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

DF Performance Analysis: Dark Souls 2 The Scholar of the First Sin (PS4 vs. XB1)

Wereroku

Member
in this version as well sadly- I have reached out to BandaiNamco rep-but havent gotten a response yet-

edit:for now just roll with multiple weapons until they hopefully address a fix

I don't think they want to fix it. I thought they were just upping the durability for weapons across the board.
 
Maybe they will patch the X1 version to run a bit better - Don't seem like no reason it can't handle the game with higher FPS. DS2 isn't really a technical achievement - could just be poor optimization on the X1 version.

I don't think X1 owners should feel bad about picking it up.

Edit: After watching the video, certainly seems like the X1 could use some work - there are areas where nothing is going on and the frame dips a bit, doesn't seem right but all in all doesn't seem all that bad.
 

ironcreed

Banned
Maybe they will patch the X1 version to run a bit better - Don't seem like no reason it can't handle the game with higher FPS. DS2 isn't really a technical achievement - good just be poor optimization on the X1 version.

I don't think X1 owners should feel bad about picking it up.

I surely don't, as it's not like it is some lag fest. It maintains around 60 fps for the most part and I am more than fine with that.

I was actually watching a stream of the Xbox One version yesterday and the guy streaming kept commenting on how smooth and beautiful it was compared to the last-gen version. You could see it as well.
 

Koobion

Member
No, it's not locked at 60.


Framerate drops below 60 immediately on PS4 as well depending on how many enemies there are. (only a couple more)


Neither can the PS4.

I didn't really expect much honesty and unbias in a DF performance thread.


Did you watch the performance video? It's blatantly clear that the Xbone version drops when you've got enemies on screen, while PS4 remains significantly more stable and remains at 60 pretty reliably. I don't see what you're trying to defend here, because it's a lost cause. Just watch the video and you'll see how much better the PS4 runs it.
 

Oppo

Member
If I was an X1 only player, I'd be pretty annoyed by the state of 3rd party games right around now.
 

Inuhanyou

Believes Dragon Quest is a franchise managed by Sony
PS4 the best console version of course. XB1 owners of course should have nothing to worry about. The framerate is still far higher than the last gen versions at all times, plus with full 1080p and much higher res textures and graphical effects.
 

ironcreed

Banned
PS4 the best console version of course. XB1 owners of course should have nothing to worry about. The framerate is still far higher than the last gen versions at all times, plus with full 1080p and much higher res textures and graphical effects.

Indeed. It is going to be great.
 
Every time another one of these threads pops up and I wonder why I bothered buying my XO. For MCC? Haha, that turned out real well. Oh well. Maybe I'll get some use out of it with Halo 5.
 

Inuhanyou

Believes Dragon Quest is a franchise managed by Sony
Indeed. It is going to be great.

What i don't understand is why people all of a sudden turned into FPS counters all of a sudden this gen. "omg Dark souls 2 drops frames like 2 percent of the time out of 20 thousand frames!? SHITTY PORT!"

Uh no , that's within margin of basically every 3D 60fps game on console ever. There are basically almost zero locked 60fps games in console history, but apparently a few drops suddenly means the port is bad.

We're talking machines that aren't so powerful to begin with, these performance metrics arent unexpected.

If we were back in the PS1 days, people would be absolutely surprised how many games ran at 30 and below, let alone a stable 60.

All i can say is that if you care THAT MUCH about absolutely locked with zero dips performance, your better off playing on PC. Cause there's no way devs can be that strict on rendering under budget all the time that they dont lower framerate in stressful scenes

Only genre where that is actually the case in games is fighting games, in which case dynamic res to ensure 60fps fluidity is the way to go
 

Nephtes

Member
I emailed Digital Foundry concerning the Achievement Unlock being the cause for the slowdown. I got a very quick response from Tom Morgan (the author of the DF piece)


Tom Morgan said:
I used the same Xbox One profile as before to avoid the Achievement Unlocked prompt of my first run - as you rightly suggest - and started up a new save so I could re-face The Last Giant. Took a bit of a speed-run but I got there fast enough!


The 36fps drop doesn't seem to be related to that Achievement prompt, sadly. The second time around I get a minimum fps reading of 32fps just as the souls start flying across - so essentially in the same ballpark as what we had before.


This is with patch 1.01 installed as well. Unfortunately the game updated just after our article went up, which is based on 1.00. But based on tests so far it's fair to say this patch doesn't affect Xbox One performance in this section.

So, not the achievement. Op, you may want to add this
 
I emailed Digital Foundry concerning the Achievement Unlock being the cause for the slowdown. I got a very quick response from Tom Morgan (the author of the DF piece)




So, not the achievement. Op, you may want to add this

Pretty cool of Thomas to check this so quickly.
 

ClearData

Member
Even with the occasional framerate hiccups this game is the smoothest Souls game on consoles. The idea that smooth gameplay is a must is a funny thing to say given that it's never been smoother than this before.

True. But the hiccups that are caused by a drop could mess up some combat encounters.
 

RoboPlato

I'd be in the dick
I heard the 60fps durability glitch carried over into this version. Is that true? Completely insane that they didn't fix it if it did indeed survive the remastering.
 
If I was an X1 only player, I'd be pretty annoyed by the state of 3rd party games right around now.

I mostly just get annoyed with comments like this that assume X1 owners had no idea what they were getting into when they opted to pick up third party games on the weaker console
 
why are people suprised this isnt a perfect 60fps and that the AA is jsut fxaa?

these consoles arent powerful why are you suprised!
Yeah, I blame them being relatively underpowered due to MS and Sony going with shitty AMD tech instead of going the godly Intel+Nvidia route.
 

UnrealEck

Member
Did you watch the performance video? It's blatantly clear that the Xbone version drops when you've got enemies on screen, while PS4 remains significantly more stable and remains at 60 pretty reliably. I don't see what you're trying to defend here, because it's a lost cause. Just watch the video and you'll see how much better the PS4 runs it.

I'll just go ahead and repeat myself by copying and pasting the post you just quoted. This time, please read it:

"Framerate drops below 60 immediately on PS4 as well depending on how many enemies there are. (only a couple more)"
It looks like I made it clear enough that the PS4 version also drops below 60 FPS immediately when there's just a couple more enemies on screen than the Xbox One. This was in reply to someone saying the Xbox drops below 60 immediately when there's enemies on screen. I am saying quite clearly that the PS4 version does this too, it just takes a couple more enemies to do it.
 

Orayn

Member
Yeah, I blame them being relatively underpowered due to MS and Sony going with shitty AMD tech instead of going the godly Intel+Nvidia route.

The AMD SoC route was much more in line with what they wanted to do this gen:
1. Keep things in a smaller TDP envelope to limit failure rates
2. Sell hardware at cost or a slight profit so they don't have to lose money and dig themselves out of a hole
It's disappointing in some respect, but I completely understand why they made the choices they did.
 

ironcreed

Banned
I mostly just get annoyed with comments like this that assume X1 owners had no idea what they were getting into when they opted to pick up third party games on the weaker console

I own both systems and have yet to see a massive difference or some big power gap that is worth me splitting hairs over. I know it's there on paper, but I am just not seeing it play out in the real to any significant degree. Hell, there are even instances where the PS4 takes a hit, which is indeed odd. But I am not going to take it any further than that, as I am loving both systems just fine.
 

Nephtes

Member
I may have! Thanks.

You're awesome! Thanks! :)

Pretty cool of Thomas to check this so quickly.

I agree, when the email showed up in my inbox from him within 2 hours of my mailing DF I was like "Damn!"

I half expected no one would be paying attention to the email and I might get a canned response in a week.

Then again, this is why I visit Digital Foundry as much as I do. Quality stuff.
 

laser

Neo Member
Yeah, I blame them being relatively underpowered due to MS and Sony going with shitty AMD tech instead of going the godly Intel+Nvidia route.

Godly, lol. You cannot be serious. The only thing godly would the the increased $100 in cost with no performance gain.

NVidia burned their bridges with both Sony and Microsoft.
Intel doesn't want to work with anyone else to produce consoles (they also don't need to).
 

warheat

Member
Does this mean Xbox version has better durability?

tumblr_lpg3so4bvm1qiy6q1.gif
 
Godly, lol. You cannot be serious. The only thing godly would the the increased $100 in cost with no performance gain.

NVidia burned their bridges with both Sony and Microsoft.
Intel doesn't want to work with anyone else to produce consoles (they also don't need to).

Well, Intel CPUs are godly compared to what AMD is putting out... GPUs IMO as well, but that is debatable.
 

mrklaw

MrArseFace
never played DS2 and after bloodborne I'll be happy to play something where I have a shield again. I'll walk through the levels just hugging it.
 

Protome

Member
Because PR pushed hard on this 60 fps thing. Before PS4 and One 60 fps on console was never a thing. Hell, FPS at all was never a thing.

But on One/PS4, PR started to promote this thing like a magic wand, so people now wants 1080p/60 fps. Easy.

Were the PS3/360 your first consoles or something?
PS2 had a crapton of 60FPS games and it was the standard for racing and action games.

60FPS was definitely a thing on consoles.
 
That "bokeh" depth of field is, at my first glance, the same depth of field option available on the default PC release. Did the last gen version have no DOF or just plain gaussian?

EDIT: IMO, the PC comparison article should perhaps include Durante's mod.

Vanilla DS PC:
darksoulsii_2015_04_0hujk8.png

PS4
2buar.png


Hard to tell if the epth of field is actually different. They changed the focal plane in this shot (forgeground is in focus vs the background).

In comparison, foreground DOF in Vanilla DS PC (which has bokeh shapes in it):
darksoulsii_2015_04_0n6kpt.png
 

Fredrik

Member
The focus on the framedrops and importance of a high framerate in a game like this makes it odd to look at how many that likes Bloodborne and think that 30fps with some drops is enough for a game like this :/
 
I own both systems and have yet to see a massive difference or some big power gap that is worth me splitting hairs over. I know it's there on paper, but I am just not seeing it play out in the real to any significant degree. Hell, there are even instances where the PS4 takes a hit, which is indeed odd. But I am not going to take it any further than that, as I am loving both systems just fine.

Same boat here... I'm still picking this one up on Xbox regardless of the larger framerate dips... I personally was just glad to see that it actually hit the 1080P resolution after it not really being confirmed. I'm right into Bloodborne right now though so it'll be probably a few weeks or longer before I get around to playing this.
 

Javin98

Banned
Watching that frame rate test video, From Software really should dropped the resolution to 900p. At a few points with lots of enemies, the PS4 is almost 15FPS ahead but it is rare, though 8-10FPS is quite common. Also nice to see a good level of AF in this game on PS4.
 

Inuhanyou

Believes Dragon Quest is a franchise managed by Sony
Because PR pushed hard on this 60 fps thing. Before PS4 and One 60 fps on console was never a thing. Hell, FPS at all was never a thing.

But on One/PS4, PR started to promote this thing like a magic wand, so people now wants 1080p/60 fps. Easy.

I was following next gen PR and news for years up to release and i barely ever heard a thing about FPS or res outside of rumors and speculation by people who didn't know what they were even talking about.

AMD once said years before the consoles dropped that they would do avatar in real time. which was obviously bullshit

http://www.cinemablend.com/games/AMD-Says-Xbox-720-Have-Avatar-Quality-Graphics-33537.html


And Shahid said close to release that 1080p and 60fps was a thing(which is true, we do have tons of 1080p games, and way more 60fps games to start then last gen)

https://twitter.com/shahidkamal/status/400013318309814273

Outside of that, i don't recall ever hearing anything about 1080p 60fps outside of console owners expecting high end PC performance that you were getting in 7th gen from PC from multiplatform ports, which of course this is one.
 

RoboPlato

I'd be in the dick
Watching that frame rate test video, From Software really should dropped the resolution to 900p. At a few points with lots of enemies, the PS4 is almost 15FPS ahead but it is rare, though 8-10FPS is quite common. Also nice to see a good level of AF in this game on PS4.

From actually seems to value AF highly. It's good in Bloodborne as well. Wasn't expecting that from them.
 
I was following next gen PR and news for years up to release and i barely ever heard a thing about FPS or res outside of rumors and speculation by people who didn't know what they were even talking about.

AMD once said years before the consoles dropped that they would do avatar in real time. which was obviously bullshit

http://www.cinemablend.com/games/AMD-Says-Xbox-720-Have-Avatar-Quality-Graphics-33537.html


And Shahid said close to release that 1080p and 60fps was a thing(which is true, we do have tons of 1080p games, and way more 60fps games to start then last gen)

https://twitter.com/shahidkamal/status/400013318309814273

Outside of that, i don't recall ever hearing anything about 1080p 60fps outside of console owners expecting high end PC performance that you were getting in 7th gen from PC from multiplatform ports, which of course this is one.

REALLY? it's been a pretty big deal this generation... You don't remember MS proudly touting that forza 5 was 1080p/60 FPS at the Xbox reveal or E3... How about Adam Boyes proudly getting on stage at EAs press conference last year to proudly state that
battlefield Hardline would be 1080p/60...

Prior to this generation I knew very little about framerate and resolution. It's been so front and center thanks to the media, fanboys, and PR that I'm now pretty well versed in it... Ignorance is Bliss however.

Now we have all these remaster touting next gen visuals with 1080p and 60fps... That alone is selling people on games now.
 

Javin98

Banned
LOL, it seems like we're back to chasing the 1080p/60 dream on consoles. I, for one, love that we have been getting quite a large amount of 1080p/60 games which look great IMO (Metro Redux, TLOU:R, MGSV) on PS4 but hoping that it becomes a standard is pure insanity.
P.S. Not referring to anyone hoping for it, just speaking in general.
 
Top Bottom