Yes, I saw the video, I read the article, and the comment on the matter clearly showed it, unlike yours, which does nothing but shoot at zero, perhaps in an attempt to match the bullet's launch...
Maybe it's your precise analysis, but I don't understand why 48fps is good on PS5, while at least 76fps is required for decency on PC.
Can you repeat it for me, please?
I'll ask you one at a time; the amount depends on the interlocutor's capabilities.
Whether you're a bot or not, the result will always be the same: You assimilate what you see and read, without the possibility of being active.
Would decent performance be at least 76fps? Do you really need the 4070 Ti Super? Why not the 4070? The Ti Super is 20 to 25% faster, so the 4070 is within 60fps. If it occasionally drops below that, VRR will mitigate it. Or is this also fine at 48fps only on PS5 and PS5 Pro?
Am I to conclude that 60fps isn't decent performance? What's the point of scaling down when the loss on PC is only 1/80th of an fps, and the difference is clearly visible, just like in the reflections? Why does the goal always have to match PC settings to those of consoles? Here too, am I to conclude that the PS5 Pro uses higher settings pointlessly?
Isn't there the usual nonsense about consoles, that the frame rate is good most of the time?
Is DLAA a useful optimization that wastes power? Like in AC-BF, just to keep the 5090 from going too fast, saying it has to scale to run at 60fps?
If only there were ever a time when you didn't find absurd distortions in the PC analysis...
The internal TAAU is excellent compared to what? If it excels, the others will be behind, right? Or is it just good because the PS5 uses it?
What's the point of using DLAA on the 5090? With the best upscaler on the market, is it just used as AA, which is even more expensive than native?
Why does PSSR on the PS5 Pro look great even at 1080p, or even 864p? Does it improve your eyesight on PC?
With the 5090, I manually set it to 1366p:
It's hard to notice the difference from a higher setting.
We're talking about lost performance, when with the 5090 you can max out everything by setting the upscaler to something similar to the balanced setting.
You did the same thing in RE-9, just to better saturate the VRAM.
With that problem, the first thing to do is use the upscaler, but instead you go from the quality setting to DLAA.
The Ryzen 5600 and the 3070 aren't mid-range PCs.
Nowadays, they're seasoned low-end.
What's the point of lightening the load on the processor if you can't reach that frame rate? So, why do you have to lower the NPC complexity regardless on a good processor?
Why isn't there a PS5 Pro, and isn't there a performance comparison with PC? Has this become something to be avoided...?
Isn't comparing with the upscaler even an option?
When it comes to PC, your analyses are like a slalom...
@Jimbojones Without a doubt. In the meantime, remember that you have to know how to be content, without making excuses that don't make sense. Otherwise, it's better to enjoy something better, dude.
The 007 analysis arrived late on PC, like many others, when they exist. Do you think the console analysis was critical enough? How can you not say that 720p with FSR-3 simply sucks?
Have you ever seen titles as demanding as those on PC, with words like "destroyed," "broken," or "rebuilt"? Even on a problematic title like Forspoken (on PS5), the headline was like: What's good and what's not so good?
Dead Space on PC was sabotaged; to introduce compilation stuttering, you have to reinstall the same drivers, a nearly impossible situation, probably discovered in the depths of Steam, given that, as usual, it was done late.
There was stuttering every time you moved the camera on PS5; I even played it at a friend's house; it was worse than my PC version, not to mention the low resolution and lower details.
The induced stuttering was mixed with the streaming stutter shared with the consoles. Result: a very good console version, a trash PC version.
Low-level information processing techniques are evident in all the cases I mentioned. There's premeditation, communication strategy (e.g., the title and ending are unrelated to the actual result), and persistence when it needs to be there.
Check the title and body of Returnal's analysis, full of problems but crafted to make it seem like a masterpiece regardless.
Excuse my frankness, but with your logic, they can do whatever they want.
I have many other categorical examples, and in any case, the "circle"-style attendance that is preferred is absurd. Are you just saying they prefer consoles because they're their target market?
The question that naturally arises should be:
How should someone who wants to support a platform behave, while trying not to let it be noticed? Bingo!
After that, one might as well believe in Santa Claus.
I wanted to say that the lack of objectivity and consistency is also a lack of respect (I'm not a native speaker either).
There are some misunderstandings, and some too many mitigating factors.
I was talking about 720p on Series S. What's the point of laughing first, talking about PS3 resolutions, before saying it's a bit softer?
No one, and the adaptation doesn't support the positive thesis.
I didn't deny it; in fact, I'm the one who pointed it out...
The problem is your attempts to justify a pointless adaptation. Apparently, because if you look from afar, it makes sense...
DF also covered PC at the beginning, and there were even more details than now.
Go revisit the analysis of FarCry-3, especially the final part.
It was already typical back then to end with a sentence like:
Well, after all, what's surprising is that the difference between PC and console isn't that great.
In the final section I quoted (an example, otherwise it'll be all night...), the PC's superiority was clear. 1080p, 60fps, lightning-fast loading times (compared to the consoles of the time), DX-11 features worthy of a next-generation console.
Conclusion? If you don't care about the frills of the PC version.
Oh, and on console it didn't even reach 30fps, closer to 20.
Now, check out DMC-5's review of SW-2:
They say the version outperforms the PS4.
It's not even 10% of the difference in FarCry-3, and many other PC games. Find me a heavy-handed term like "outperform."
A bloodhound won't be enough...
Regarding loading times, check out why they're not mentioned in the Baldur's Gate-3 review, when they could be up to 30 seconds longer than PC ones. They talked about improvements between PS5 and XSX in a few seconds. The title only mentioned Ultra settings like on PC, in a game that was clearly CPU-limited and not very demanding on the GPU.
The result was that the classic Ryzen 3600 ran almost 50% faster.
With this background, can you explain to me how it's possible to make a gaming title while only focusing on graphics settings, completely avoiding loading times?
Let's be clear: In high-profile games, if they're supposed to perform well, they'll perform well, and you could figure out why on your own.
The title, the context, and the body of the analysis—contexts designed to flatter the few experts—criticisms lightened with "it's not perfect" when the appropriate term would have been "it's poor," a good conclusion even if the sum of the flaws would suggest otherwise, etc.
Your wrong and opportunistic assumptions won't change the situation.
If you say DLSS Lite is better than native even when it scales from 540p to 1080p, which is the worst-case scenario: Power consumption and cost (I'm getting ahead of myself, since you're looking for it...) have nothing to do with it!
If the SW2 version outperforms the PS4, it's because of power consumption; otherwise, it would be worse...?
How many times have you read about "overshoot" when the PC version was a generation ahead? Hmm...
Do you realize that a little elementary school rhetoric is enough to refute the usual excuses used by those accustomed to playing at a low level?
Ah, the 3060 doesn't consume 300 watts, not even if you put in a processor that runs twice as fast as the console ones (on SW2, the multiplication increases).
If the disrespect is upstream, the consequence won't be a confetti shower...
There's an absurd double standard, and I'm only using double standards, because SW2 isn't the only one that stands out.
Saying it's not exceptional doesn't mean anything.
Only the exceptional is exceptional; everything below that isn't exceptional, whether it's poor or optimal.
There's clear preferential treatment, which implies disfavor for the rest.
How do you explain that there was more talk about AI upscaling after the PS5 Pro and Switch 2 releases than in the previous five years?
They did the same thing with more frequent 60fps, increased resolution, faster loading times, VRR, etc.
How many times did you see the timer in loading screens before SSDs arrived on consoles? It wasn't important, it wasn't a problem, also because it was simply a factor that didn't exist. If there are isolated cases, it's the exception that proves the rule.
Why, in the early cases of the Series S dropping to 720p, there was laughter with a nod to the previous generation; the terms used were poor, confusing, and unstable. Then, when it happened on the major consoles, did it become a little softer?
We're talking about technical analyses. When you do them, you shouldn't say what it isn't (it's not exceptional), you have to say what it is, taking it from a well-defined scale, not based on how you wake up in the morning (so to speak...).
Consistency is the essence, and DF has no substance...
No, or at least not in the objective report that talks about rendering on a 4K TV, especially when comparing it to the Series S's native 720p/1080p. If you want to believe the excuses outside of the game, go ahead, but don't expect others to be that clever.
In short, it's clearly and repeatedly said that Switch-2 performs better than native even starting at 540p, i.e., the performance setting. Either true or false, consumption won't change that truth.
Now, tell me how many times you've seen DLSS treated that way on PC, where a low-end card like the 3060 could be plugged into a 1080p screen and therefore shouldn't even have to undergo the basic spatial upscaling, which seems to be absent in the SW2 analyses.
I'm struggling to find a single instance where anyone has said that DLSS quality is better than native, despite the fact that SW2 essentially uses DLSS-3, which is very little different from 2, and even uses a lame version of it.
Not only that, before SW2 and PS5-Pro, cross-analyses between DLSS and TAAU/FSR2 were rare indeed.
If you can't even pinpoint one unbalanced case like this, I'll understand even better why DF can afford to tell so many stories depending on what it wants you to believe.
Maybe you appreciate SW2's amplification, so you don't care about PC minimization and the obvious double standards.
Well, good for you, but you could avoid giving credence to incredible things just because they're enjoyable...
The DLSS treatment on SW2 has become a joke. It has nothing to do with the previous (and subsequent) treatment seen on PC, even though SW2 requires a 4K TV.
In 90% of cases, in the PC tests, it didn't compare to the consoles' performance. With a logic vaguely similar to that used on SW2, a 3060 would be a monster, which never seemed right, especially to you, who, to saturate the 3070's VRAM, went as far as using DLAA on RE9.
You're not credible, if your goal is intellectual honesty...
The usual opportunistic confusion between PC "categories," and the usual downplaying of the PC's advantages.
All for the benefit of the original version, for DF.
Ah, porting isn't a game developed and released on the same day, stop with these ridiculous techniques. I even read about porting in the Diablo 4 review. A medic recovery is needed...
What's the point of a 5600 as a mid-range CPU, from which you can jump straight to a high-end 9800X3D? There's a world of difference, but since it's ugly to classify consoles as low-end, the modus operando adapts.
Ditto for GPUs. Which mid-range GPU should set textures to medium? With what DLSS settings? Because the memory usage isn't the same, with DLSS dropping to 720p like on consoles.
Why measure the performance at 4K + DLAA, which also increases from native + TAA, and do it on a 5090 with 32GB?
What mid-range GPU (the mid-range is a 5070, not the 3070—the usual misunderstandings about the processor?) will have to manage the 12GB limit, which will play maxed out at 4K + DLAA?
It doesn't exist, it's a non-issue.
The difference between Ultra and High textures is very visible; what does a little sharper mean? The symbol and the text are much clearer.
Lastly, make the comparison in a dark, limited area, so as to hide most of the differences.
Is the lack of universal Frame Gen a problem?
So, why don't you use it with Nvidia cards (basically the only ones you test), and why isn't there even a mention of VRR?
As usual, you think you're invisible, but it doesn't take much to summarize your biases; you just have to understand them once, and the rest is a consequence...
PC narrative is completely out of the question here. Demanding with an RTX 2060? What if it's for 60fps? Will it also run on a Series S, right?
There are other games that take up more space, and I don't recall this "detail" being thrown around as if it were a problem, or as if it automatically had something to do with weight.
Haven't you ever seen Black Myth Wukong, AC Shadows, Crimson Desert, Indiana Jones + DLC, Space Marine-2 + Texture HD, GOW Ragnarok, Final Fantasy VII Rebirth, or other games that take up slightly less space? Like Horizon FW, Death Stranding 2, Spider-Man-2, SW Jedi Survivor, etc.?
What's the point of amplifying the relevance of PC components that are 7-8 to 10 years old? To make consoles look less old?
Two out of three times, XSX is higher than PS5 in resolution, but the video says otherwise. You can't even pretend to be objective, eh?
720p with FSR-3 on a 4K screen sucks, there's no less serious way to say it. It's softer, it doesn't mean anything, it's not a fabric softener, and it doesn't even improve antialiasing; in fact, FSR-3 amplifies it, so there's no room for making ridiculous excuses, or there wouldn't be any, it would be better to say...
Wow, when, initially, only the Series S could run at 720p, it was a temporal accumulation of criticisms and ironic jokes, now completely ridiculous.
In practice, the current consoles have to be saved somehow; the rest is just chatter trying to hide it.
Out of 100 videos, DLSS cross-console was an exception. PSSR came out, which was truly awful... and in an instant it became a primary topic, along with the Switch 2, which with DLSS performance seems to work wonders even at 540p, i.e., with the performance profile.
Now, consistently, how was it possible to compare the 2070/2070S with the PS5 for years without mentioning it? Mysteries of the partisan...
The 5070s on PC are mainly used for 1440p. DF makes the usual console-centric summary, adding the exception it tries to pass off as the rule.
When might 12GB seem too little? At 1440p? When do you activate Frame Gen? So why do we want to try it at 4K, and Frame Gen seems nonexistent compared to consoles?
Let's wait for it to arrive on PS6, so we can start talking about it, like we did with VRR, 60fps, fast loading, etc. But unfortunately, these were also available on consoles, and worse, at least when it comes to the PS5.
On the other hand, considering 864p on PS5 Pro to be excellent in Pragmanta, then saying that with the 1080p patch it was excellent, while on PC, in order to undermine the 3070, they had to resort to DLAA at 1440p, should say a lot...
It's a shame that there are only chickens in the CDI chicken coop, and that's the only target for DF, otherwise it would immediately become a foolish Pro console (and Pro PS5 Pro) analyzer.
"with a rock-solid 60fps across multiple consoles and impressively high image quality."
In the first test, it's obvious that the image quality at 60fps is poor, and that's emphasized, though not as much as it deserves. Would FSR3 at 720p be impressive?
The extra resolution in games that had low resolutions was nice, but back then it wasn't as effective on PC. I remember the refrain about assets not being designed for higher resolutions; on PC it almost seemed like the situation was worse.
DF's double standards are notorious; calling them unbalanced is an understatement...
I don't understand... Should the low-end PC showcase the low-end PC, or is it for general interest? The 4060 was often limited by the processor. Then, when it didn't work well, they said all the hardware wasn't optimized like on consoles.
Even choosing the 5600X is a cut-price option. The survey shows that 90% use 5000-7000-9000 models, and it's also said that many X3D owners on AM4 remained on the old platform.
In the end, they discard the 10% to include a processor that will be 10% of that 90%. The 5600X is essentially the minimum of the 5000s; the right processor would have been the 7600X, or at most the one without X.
The low-end shouldn't also be the old low-end, and if you include the 4060 there, it makes no sense, given that it came out 5 months after the Ryzen 7600X.
This distorts the result, making it appear that the low-end 2023 model, which is already three years old... is performing less than it could.
Finally, it's senseless to leave Intel out: It's even more popular than AMD, and a simple 2021 12600K performs on average 10% more than the 5600X.
Above is a user with a 13600K, a very popular processor in gaming (and good for other things too). It came out in the fall of 2022, tree and a half years from now, and on average it performs almost 15% more than the 7600X, which this one performs almost 15% more than the 5600.
Basically, the 5600X is old and pointless as soon as it's included; it's already a potential bottleneck, especially when it comes to overrevving... and you'd like to leave the Ryzen 3600 alone to make the consoles happy. Which also came out a year before the consoles, you don't really like well-done tests, huh...
"...under the new patch and some smaller problems remain with the PS5 and PS5 Pro versions" Smaller problems, frequent crashes on consoles? Velvet gloves are used in PS5 ports
The hate speech surrounding the PC version of Dead Space continues to cry out for vengeance. I played it last year without any particular problems on a decent PC. Creating stutter by deleting the shader cache and reinstalling the same drivers smacks of tampering. We search for the strangest issues before reproducing them as if they were common.
@Rich_Leadbetter You're trying to force the science to do your bidding... You can't match the most used DLSS settings with the 4070 Ti Super, nor can you plug in any monitor you want. On Steam, 4K monitors/TVs are less than 5%, and cards that perform twice as fast as the PS5 are at least double. It's unclear why you need to go beyond that statistic to choose a monitor, or rather, it's all too clear...
With the 4070 Ti S, you're worried about being CPU-limited (and we don't even know what to do with it), but limiting the 4060 to lock it into the PS5 isn't a problem, it seems.
Aren't you interested in processor purchase data for over five years now? You chose the Ryzen 3600 to level the playing field with the PS5, you've said it 100 times, now you add reasons at will, perhaps to hide the fact that your publication is heavily console-centric?
Why are you talking about a beta right away? Just because it could have been improved at the beginning? How come I don't see the word beta in Starfield for PS5/Pro, even though it looks more like an alpha (the constant crashes on consoles are ridiculous), and why was the analysis released right away? Isn't there a wait? Isn't there a good critique? It doesn't seem bad, after all, there are just a few small issues...
Your unbalanced unit of measurement isn't invisible. Oliver always tries to justify and downplay the low resolution and frame rate drops on PS5 in every way: It's a bit softer, it mostly holds 60fps, etc. The second excuse is grotesque; even a game that stutters at 200ms twice a second could fall into that category.
Why does DLSS on PC need 4K in quality mode to be better than native, while on the Switch 2, even in performance mode at 1080p—the worst-case scenario—it seems to work miracles?
How come, since DLSS's release, now more than 7 years ago, you've been talking and comparing AI upscalers more directly than in previous years? You clearly think you're invisible, huh?
On RE9, the 3070 needed to use DLAA, otherwise the limited VRAM wouldn't have been saturated enough. Even there, the 4070 TI S was on par with the Pro; the difference in textures, etc., was minimized without even being noticed, and the fear goes away. In the end, you managed to take the Pro to the next level from the 4070, one way or another.
Does the PS5 Pro's popularity matter? The Steam charts feature stuff from 10 years ago, which only launches a few 2D indie games. At that point, on consoles, you'd have to include the Switch 1 as well, and maybe the older consoles. Give me the approximate percentage the Pro would get among that crowd, and then explain why it's always in pole position; every sneeze is recorded.
It's clear that you're always trying to force the PC settings toward PS5; just as you can see, anything more is often downplayed, you forgot a piece... As I was saying, anything more will be well-regarded when it arrives on the Pro, or on PS6.
The frame-gen will exist later, as will the importance of 60fps, fast loading, and VRR, something you've talked about five times over the years before it arrived on consoles. After that, the stopwatch even counted tenths, and if it reaches 48Hz in fits and starts, that's good!
The longer version of damage control vs. damage finder.
Don't waste too much time hyping up RT; keep putting it aside for when it's added to the PS5 Pro.
It's insane that, on PC, the quintessential dynamic platform, you only run a locked-in configuration setting.
The Ryzen 3600, released before the PS5, should be retired, otherwise the console-centricity will be too obvious. It's not mid-range, it's the low-end of the last century.
Why does the low-end have to run at 1440p, and why shouldn't it use DLSS performance, which on the Switch 2 seems to work wonders, even at 1080p, and even with the worst version? Why does the PC have to suffer from the damage finder vs. the consoles' damage control, that seems clear to me.
Can the 4070 Ti only use the quality setting? The RT noise is annoying only on PC, while in unusual cases like MHW on the PS5 it's a win-win, even if it sounds like a hornet's nest?
Please, look carefully for cases where the RT isn't visible, and mix the 4070 TI with the 4060 to change the subject, which isn't really noticeable anyway...
We're waiting for the pre-mega patch for PS5 Pro, which will be analyzed before it's available on the PSSR, which was alpha until yesterday, where the significant improvements will be shown in great detail, more or less as has been done before.
You've left Eurogamer to take everything directly, eh...
The usual PC settings normalization for consoles. Water doesn't change anything; even 1.5% is a gain, so we choose to remove it to normalize as usual.
DLSS 4.5 weighs more than 4, which remains comfortably better than PSS2, whose flaws are invisible, just as the first's were barely noticeable before. The usual improvements are made after the fact.
Scenarios for textures and lighting are carefully chosen to minimize the impact on the flagship consoles, and the circle can be closed, for now...
It feels like we're going back in time, when who wanted a resolution above the PS4, if not the PS3... They had to become purists right away, as if above that threshold (a forced norm) was a defect. You don't need 4K purists to demand image rendering higher than 1080p with FSR1, and if it often drops below 60fps, and the Pro aims for the same peak, I'd say the lower consoles are not infrequently going to 1080p. Oh, do you need frame rate purists, even for 60fps that drops to 40fps?
Nostalgic damage control. Rather than upgrading patches for older games, wouldn't it be appropriate to cover games that were completely skipped on PC, like Stellar Blade, Mafia, Wuchang, or even a detailed video on DL Beast? No, eh? Better to analyze every patch released on consoles, including the Switch 2.
@NandoCalrissian You also need to calibrate HDR on Windows; there's a dedicated app in the store. The PS5 has it built-in, and the game usually adjusts accordingly (at least the default, if the game doesn't have specific settings), but if the implementation is flawed, you have no solution. On PC, you can rely on RenoDX and Luma, which also allow you to enable it where it's not available. There are also specific presets for the most popular graphics engines (UE-4, 5, and Unity), from which you can adjust the settings in detail.
Consoles start out better, but if the original work is poorly done, you have no alternative. On PC, there are many ways to improve, and you can enable it where it's not available in various ways, including RTX-HDR and Windows Auto HDR.
I agree, but I still criticize the lack of consistency when it comes to console-centric games...
Until PSSR started being discussed, comparisons between console and PC upscalers were almost nonexistent. If you look closely, you'll notice they talked more about ML upscalers with the PS5 Pro + Switch 2 than about DLSS in the last 5-6 years.
Until yesterday, on consoles, the distance from the TV hid even 720p, but not anymore. This is consistent with the usual things that are only amplified when they arrive on consoles, like the more present 60fps, SSD, VRR, etc.
Now the sensitivity threshold has been raised. If we need an upscaler that performs like PSSR2 on RE9, meaning it's not wasted, it means that the image quality issues on consoles were downplayed before. After all, a PC only has a little compilation stutter and the discussion begins and ends there. 9 times out of 10, the superior image quality isn't praised, and without a PS5 Pro and Switch 2, cross-checks don't exist.
When the story is better understood by considering what's missing, it's a bad sign before considering the reasons.
They're already starting with the off-topic distinctions and the overall approximate weight. So, overall, it's worse than upscalers on PC, right? I figured it out easily: when something on consoles looks similar to PC, it means it's worse, before I get dragged by the neck.
Sharpness on PC is easily changed; RIS2 on AMD is excellent. So the increased sharpness of PSSR2 doesn't exist, and it's possible that it can be achieved using an internal sharpening filter.
These "details" are always skipped, if it's the PS5 that suffers...
Most console gamers I know play two steps away from the big screen, usually placing a chair between the couch and the TV. Who said the average PC gamer is glued to the monitor? All assumptions aimed at minimizing...
But even if that were the case, could one easily argue that certain details on consoles are useless, since what do you want to see from five meters away?
Or does the remote screen hide the flaws but not the strengths?
We don't understand each other. I'll give you some more examples...
XSS has been heavily criticized, as if the threshold below the major consoles wasn't decent, now the Switch-2 still seems good. How many times have you seen XSS results benchmarked against price and/or theoretical power? Almost never, I tell you...
XSS was awful regardless. Don't tell me you really think the difference now could be the difference between TAAU and FSR-2, when it was awful in any way?
What is being considered in this test? Do you see the criticism consistent with the sense of proportion you're talking about?
Shouldn't a company that claims to be a pioneer of technical tests always consider technical differences? That's what I was talking about, not the difference in mass perception, which is often influenced by the industry press.
If it were as you say, this test would be about hairs crossed, not problems. You can't see the double standards because you've been trained to think like that.
I was talking specifically about Oliver, who with the PS5 Pro, once said that from a distance you can't see the glowing red doll (shimmering on Astrobot), another time that you can't see the lack of sharpness. Consistency is the essence, and the only consistency DF can afford is to amplify and/or minimize as needed, tending to have the mid-range consoles at the epicenter of the universe.
Why has there been more talk of ML upscaling with the PS5-Pro and SW2 than in the previous 7 years? Why are there no cross-tests with PC? Why was FSR1 only a flop on the road on PC?
Does it seem natural to you to continue carrying the Ryzen 3600? They test it more than anything else, just like in the PS3/X360 days, they forced PC resolution to 720p, and said the assets were the same even at 1080p (which isn't always true), 60fps wasn't essential, etc. Except for celebrating GOW-3 on PS4, where the assets seemed to be made to be better, and the mipmapping worked wonders—which was also a given on PC, but there wasn't even a mention of it there.
You mean to tell me that perception improves with age? Old age is supposed to improve your eyesight...?
And then the PC alone has a market that rivals the rest of the world, yet there are a lot of PC-only tests that failed, like Mafia, Stellar Blade (how many articles for each patch and for the PS5-Pro version?), Wuchang, etc.
You've veered into the unsolicited. I was talking about DF, and Oliver specifically; you've changed the subject by bringing up the masses' perception of time.
You've been happy with the narrative they've cooked up for you; if you don't follow the same path, it will seem strange, and you're led to justify the real inconsistencies without needing any encouragement.
Do you think that when the new consoles come out, they won't make the differences in upscaling and starting resolution count? You're just wrong to assume so...
By the way, look at the "significant difference" in Hellblade 2 on PS5-Pro, for just a few extra pixels (with accompanying music by Ennio Morricone).
In theory, your point makes sense...
In practice, so looking at the history of the value weighted by DF: It has the usual flaw, that is, the usual double standards depending on what and how you're looking.
Explain to me why Oliver had a big grin when talking about TLOU-2 on PS5-Pro with PSSR.
Remember:
"Hey, it looks native, hippy hippy yeah yeah! Incredible! Impressive!"
In the early days when only the Xbox Series S could handle 720p, there was a sarcastic smile followed by a comparison with the PS3.
There, it wasn't good enough; it was simply poor and confusing.
Now that standard consoles are running at 720p (but also 504p, as we said above), 720p isn't bad after all. From a reasonable distance from the TV (I don't know which one, and it's better not to say...) you can't see much, but ultimately it's good, and at times excellent.
The same concept can be "exported" to the 60fps, VRR, SSD loading, etc. Until they arrived on consoles, it wasn't very useful, and not having them wasn't a problem. After that, it was indispensable, and not having the plus—or any more—was a failure.
Forgive my frankness, but with such a distracted user base, they can easily make donkeys fly; maybe they'll even explain that they fly because of their big ears...
@themightyant When you'll have to start at 720p + FSR2 to reach 60fps: You won't be able to help but worry about this while playing.
The PC and console tests are increasingly separating, more or less like they did at the end of the previous generation's lifespan. Maybe it's because it's better to analyze the consoles with a closer look, perhaps saying that with the above settings it's not bad, before looking for nitpicks in the best upscaler out there, and by far.
Oliver called Dragon Age Veilguard pretty good, starting at 504p. What are we talking about?
Coincidentally, most upscaler tests are done on consoles, almost never directly comparing them to PC.
Anyway, a question arises spontaneously: If the lame DLSS is better than FSR, how does an RTX 3060 stack up against DLSS4? I'd say the PS5 can easily handle it, and could even compete with the PS5 Pro, or is it better not to say that?
Why is the case where the DLSS half performs worse missing from the paper? There's the case where DLSS performs better and the one where both perform poorly, but the counterpart is missing. So even the conclusion seems absurd, because if you show the best and the worst, why conclude with an overall result? Perhaps because the unwritten result is also considered?
I've long noticed the inconsistency of your variable values, the unit of measurement that changes depending on what you're trying to measure. Whenever there's a comparison, otherwise it's like all the missing PC tests, which alone takes up as much space as all the other consoles.
So, double standards, and when it's not convenient, it's better to leave the measurement out, one might say...
First of all, you should criticize the person who wrote this article, not because of the CPU limitation, because it's true, but because it's ridiculous to make such a sensational title for a game that drops to 20fps. Then, on PC, at the first problem, the game would be rejected...
After that, but it would be earlier... If it's CPU-limited, you can render it internally even at 240p, and it will still be CPU-limited. If you don't even have a basic understanding of what it means to be CPU-limited, you shouldn't point out other people's mistakes.
In his review of Mafia: The Old Country, Oliver advised against using performance mode. It's not clear that that mode is a significant downgrade, and a reasonable frame rate means nothing; it was unstable in driving and shooting, yet he said it played well at 30fps.
It's interesting that 2 out of 3 of you played it on PC, but that's the only analysis missing. It joins Wuchang and Stellar Blade, where each patch was analyzed for Sony consoles.
The honorable mentions dedicated solely to the Switch 2 are laughable; they're the icing on the cake... Said as if it weren't a clear stretch, a bottleneck that most will interpret differently.
DL The Beast wasn't clear that consoles were missing what was already in the incomplete PC version. The RT patch came out two weeks ago; you see a partial award without even a dedicated analysis.
Before we digress from current events (e.g., the Snow Drop engine and retro games...), it's best not to select tests based on what's missing from consoles...
Oh, the hair strands didn't seem interesting in Oliver's Pro test; he spent five seconds pretending not to know they weren't there.
You're not invisible, you'd better keep that in mind...
Comments 39
Re: Halo: Campaign Evolved PC Looks Stunning - But Requires Further Optimisation
Yes, I saw the video, I read the article, and the comment on the matter clearly showed it, unlike yours, which does nothing but shoot at zero, perhaps in an attempt to match the bullet's launch...
Maybe it's your precise analysis, but I don't understand why 48fps is good on PS5, while at least 76fps is required for decency on PC.
Can you repeat it for me, please?
I'll ask you one at a time; the amount depends on the interlocutor's capabilities.
Whether you're a bot or not, the result will always be the same:
You assimilate what you see and read, without the possibility of being active.
Re: Halo: Campaign Evolved PC Looks Stunning - But Requires Further Optimisation
Would decent performance be at least 76fps?
Do you really need the 4070 Ti Super? Why not the 4070?
The Ti Super is 20 to 25% faster, so the 4070 is within 60fps. If it occasionally drops below that, VRR will mitigate it. Or is this also fine at 48fps only on PS5 and PS5 Pro?
Am I to conclude that 60fps isn't decent performance?
What's the point of scaling down when the loss on PC is only 1/80th of an fps, and the difference is clearly visible, just like in the reflections?
Why does the goal always have to match PC settings to those of consoles? Here too, am I to conclude that the PS5 Pro uses higher settings pointlessly?
Isn't there the usual nonsense about consoles, that the frame rate is good most of the time?
Is DLAA a useful optimization that wastes power?
Like in AC-BF, just to keep the 5090 from going too fast, saying it has to scale to run at 60fps?
Where does the fee come from...?
Re: Assassin's Creed Black Flag Resynced: Our Optimised Settings For A Terrific PC Release
The censorship of my criticisms on the merits is a nice confirmation.
It wasn't necessary, but a stamp is better than nothing...
The 5090 needs to be optimized with DLAA, mind you, and the options above need to be scaled down, so the PS5 Pro looks good.
Re: Review: Black Flag Resynced: Accomplished on All Consoles - but a Cut Above on PS5 Pro
If only there were ever a time when you didn't find absurd distortions in the PC analysis...
The internal TAAU is excellent compared to what? If it excels, the others will be behind, right? Or is it just good because the PS5 uses it?
What's the point of using DLAA on the 5090? With the best upscaler on the market, is it just used as AA, which is even more expensive than native?
Why does PSSR on the PS5 Pro look great even at 1080p, or even 864p? Does it improve your eyesight on PC?
With the 5090, I manually set it to 1366p:
It's hard to notice the difference from a higher setting.
We're talking about lost performance, when with the 5090 you can max out everything by setting the upscaler to something similar to the balanced setting.
You did the same thing in RE-9, just to better saturate the VRAM.
With that problem, the first thing to do is use the upscaler, but instead you go from the quality setting to DLAA.
The Ryzen 5600 and the 3070 aren't mid-range PCs.
Nowadays, they're seasoned low-end.
What's the point of lightening the load on the processor if you can't reach that frame rate? So, why do you have to lower the NPC complexity regardless on a good processor?
Why isn't there a PS5 Pro, and isn't there a performance comparison with PC? Has this become something to be avoided...?
Isn't comparing with the upscaler even an option?
When it comes to PC, your analyses are like a slalom...
Re: Review: Devil May Cry 5 On Switch 2 Easily Outclasses the PS4 Version, Yet Further Improvements Could Be Made
I already have the best, I don't have to make the dwarf bigger...
Re: Review: Devil May Cry 5 On Switch 2 Easily Outclasses the PS4 Version, Yet Further Improvements Could Be Made
@Jimbojones
Without a doubt. In the meantime, remember that you have to know how to be content, without making excuses that don't make sense.
Otherwise, it's better to enjoy something better, dude.
Re: Review: Star Fox On Switch 2 Is a Refined Return to an Iconic Game - and the Rail Shooter Genre
@Starfox85
Part-2:
The 007 analysis arrived late on PC, like many others, when they exist. Do you think the console analysis was critical enough? How can you not say that 720p with FSR-3 simply sucks?
Have you ever seen titles as demanding as those on PC, with words like "destroyed," "broken," or "rebuilt"? Even on a problematic title like Forspoken (on PS5), the headline was like: What's good and what's not so good?
Dead Space on PC was sabotaged; to introduce compilation stuttering, you have to reinstall the same drivers, a nearly impossible situation, probably discovered in the depths of Steam, given that, as usual, it was done late.
There was stuttering every time you moved the camera on PS5; I even played it at a friend's house; it was worse than my PC version, not to mention the low resolution and lower details.
The induced stuttering was mixed with the streaming stutter shared with the consoles. Result: a very good console version, a trash PC version.
Low-level information processing techniques are evident in all the cases I mentioned. There's premeditation, communication strategy (e.g., the title and ending are unrelated to the actual result), and persistence when it needs to be there.
Check the title and body of Returnal's analysis, full of problems but crafted to make it seem like a masterpiece regardless.
Excuse my frankness, but with your logic, they can do whatever they want.
I have many other categorical examples, and in any case, the "circle"-style attendance that is preferred is absurd. Are you just saying they prefer consoles because they're their target market?
The question that naturally arises should be:
How should someone who wants to support a platform behave, while trying not to let it be noticed? Bingo!
After that, one might as well believe in Santa Claus.
Re: Review: Star Fox On Switch 2 Is a Refined Return to an Iconic Game - and the Rail Shooter Genre
@Starfox85
Part-1:
I wanted to say that the lack of objectivity and consistency is also a lack of respect (I'm not a native speaker either).
There are some misunderstandings, and some too many mitigating factors.
I was talking about 720p on Series S. What's the point of laughing first, talking about PS3 resolutions, before saying it's a bit softer?
No one, and the adaptation doesn't support the positive thesis.
I didn't deny it; in fact, I'm the one who pointed it out...
The problem is your attempts to justify a pointless adaptation. Apparently, because if you look from afar, it makes sense...
DF also covered PC at the beginning, and there were even more details than now.
Go revisit the analysis of FarCry-3, especially the final part.
It was already typical back then to end with a sentence like:
Well, after all, what's surprising is that the difference between PC and console isn't that great.
In the final section I quoted (an example, otherwise it'll be all night...), the PC's superiority was clear. 1080p, 60fps, lightning-fast loading times (compared to the consoles of the time), DX-11 features worthy of a next-generation console.
Conclusion? If you don't care about the frills of the PC version.
Oh, and on console it didn't even reach 30fps, closer to 20.
Now, check out DMC-5's review of SW-2:
They say the version outperforms the PS4.
It's not even 10% of the difference in FarCry-3, and many other PC games. Find me a heavy-handed term like "outperform."
A bloodhound won't be enough...
Regarding loading times, check out why they're not mentioned in the Baldur's Gate-3 review, when they could be up to 30 seconds longer than PC ones. They talked about improvements between PS5 and XSX in a few seconds. The title only mentioned Ultra settings like on PC, in a game that was clearly CPU-limited and not very demanding on the GPU.
The result was that the classic Ryzen 3600 ran almost 50% faster.
With this background, can you explain to me how it's possible to make a gaming title while only focusing on graphics settings, completely avoiding loading times?
Let's be clear: In high-profile games, if they're supposed to perform well, they'll perform well, and you could figure out why on your own.
The title, the context, and the body of the analysis—contexts designed to flatter the few experts—criticisms lightened with "it's not perfect" when the appropriate term would have been "it's poor," a good conclusion even if the sum of the flaws would suggest otherwise, etc.
Re: Review: Devil May Cry 5 On Switch 2 Easily Outclasses the PS4 Version, Yet Further Improvements Could Be Made
Your wrong and opportunistic assumptions won't change the situation.
If you say DLSS Lite is better than native even when it scales from 540p to 1080p, which is the worst-case scenario: Power consumption and cost (I'm getting ahead of myself, since you're looking for it...) have nothing to do with it!
If the SW2 version outperforms the PS4, it's because of power consumption; otherwise, it would be worse...?
How many times have you read about "overshoot" when the PC version was a generation ahead? Hmm...
Do you realize that a little elementary school rhetoric is enough to refute the usual excuses used by those accustomed to playing at a low level?
Ah, the 3060 doesn't consume 300 watts, not even if you put in a processor that runs twice as fast as the console ones (on SW2, the multiplication increases).
Do you like childish provocations like yours...?
Re: Review: Star Fox On Switch 2 Is a Refined Return to an Iconic Game - and the Rail Shooter Genre
@Starfox85
If the disrespect is upstream, the consequence won't be a confetti shower...
There's an absurd double standard, and I'm only using double standards, because SW2 isn't the only one that stands out.
Saying it's not exceptional doesn't mean anything.
Only the exceptional is exceptional; everything below that isn't exceptional, whether it's poor or optimal.
There's clear preferential treatment, which implies disfavor for the rest.
How do you explain that there was more talk about AI upscaling after the PS5 Pro and Switch 2 releases than in the previous five years?
They did the same thing with more frequent 60fps, increased resolution, faster loading times, VRR, etc.
How many times did you see the timer in loading screens before SSDs arrived on consoles? It wasn't important, it wasn't a problem, also because it was simply a factor that didn't exist. If there are isolated cases, it's the exception that proves the rule.
Why, in the early cases of the Series S dropping to 720p, there was laughter with a nod to the previous generation; the terms used were poor, confusing, and unstable. Then, when it happened on the major consoles, did it become a little softer?
We're talking about technical analyses. When you do them, you shouldn't say what it isn't (it's not exceptional), you have to say what it is, taking it from a well-defined scale, not based on how you wake up in the morning (so to speak...).
Consistency is the essence, and DF has no substance...
Re: Review: Devil May Cry 5 On Switch 2 Easily Outclasses the PS4 Version, Yet Further Improvements Could Be Made
@Jimbojones
There is none so deaf as he who will not hear...
Re: Review: Devil May Cry 5 On Switch 2 Easily Outclasses the PS4 Version, Yet Further Improvements Could Be Made
@Jimbojones
No, or at least not in the objective report that talks about rendering on a 4K TV, especially when comparing it to the Series S's native 720p/1080p.
If you want to believe the excuses outside of the game, go ahead, but don't expect others to be that clever.
In short, it's clearly and repeatedly said that Switch-2 performs better than native even starting at 540p, i.e., the performance setting. Either true or false, consumption won't change that truth.
Now, tell me how many times you've seen DLSS treated that way on PC, where a low-end card like the 3060 could be plugged into a 1080p screen and therefore shouldn't even have to undergo the basic spatial upscaling, which seems to be absent in the SW2 analyses.
I'm struggling to find a single instance where anyone has said that DLSS quality is better than native, despite the fact that SW2 essentially uses DLSS-3, which is very little different from 2, and even uses a lame version of it.
Not only that, before SW2 and PS5-Pro, cross-analyses between DLSS and TAAU/FSR2 were rare indeed.
If you can't even pinpoint one unbalanced case like this, I'll understand even better why DF can afford to tell so many stories depending on what it wants you to believe.
Maybe you appreciate SW2's amplification, so you don't care about PC minimization and the obvious double standards.
Well, good for you, but you could avoid giving credence to incredible things just because they're enjoyable...
Re: Review: Devil May Cry 5 On Switch 2 Easily Outclasses the PS4 Version, Yet Further Improvements Could Be Made
The DLSS treatment on SW2 has become a joke. It has nothing to do with the previous (and subsequent) treatment seen on PC, even though SW2 requires a 4K TV.
In 90% of cases, in the PC tests, it didn't compare to the consoles' performance. With a logic vaguely similar to that used on SW2, a 3060 would be a monster, which never seemed right, especially to you, who, to saturate the 3070's VRAM, went as far as using DLAA on RE9.
You're not credible, if your goal is intellectual honesty...
Re: Review: Star Fox On Switch 2 Is a Refined Return to an Iconic Game - and the Rail Shooter Genre
Solid image quality, but not exceptional?
Exceptional is the best, and here it's not even clear which AA is involved.
One of the most in-depth parameters (and has been for many years) is downplayed or completely denied here.
Is it better or worse than the 1080p + TAA of Series S on FF-Rebirth, where DLSS seems to suck in order to amplify it?
After years of perfect 1080p + TAA on PS4?
After years of PS5 equal to RTX-2070, why was DLSS better not to consider it?
Joking aside, how much do Sony and Nintendo commission?
As always, DF thinks it's invisible...
Re: Review: 007 First Light: PC Review and Optimised Settings Guide
The usual opportunistic confusion between PC "categories," and the usual downplaying of the PC's advantages.
All for the benefit of the original version, for DF.
Ah, porting isn't a game developed and released on the same day, stop with these ridiculous techniques. I even read about porting in the Diablo 4 review. A medic recovery is needed...
What's the point of a 5600 as a mid-range CPU, from which you can jump straight to a high-end 9800X3D? There's a world of difference, but since it's ugly to classify consoles as low-end, the modus operando adapts.
Ditto for GPUs. Which mid-range GPU should set textures to medium? With what DLSS settings? Because the memory usage isn't the same, with DLSS dropping to 720p like on consoles.
Why measure the performance at 4K + DLAA, which also increases from native + TAA, and do it on a 5090 with 32GB?
What mid-range GPU (the mid-range is a 5070, not the 3070—the usual misunderstandings about the processor?) will have to manage the 12GB limit, which will play maxed out at 4K + DLAA?
It doesn't exist, it's a non-issue.
The difference between Ultra and High textures is very visible; what does a little sharper mean? The symbol and the text are much clearer.
Lastly, make the comparison in a dark, limited area, so as to hide most of the differences.
Is the lack of universal Frame Gen a problem?
So, why don't you use it with Nvidia cards (basically the only ones you test), and why isn't there even a mention of VRR?
As usual, you think you're invisible, but it doesn't take much to summarize your biases; you just have to understand them once, and the rest is a consequence...
Re: Gears of War: E-Day requires 130GB SSD space, RTX 2060 or better GPU
@MattGPT
There's no doubt that it will be scalable.
It was implicit in the difference between the requirements and the Series S support.
I didn't object to that, but rather to the absurdity of considering high requirements that began before the latest "Next-Gen" consoles.
In quotes to the nth degree, since, until the new ones arrive, one way or another, DF will always consider them current.
I don't understand why so many people aren't clear about DF's console-centric imbalance. It's probably a matter of habit...
Re: Gears of War: E-Day requires 130GB SSD space, RTX 2060 or better GPU
PC narrative is completely out of the question here.
Demanding with an RTX 2060? What if it's for 60fps?
Will it also run on a Series S, right?
There are other games that take up more space, and I don't recall this "detail" being thrown around as if it were a problem, or as if it automatically had something to do with weight.
Haven't you ever seen Black Myth Wukong, AC Shadows, Crimson Desert, Indiana Jones + DLC, Space Marine-2 + Texture HD, GOW Ragnarok, Final Fantasy VII Rebirth, or other games that take up slightly less space?
Like Horizon FW, Death Stranding 2, Spider-Man-2, SW Jedi Survivor, etc.?
What's the point of amplifying the relevance of PC components that are 7-8 to 10 years old? To make consoles look less old?
Re: Review: 007 First Light on Xbox Series X|S: Minor Quirks But Solid Ports Overall
Two out of three times, XSX is higher than PS5 in resolution, but the video says otherwise. You can't even pretend to be objective, eh?
720p with FSR-3 on a 4K screen sucks, there's no less serious way to say it. It's softer, it doesn't mean anything, it's not a fabric softener, and it doesn't even improve antialiasing; in fact, FSR-3 amplifies it, so there's no room for making ridiculous excuses, or there wouldn't be any, it would be better to say...
Wow, when, initially, only the Series S could run at 720p, it was a temporal accumulation of criticisms and ironic jokes, now completely ridiculous.
In practice, the current consoles have to be saved somehow; the rest is just chatter trying to hide it.
Out of 100 videos, DLSS cross-console was an exception. PSSR came out, which was truly awful... and in an instant it became a primary topic, along with the Switch 2, which with DLSS performance seems to work wonders even at 540p, i.e., with the performance profile.
Now, consistently, how was it possible to compare the 2070/2070S with the PS5 for years without mentioning it? Mysteries of the partisan...
Re: RTX 5070 Drops Below Launch MSRP In The UK
The 5070s on PC are mainly used for 1440p. DF makes the usual console-centric summary, adding the exception it tries to pass off as the rule.
When might 12GB seem too little?
At 1440p? When do you activate Frame Gen?
So why do we want to try it at 4K, and Frame Gen seems nonexistent compared to consoles?
Let's wait for it to arrive on PS6, so we can start talking about it, like we did with VRR, 60fps, fast loading, etc. But unfortunately, these were also available on consoles, and worse, at least when it comes to the PS5.
On the other hand, considering 864p on PS5 Pro to be excellent in Pragmanta, then saying that with the 1080p patch it was excellent, while on PC, in order to undermine the 3070, they had to resort to DLAA at 1440p, should say a lot...
It's a shame that there are only chickens in the CDI chicken coop, and that's the only target for DF, otherwise it would immediately become a foolish Pro console (and Pro PS5 Pro) analyzer.
Re: "They Understood the Assignment" – The 007 First Light Technology Review
"with a rock-solid 60fps across multiple consoles and impressively high image quality."
In the first test, it's obvious that the image quality at 60fps is poor, and that's emphasized, though not as much as it deserves. Would FSR3 at 720p be impressive?
Did you forget to include the sponsored tag?
Re: PS3 Emulation On PS5 Tested: Killzone, MotorStorm, GTA4 and Many, Many More
The extra resolution in games that had low resolutions was nice, but back then it wasn't as effective on PC. I remember the refrain about assets not being designed for higher resolutions; on PC it almost seemed like the situation was worse.
DF's double standards are notorious; calling them unbalanced is an understatement...
Re: It's Time To Say Goodbye To The Ryzen 5 3600
@Max_the_German
I don't understand... Should the low-end PC showcase the low-end PC, or is it for general interest? The 4060 was often limited by the processor. Then, when it didn't work well, they said all the hardware wasn't optimized like on consoles.
Even choosing the 5600X is a cut-price option. The survey shows that 90% use 5000-7000-9000 models, and it's also said that many X3D owners on AM4 remained on the old platform.
In the end, they discard the 10% to include a processor that will be 10% of that 90%. The 5600X is essentially the minimum of the 5000s; the right processor would have been the 7600X, or at most the one without X.
The low-end shouldn't also be the old low-end, and if you include the 4060 there, it makes no sense, given that it came out 5 months after the Ryzen 7600X.
This distorts the result, making it appear that the low-end 2023 model, which is already three years old... is performing less than it could.
Finally, it's senseless to leave Intel out: It's even more popular than AMD, and a simple 2021 12600K performs on average 10% more than the 5600X.
Above is a user with a 13600K, a very popular processor in gaming (and good for other things too). It came out in the fall of 2022, tree and a half years from now, and on average it performs almost 15% more than the 7600X, which this one performs almost 15% more than the 5600.
Basically, the 5600X is old and pointless as soon as it's included; it's already a potential bottleneck, especially when it comes to overrevving... and you'd like to leave the Ryzen 3600 alone to make the consoles happy. Which also came out a year before the consoles, you don't really like well-done tests, huh...
Re: Yup, Oblivion Remastered Is Still Broken a Year After Release
"...under the new patch and some smaller problems remain with the PS5 and PS5 Pro versions"
Smaller problems, frequent crashes on consoles?
Velvet gloves are used in PS5 ports
The hate speech surrounding the PC version of Dead Space continues to cry out for vengeance.
I played it last year without any particular problems on a decent PC.
Creating stutter by deleting the shader cache and reinstalling the same drivers smacks of tampering.
We search for the strangest issues before reproducing them as if they were common.
Re: Review: Death Stranding 2 PC: The Last Big Sony Single-Player PS5 Port?
@Rich_Leadbetter
You're trying to force the science to do your bidding...
You can't match the most used DLSS settings with the 4070 Ti Super, nor can you plug in any monitor you want.
On Steam, 4K monitors/TVs are less than 5%, and cards that perform twice as fast as the PS5 are at least double. It's unclear why you need to go beyond that statistic to choose a monitor, or rather, it's all too clear...
With the 4070 Ti S, you're worried about being CPU-limited (and we don't even know what to do with it), but limiting the 4060 to lock it into the PS5 isn't a problem, it seems.
Aren't you interested in processor purchase data for over five years now? You chose the Ryzen 3600 to level the playing field with the PS5, you've said it 100 times, now you add reasons at will, perhaps to hide the fact that your publication is heavily console-centric?
Why are you talking about a beta right away? Just because it could have been improved at the beginning? How come I don't see the word beta in Starfield for PS5/Pro, even though it looks more like an alpha (the constant crashes on consoles are ridiculous), and why was the analysis released right away? Isn't there a wait? Isn't there a good critique? It doesn't seem bad, after all, there are just a few small issues...
Your unbalanced unit of measurement isn't invisible. Oliver always tries to justify and downplay the low resolution and frame rate drops on PS5 in every way: It's a bit softer, it mostly holds 60fps, etc.
The second excuse is grotesque; even a game that stutters at 200ms twice a second could fall into that category.
Why does DLSS on PC need 4K in quality mode to be better than native, while on the Switch 2, even in performance mode at 1080p—the worst-case scenario—it seems to work miracles?
How come, since DLSS's release, now more than 7 years ago, you've been talking and comparing AI upscalers more directly than in previous years? You clearly think you're invisible, huh?
On RE9, the 3070 needed to use DLAA, otherwise the limited VRAM wouldn't have been saturated enough. Even there, the 4070 TI S was on par with the Pro; the difference in textures, etc., was minimized without even being noticed, and the fear goes away. In the end, you managed to take the Pro to the next level from the 4070, one way or another.
Does the PS5 Pro's popularity matter?
The Steam charts feature stuff from 10 years ago, which only launches a few 2D indie games. At that point, on consoles, you'd have to include the Switch 1 as well, and maybe the older consoles.
Give me the approximate percentage the Pro would get among that crowd, and then explain why it's always in pole position; every sneeze is recorded.
It's clear that you're always trying to force the PC settings toward PS5; just as you can see, anything more is often downplayed, you forgot a piece... As I was saying, anything more will be well-regarded when it arrives on the Pro, or on PS6.
The frame-gen will exist later, as will the importance of 60fps, fast loading, and VRR, something you've talked about five times over the years before it arrived on consoles. After that, the stopwatch even counted tenths, and if it reaches 48Hz in fits and starts, that's good!
The longer version of damage control vs. damage finder.
Re: Review: Death Stranding 2 PC: The Last Big Sony Single-Player PS5 Port?
Don't waste too much time hyping up RT; keep putting it aside for when it's added to the PS5 Pro.
It's insane that, on PC, the quintessential dynamic platform, you only run a locked-in configuration setting.
The Ryzen 3600, released before the PS5, should be retired, otherwise the console-centricity will be too obvious. It's not mid-range, it's the low-end of the last century.
Why does the low-end have to run at 1440p, and why shouldn't it use DLSS performance, which on the Switch 2 seems to work wonders, even at 1080p, and even with the worst version? Why does the PC have to suffer from the damage finder vs. the consoles' damage control, that seems clear to me.
Can the 4070 Ti only use the quality setting? The RT noise is annoying only on PC, while in unusual cases like MHW on the PS5 it's a win-win, even if it sounds like a hornet's nest?
Please, look carefully for cases where the RT isn't visible, and mix the 4070 TI with the 4060 to change the subject, which isn't really noticeable anyway...
We're waiting for the pre-mega patch for PS5 Pro, which will be analyzed before it's available on the PSSR, which was alpha until yesterday, where the significant improvements will be shown in great detail, more or less as has been done before.
You've left Eurogamer to take everything directly, eh...
Re: Pragmata On PC: Impressive From Path-Traced RTX 5090 Down To The Lowly 4060
Ryzen 3600 + 4060 mid-range? Are you drunk?
No, it's just to keep the consoles from becoming very low-end...
Re: Review: Crimson Desert PC: Changing Just One Setting Dramatically Boosts Frame-Rate
The usual PC settings normalization for consoles. Water doesn't change anything; even 1.5% is a gain, so we choose to remove it to normalize as usual.
DLSS 4.5 weighs more than 4, which remains comfortably better than PSS2, whose flaws are invisible, just as the first's were barely noticeable before. The usual improvements are made after the fact.
Scenarios for textures and lighting are carefully chosen to minimize the impact on the flagship consoles, and the circle can be closed, for now...
Re: Review: Kingdom Come: Deliverance's New Patch Delivers A Convincingly PC-Like Upgrade
It feels like we're going back in time, when who wanted a resolution above the PS4, if not the PS3... They had to become purists right away, as if above that threshold (a forced norm) was a defect.
You don't need 4K purists to demand image rendering higher than 1080p with FSR1, and if it often drops below 60fps, and the Pro aims for the same peak, I'd say the lower consoles are not infrequently going to 1080p. Oh, do you need frame rate purists, even for 60fps that drops to 40fps?
Nostalgic damage control. Rather than upgrading patches for older games, wouldn't it be appropriate to cover games that were completely skipped on PC, like Stellar Blade, Mafia, Wuchang, or even a detailed video on DL Beast? No, eh? Better to analyze every patch released on consoles, including the Switch 2.
Re: Alan Wake 2's Upgraded PSSR Delivers A Vast Improvement
@NandoCalrissian
You also need to calibrate HDR on Windows; there's a dedicated app in the store. The PS5 has it built-in, and the game usually adjusts accordingly (at least the default, if the game doesn't have specific settings), but if the implementation is flawed, you have no solution. On PC, you can rely on RenoDX and Luma, which also allow you to enable it where it's not available. There are also specific presets for the most popular graphics engines (UE-4, 5, and Unity), from which you can adjust the settings in detail.
Consoles start out better, but if the original work is poorly done, you have no alternative. On PC, there are many ways to improve, and you can enable it where it's not available in various ways, including RTX-HDR and Windows Auto HDR.
Re: It's Official: Resident Evil Requiem Uses Sony's Brand-New PSSR Upscaler
@MattGPT
I agree, but I still criticize the lack of consistency when it comes to console-centric games...
Until PSSR started being discussed, comparisons between console and PC upscalers were almost nonexistent. If you look closely, you'll notice they talked more about ML upscalers with the PS5 Pro + Switch 2 than about DLSS in the last 5-6 years.
Until yesterday, on consoles, the distance from the TV hid even 720p, but not anymore. This is consistent with the usual things that are only amplified when they arrive on consoles, like the more present 60fps, SSD, VRR, etc.
Now the sensitivity threshold has been raised. If we need an upscaler that performs like PSSR2 on RE9, meaning it's not wasted, it means that the image quality issues on consoles were downplayed before. After all, a PC only has a little compilation stutter and the discussion begins and ends there. 9 times out of 10, the superior image quality isn't praised, and without a PS5 Pro and Switch 2, cross-checks don't exist.
When the story is better understood by considering what's missing, it's a bad sign before considering the reasons.
Re: It's Official: Resident Evil Requiem Uses Sony's Brand-New PSSR Upscaler
They're already starting with the off-topic distinctions and the overall approximate weight. So, overall, it's worse than upscalers on PC, right? I figured it out easily: when something on consoles looks similar to PC, it means it's worse, before I get dragged by the neck.
Sharpness on PC is easily changed; RIS2 on AMD is excellent. So the increased sharpness of PSSR2 doesn't exist, and it's possible that it can be achieved using an internal sharpening filter.
These "details" are always skipped, if it's the PS5 that suffers...
Most console gamers I know play two steps away from the big screen, usually placing a chair between the couch and the TV. Who said the average PC gamer is glued to the monitor? All assumptions aimed at minimizing...
But even if that were the case, could one easily argue that certain details on consoles are useless, since what do you want to see from five meters away?
Or does the remote screen hide the flaws but not the strengths?
Re: DLSS 4.5 "Preset L" Tested: How Good Can a 4K Upscale from 720p Look?
@themightyant
We don't understand each other. I'll give you some more examples...
XSS has been heavily criticized, as if the threshold below the major consoles wasn't decent, now the Switch-2 still seems good. How many times have you seen XSS results benchmarked against price and/or theoretical power? Almost never, I tell you...
XSS was awful regardless. Don't tell me you really think the difference now could be the difference between TAAU and FSR-2, when it was awful in any way?
What is being considered in this test?
Do you see the criticism consistent with the sense of proportion you're talking about?
Shouldn't a company that claims to be a pioneer of technical tests always consider technical differences? That's what I was talking about, not the difference in mass perception, which is often influenced by the industry press.
If it were as you say, this test would be about hairs crossed, not problems. You can't see the double standards because you've been trained to think like that.
I was talking specifically about Oliver, who with the PS5 Pro, once said that from a distance you can't see the glowing red doll (shimmering on Astrobot), another time that you can't see the lack of sharpness.
Consistency is the essence, and the only consistency DF can afford is to amplify and/or minimize as needed, tending to have the mid-range consoles at the epicenter of the universe.
Why has there been more talk of ML upscaling with the PS5-Pro and SW2 than in the previous 7 years? Why are there no cross-tests with PC?
Why was FSR1 only a flop on the road on PC?
Does it seem natural to you to continue carrying the Ryzen 3600?
They test it more than anything else, just like in the PS3/X360 days, they forced PC resolution to 720p, and said the assets were the same even at 1080p (which isn't always true), 60fps wasn't essential, etc. Except for celebrating GOW-3 on PS4, where the assets seemed to be made to be better, and the mipmapping worked wonders—which was also a given on PC, but there wasn't even a mention of it there.
You mean to tell me that perception improves with age?
Old age is supposed to improve your eyesight...?
And then the PC alone has a market that rivals the rest of the world, yet there are a lot of PC-only tests that failed, like Mafia, Stellar Blade (how many articles for each patch and for the PS5-Pro version?), Wuchang, etc.
You've veered into the unsolicited. I was talking about DF, and Oliver specifically; you've changed the subject by bringing up the masses' perception of time.
You've been happy with the narrative they've cooked up for you; if you don't follow the same path, it will seem strange, and you're led to justify the real inconsistencies without needing any encouragement.
Do you think that when the new consoles come out, they won't make the differences in upscaling and starting resolution count? You're just wrong to assume so...
By the way, look at the "significant difference" in Hellblade 2 on PS5-Pro, for just a few extra pixels (with accompanying music by Ennio Morricone).
Re: DLSS 4.5 "Preset L" Tested: How Good Can a 4K Upscale from 720p Look?
@themightyant
In theory, your point makes sense...
In practice, so looking at the history of the value weighted by DF: It has the usual flaw, that is, the usual double standards depending on what and how you're looking.
Explain to me why Oliver had a big grin when talking about TLOU-2 on PS5-Pro with PSSR.
Remember:
"Hey, it looks native, hippy hippy yeah yeah! Incredible! Impressive!"
In the early days when only the Xbox Series S could handle 720p, there was a sarcastic smile followed by a comparison with the PS3.
There, it wasn't good enough; it was simply poor and confusing.
Now that standard consoles are running at 720p (but also 504p, as we said above), 720p isn't bad after all. From a reasonable distance from the TV (I don't know which one, and it's better not to say...) you can't see much, but ultimately it's good, and at times excellent.
The same concept can be "exported" to the 60fps, VRR, SSD loading, etc. Until they arrived on consoles, it wasn't very useful, and not having them wasn't a problem. After that, it was indispensable, and not having the plus—or any more—was a failure.
Forgive my frankness, but with such a distracted user base, they can easily make donkeys fly; maybe they'll even explain that they fly because of their big ears...
Re: DLSS 4.5 "Preset L" Tested: How Good Can a 4K Upscale from 720p Look?
@themightyant
When you'll have to start at 720p + FSR2 to reach 60fps: You won't be able to help but worry about this while playing.
The PC and console tests are increasingly separating, more or less like they did at the end of the previous generation's lifespan.
Maybe it's because it's better to analyze the consoles with a closer look, perhaps saying that with the above settings it's not bad, before looking for nitpicks in the best upscaler out there, and by far.
Oliver called Dragon Age Veilguard pretty good, starting at 504p. What are we talking about?
Re: Is Switch 2's "Tiny" DLSS better than FSR 3?
Coincidentally, most upscaler tests are done on consoles, almost never directly comparing them to PC.
Anyway, a question arises spontaneously:
If the lame DLSS is better than FSR, how does an RTX 3060 stack up against DLSS4? I'd say the PS5 can easily handle it, and could even compete with the PS5 Pro, or is it better not to say that?
Why is the case where the DLSS half performs worse missing from the paper?
There's the case where DLSS performs better and the one where both perform poorly, but the counterpart is missing. So even the conclusion seems absurd, because if you show the best and the worst, why conclude with an overall result? Perhaps because the unwritten result is also considered?
I've long noticed the inconsistency of your variable values, the unit of measurement that changes depending on what you're trying to measure. Whenever there's a comparison, otherwise it's like all the missing PC tests, which alone takes up as much space as all the other consoles.
So, double standards, and when it's not convenient, it's better to leave the measurement out, one might say...
Re: Review: Microsoft Flight Simulator 2024 Gets A Solid, Unsurprisingly Great PS5 Port
First of all, you should criticize the person who wrote this article, not because of the CPU limitation, because it's true, but because it's ridiculous to make such a sensational title for a game that drops to 20fps. Then, on PC, at the first problem, the game would be rejected...
After that, but it would be earlier... If it's CPU-limited, you can render it internally even at 240p, and it will still be CPU-limited.
If you don't even have a basic understanding of what it means to be CPU-limited, you shouldn't point out other people's mistakes.
Anyway, best wishes and a happy new year.
Re: Review: Microsoft Flight Simulator 2024 Gets A Solid, Unsurprisingly Great PS5 Port
@PGR
A better upscaler could have helped reduce shimmering, and perhaps enable RT features, starting at a much lower resolution.
I think you completely misunderstand that the upscaler won't "overcome" the processor's limitations; it will "only" improve the GPU's bottleneck.
Re: The Best and Worst PC Ports of 2025
But which ports?
Re: Digital Foundry's 2025 Graphics of the Year Awards
In his review of Mafia: The Old Country, Oliver advised against using performance mode.
It's not clear that that mode is a significant downgrade, and a reasonable frame rate means nothing; it was unstable in driving and shooting, yet he said it played well at 30fps.
It's interesting that 2 out of 3 of you played it on PC, but that's the only analysis missing. It joins Wuchang and Stellar Blade, where each patch was analyzed for Sony consoles.
The honorable mentions dedicated solely to the Switch 2 are laughable; they're the icing on the cake... Said as if it weren't a clear stretch, a bottleneck that most will interpret differently.
DL The Beast wasn't clear that consoles were missing what was already in the incomplete PC version. The RT patch came out two weeks ago; you see a partial award without even a dedicated analysis.
Before we digress from current events (e.g., the Snow Drop engine and retro games...), it's best not to select tests based on what's missing from consoles...
Oh, the hair strands didn't seem interesting in Oliver's Pro test; he spent five seconds pretending not to know they weren't there.
You're not invisible, you'd better keep that in mind...