

Why do we still talk about 60FPS all the time? I was trying to optimize a game on my PC to get from 55FPS to a steady 60FPS when I realized that I have a VRR display so why do I care specifically about a framerate that is irrelevant now? Why 60 and not 55 or 65? Majority on this forum have OLED...

www.neogaf.com

VRR does not "fix" poor performance, nor should it remove the need for devs (or the end user on PC) to use appropriate settings in order to reach a target framerate on a consistent basis. VRR should be there to iron out the kinks on the rare occasion the game dips below the target framerate, it should not be leant on as a means of permanently attempting to circumvent any optimisation or performance issues.

 

[poppabk]

The "dispute" is covered in the first couple of minutes of the video which you claimed to watch.
And this (your thread by the way):

Why do we still care about 60FPS?

Why do we still talk about 60FPS all the time? I was trying to optimize a game on my PC to get from 55FPS to a steady 60FPS when I realized that I have a VRR display so why do I care specifically about a framerate that is irrelevant now? Why 60 and not 55 or 65? Majority on this forum have OLED...

www.neogaf.com

VRR does not "fix" poor performance, nor should it remove the need for devs (or the end user on PC) to use appropriate settings in order to reach a target framerate on a consistent basis. VRR should be there to iron out the kinks on the rare occasion the game dips below the target framerate, it should not be leant on as a means of permanently attempting to circumvent any optimisation or performance issues.

My thread has nothing to do with any of the issues they discuss though. A consistent 55FPS and a consistent 60 FPS are effectively identical on a VRR TV, barring issues with local dimming etc.
Screen tearing and vsync issues existed long before G-sync existed - that's why it was made - so VRR helps smooth out the problems that are there whether we think they should be or not. Saying Devs should optimize better and not rely on vrr, when their optimization uses a 720p base image upscale with FSR 2 is pointless.
Great now my 600p upscale image game runs at a constant 60 fps and I can turn VRR off!

 

[GHG]

My thread has nothing to do with any of the issues they discuss though. A consistent 55FPS and a consistent 60 FPS are effectively identical on a VRR TV, barring issues with local dimming etc.

No they aren't identical, you even got told that by several other people here in that thread of yours. Firstly because you're not getting 60fps when you're getting 55.and secondly because of the ton of other issues that can introduce as discussed in DF's video.

Screen tearing and vsync issues existed long before G-sync existed - that's why it was made - so VRR helps smooth out the problems that are there whether we think they should be or not.

Yep exactly, it was not created to allow devs to ignore optimisation or force the end-user to have to work around their poor optimisation by using VRR.

Saying Devs should optimize better and not rely on vrr, when their optimization uses a 720p base image upscale with FSR 2 is pointless.
Great now my 600p upscale image game runs at a constant 60 fps and I can turn VRR off!

Using extreme examples like this does you no favours. There are plenty of developers out there who don't have to resort to 720p or below in order to hit a consistent 60fps. This is a poor way of excusing the developers who have decided to ignore their duties towards optimisation.

 

[poppabk]

No they aren't identical, you even got told that by several other people here in that thread of yours. Firstly because you're not getting 60fps when you're getting 55.and secondly because of the ton of other issues that can introduce as discussed in DF's video.

Ok a steady 65 fps with VRR and good frame pacing versus a steady 60 fps without VRR and good frame pacing. What VRR issues am I going to see?

 

[Klayzer]

Now you're just lying, nobody is talking about "perfect frames", the discussion is around how people have greatly exaggerated the impact of VRR and how it does not mitigate for performance issues in the way that people have claimed, all of which you were involved in by the way.

Here's you claiming you don't get any frame drops with VRR:

Here's you claiming VRR eliminates stutter:

You claiming there are "no issues" with a game thanks to VRR despite the framerate dropping to 53fps in a game that is supposed to hold 60fps:

You claiming the well documented OLED VRR flicker doesn't exist:

Need I go on?

You were deep in the trenches on this topic along with Riky , supporting each other's nonsensical (and a lot of the time, outright false) posts surrounding the subject of VRR. If I didn't know any better I'd think several of the posts on the topic came from the same person.

So in that context, it's now 100% apparent as to why you're taking issue with this video from digital foundry.

Got damm, that was a crime scene.

 

[Ulysses 31]

VRR doesn't fix low fps, it can fix judder from uneven fps in the VRR window.

 

[Zathalus]

Try watching the video while eating your breakfast, you might find the discussion educational. VRR factually cannot overcome games that exhibit framepacing issues.

Of course it can, but it only works on framepacing issues arising from an uneven FPS. A game running at around 50ish fps for example will not have the judder present caused by framepacing that you would see on fixed display. Any large frametime spikes introduced by shader, loading or other reasons can not be fixed, as Alex points out. Major fluctuations in fps can not be really compensated for either.

 

[GHG]

Ok a steady 65 fps with VRR and good frame pacing versus a steady 60 fps without VRR and good frame pacing. What VRR issues am I going to see?

In that scenario as long as your display's refresh rate is set to 120hz then you shouldn't see or notice anything too horrible.

But if the most you can do is get 65fps (and it's consistent without any dips below 60fps) then I'd just lock it to 60 and enjoy the consistency without any potential issues.

If you're able to get significantly above 60fps (for example 80 fps and above) and your display supports it then turning on VRR with the refresh rate set to 120hz will yield better results provided your framerate is stable and you're not experiencing any severe drops from the average fps (any sudden dips to and/or below 60fps from that framerate will still feel horrible).

You should always go for the option that results in the most consistent output. The fundamental thing to understand is that VRR does not make lower framerates feel higher it just prevents any of the more

Of course it can, but it only works on framepacing issues arising from an uneven FPS. A game running at around 50ish fps for example will not have the judder present caused by framepacing that you would see on fixed display. Any large frametime spikes introduced by shader, loading or other reasons can not be fixed, as Alex points out. Major fluctuations in fps can not be really compensated for either.

It can help, but not overcome. There is a difference.

For example both Wo Long on PC and Rise of the Ronin on PS5 have frame pacing issues, neither of which can be overcome by VRR. Yes, it's a bit better with VRR enabled, but even in the case of wo long where I'm easily able to lock it to 60fps without any sweat on PC the poor frame pacing is still noticeable.

 

[Panajev2001a]

Now you're just lying, nobody is talking about "perfect frames", the discussion is around how people have greatly exaggerated the impact of VRR and how it does not mitigate for performance issues in the way that people have claimed, all of which you were involved in by the way.

Here's you claiming you don't get any frame drops with VRR:

Here's you claiming VRR eliminates stutter:

You claiming there are "no issues" with a game thanks to VRR despite the framerate dropping to 53fps in a game that is supposed to hold 60fps:

You claiming the well documented OLED VRR flicker doesn't exist:

Need I go on?

You were deep in the trenches on this topic along with Riky , supporting each other's nonsensical (and a lot of the time, outright false) posts surrounding the subject of VRR. If I didn't know any better I'd think several of the posts on the topic came from the same person.

So in that context, it's now 100% apparent as to why you're taking issue with this video from digital foundry.

Receipts, well ordered receipts .

 

[j0hnnix]

VRR fixed the climate.

 

[Team Andromeda]

Now you're just lying, nobody is talking about "perfect frames", the discussion is around how people have greatly exaggerated the impact of VRR and how it does not mitigate for performance issues in the way that people have claimed, all of which you were involved in by the way.

Here's you claiming you don't get any frame drops with VRR:



You claiming the well documented OLED VRR flicker doesn't exist:


Need I go on?

You were deep in the trenches on this topic along with

Up to your old tricks with selective quoting I see. The frame rate drops in both the Medium and Metro fall well with-in the VRR window and so you do get a complete smooth experience, compared to playing those games without VRR.

 

[GHG]

Up to your old tricks with selective quoting I see.

Nothing selective about the posts, everyone can find them here along with the topics you posted them in. Those were the claims you were making at the time, so like I said, I can see why you're taking issue with all of this.

The frame rate drops in both the Medium and Metro fall well with-in the VRR window and so you do get a complete smooth experience, compared to playing those games without VRR.

They will be better than they would be without VRR, but given the framerates that those games operate at on console along with the inconsistencies there will be nothing "completely smooth" about them even with VRR enabled (especially not in the case of the medium where it targets 30fps and runs sub 30fps a lot of the time).

Maybe next time Riky.

 

[adamsapple]

VRR fixed the climate.

I am a much better lover now because of VRR.

 

[Klayzer]

I am a much better lover now because of VRR.

Deeper throat?

 

[S0ULZB0URNE]

It's not and gsync is overrated.
But don't get it twisted I rather have the option than not have it.

 

[adamsapple]

Deeper throat?

Of course it's better than not having VRR, that was never up for dispute.

Yes, that's what some of us are saying while you're out for blood, lol.

No one said VRR can fix streaming hitches etc, but it makes a big difference in games with unlocked frame rates that aren't able to reach the target 60 but are within the VRR coverage. In the absence of universal developer competence, this is at least one solution the end-user can do to improve playability.

 

[GHG]

Yes, that's what some of us are saying while you're out for blood, lol.

That's what you're saying now.

No one said VRR can fix streaming hitches etc, but it makes a big difference in games with unlocked frame rates that aren't able to reach the target 60 but are within the VRR coverage. In the absence of universal developer competence, this is at least one solution the end-user can do to improve playability.

I swear it's like some of you have a severe case of amnesia. Let me help since you previously actually had some of these discussions with me.

"no performance issues" for Xbox gamers with VRR apparently:

Here's you saying VRR can "fix" drops to 40fps:

Don't play dumb when these discussions where had on this very forum.

 

[adamsapple]

I swear it's like some of you have a severe case of amnesia. Let me help since you previously actually had some of these discussions with me.

"no performance issues" for Xbox gamers with VRR apparently:

Weak history crawling effort, G

The game, and topic, in question is from Cyberpunk 2077, where the patching was good enough to bring up the general performance of the game anyway and VRR helps iron out any small instances of drops during combat etc.

You wouldn't need VRR if most of the game runs at a solid clip, but for the cases it drops, VRR is there.

 

[GHG]

Weak history crawling effort, G

The game, and topic, in question is from Cyberpunk 2077, where the patching was good enough to bring up the general performance of the game anyway and VRR helps iron out any small instances of drops during combat etc.

You wouldn't need VRR if most of the game runs at a solid clip, but for the cases it drops, VRR is there.

You weren't merely saying it "helped" or that it "ironed things out" though were you?

Which is the point, you were throwing around words like "fixed" because of VRR, and claiming that it results in "no performance issues", that's a far cry from the type of language you're now using.

 

[Shake Your Rump]

(and I prefer a 35-45fps non-VRR uncapped framerate vs locked 30fps game)

 

[Bojji]

It may not be able to fix all issues but for example PS5 version of Eden Ring was unplayable to me at launch when I had normal 60hz 4k tv. I had to complete PS4 version that was running in 60fps. PS5 version was constant stutter.

Now with vrr I completed both base game (again) and dlc of native PS5 version. 80% of the time game looks smooth despite running in ~50fps.

Game changer for some titles.

 

[ManaByte]

I REALLY hope the PS5 Pro makes 120hz VRR a system level feature with the same range as the XSX VRR.

 

[adamsapple]

.Game changer for some titles.

Additionally, a great boost to games which may have unlocked quality modes like Tales of Arise, Dogma 2, Starfield, the Fallout 4 new gen update with mods and more.

 

[Pejo]

 

[Team Andromeda]

Nothing selective about the posts, everyone can find them here along with the topics you posted them in. Those were the claims you were making at the time, so like I said, I can see why you're taking issue with all of this.



They will be better than they would be without VRR, but given the framerates that those games operate at on console along with the inconsistencies there will be nothing "completely smooth" about them even with VRR enabled (especially not in the case of the medium where it targets 30fps and runs sub 30fps a lot of the time).

Maybe next time Riky.

You've done it before, so I'm used to your selective quoting. No one is saying that a game that is running at 20 to 15 fps is suddenly going to 30 or 60 fps super smooth experience, but if the game is suffering an inconstant frame rate VVR smooths it all out and yes The likes of Medium and Metro were a completely smooth experience thanks to VRR on the console

For a little irony back then I also think only John and Oliver had VVR TVs too and you've got to love the double standards of the DF They said Medium is better on the PS5 thanks to screen res, but that's not the case for Metro on the Series X.

 

[GHG]

You've done it before, so I'm used to your selective quoting. No one is saying that a game that is running at 20 to 15 fps is suddenly going to 30 or 60 fps super smooth experience, but if the game is suffering an inconstant frame rate VVR smooths it all out and yes The likes of Medium and Metro were a completely smooth experience thanks to VRR on the console

But yet this is what you said regarding a game that targets 30fps and frequently dips below that target in to the 20's (I'll bold the key words for you since you seem to keep forgetting):

It's not odd, it's just DF when you have VRR you didn't get any frame drops either.

Despite your bullshit, everybody knows VRR isn't helping you in scenarios like this:

No frame drops apparently. VRR must be magic.

For a little irony back then I also think only John and Oliver had VVR TVs too and you've got to love the double standards of the DF They said Medium is better on the PS5 thanks to screen res, but that's not the case for Metro on the Series X.

Sounds horrible. You should write to them because of these previous injustices and now this video on VRR putting you in a tough place.

 

[nemiroff]

How is it whenever I finally get the tech everyone has been praising for years, it suddenly blows donkey hammer?

It doesn't, VRR works as intended. The effectiveness of VRR has been a topic of discussion for a decade, its shortcomings are not new information. I believe it's simply the framing of this that may lead to a perceived dissonance. It's almost disingenuous in my opinion. But as long as it's part of a console wars, sigh, of course it's going to stir up some shit - As probably intended.

 

[Team Andromeda]

But yet this is what you said regarding a game that targets 30fps and frequently dips below that target in to the 20's (I'll bold the key words for you since you seem to keep forgetting):



Despite your bullshit, everybody knows VRR isn't helping you in scenarios like this:

DF didn't show VRR effect in its graphs (hence the comments of VRR maybe would clear it up in their various vids ) given the capture card in those days and also at the time of the Medium I'm sure Alex didn't have a VRR TV either for even more irony. It was left to John and Oliver TV's for the wonders of 120 FPS, VRR Ect for the consoles

I don't know what Medium game you played, but the game even without VRR, hit the 30 FPS target 'most of the time' and like with Metro, the drops easily fall with-in the VRR windows to clear it all up and give the user a completely smooth experience. Not that for one minute do I believe you played both games from beginning to end on a Series X with VRR .

 

[GHG]

DF didn't show VRR effect in its graphs (hence the comments of VRR maybe would clear it up in their various vids ) given the capture card in those days and also at the time of the Medium I'm sure Alex didn't have a VRR TV either for even more irony. It was left to John and Oliver TV's for the wonders of 120 FPS, VRR Ect for the consoles

You can't show any "vrr effect" via the videos they produce. But everyone who uses a VRR capable display knows that dips and drops in games that run at a maximum of 30fps (especially down to the low 20's) are not salvagable by VRR. But yet, despite that you've attempted to claim VRR means you "didn't get any frame drops", which everyone knows is nonsense.

I don't know what Medium game you played, but the game even without VRR, hit the 30 FPS target 'most of the time' and like with Metro, the drops easily fall with-in the VRR windows to clear it all up and give the user a completely smooth experience. Not that for one minute do I believe you played both games from beginning to end on a Series X with VRR .

I don't need to play a game running at 30fps with dips to know is going to look like shit regardless, VRR or no VRR. I've seen and experienced it first hand prior to me upgrading my PC, it's not fun. If you're capabale of fooling yourself in to believing it's a good experience because you have no other choice and/or you have a duty to promote the console then that's your problem, not mine.

 

[Three]

Prediction: some game drops to 48-55 fps. Df: "this is terrible, VRR doesn't help now. Auto frame interpolation on the other hand is amazing"