Support NeoGAF

[NZerker12]

I love my PS4 but come on. Anyone who thought the PS4 version will match what high end PCs are doing is just kidding themselves. That being said, the PS4 version still looks great I am glad we can all enjoy the game.

 

[FairXchange]

I'm playing Witcher 3 on PS4, visually it looks really nice to my eyes. I could attempt to play on PC, but I have an all AMD rig and would have to wait for drivers to improve performance there.

 

[Madness]

That wasn't the point I was making but hey, I fully expected a smart ass response, your medal is in the post.

But they are weak and underpowered, and this generation is the first time the gulf between new consoles and PC has grown so wide. The consoles are already being beaten by low to medium end PC machines. Saying that hey, the consoles look good because they're better than the last consoles and so we shouldn't criticize them as underpowered is wrong. They don't exist independently.

I can enjoy Halo 5, and GTA V and every other Xbox One game that will come out. But that doesn't mean I also won't acknowledge the Xbox is the weakest out of the three or that the consoles we have now are somewhat underpowered. Microsoft and Sony could have easily given us better hardware if they weren't so adamant on pushing the bottom line.

 

[Ysiadmihi]

That wasn't the point I was making but hey, I fully expected a smart ass response, your medal is in the post.

Believe me, I got your point.

Whether you like it or not, the fact that these consoles are underpowered relative to previous gens will (rightly) be brought up in tech threads. If someone can't handle that uncomfortable truth...well, then I'd question why they're snooping around this thread instead of enjoying the game.

 

[Summer Haze]

SOOO happy that I'll play this on PC. If you are an enthusiast like me (let's face it, if you're on GAF you probably are) then do yourself a favor and experience this game the way it was meant to be played. On PC. Don't settle for low density NPCs, shitty shadows, LOW settings mixed in with medium. Get something with actual teeth. Get a BEAST. Buy a PC.

 

[Cheech]

The most impressive thing I've seen in this game so far (PS4) is the fire. Holy crap.

Overall, the game is very good looking, but not mind blowing, and IMO the differences between the console versions are trivial. We are already hitting the point where these systems are feeling a bit long in the tooth, thanks to the gimpy CPUs driving these things.

I have a GTX 760 that is going to waste, as my gaming PC is on the bricks ATM. I'll double dip on this game down the road, it is really damn good.

 

[RE_Player]

I own everything from this current generation of platforms, from a high end PC to a 3DS. Even though I could run Witcher 3 on my PC I decided to opt for the PS4 version as that is the system currently hooked up in my living room. I'm glad they managed to pull off good console versions.

Also what the hell is with people smack talking the console versions? Of course PC will be better with the right hardware. For $350 and $400 boxes though I think the consoles are giving out some great performance.

 

[UnrealEck]

If anything, the two screenshots between the PS4 and PC here signify to me that the differences are pretty minimal aside from the slightly crisper textures on the PC side.

Opening up the images in separate tabs and switching between them, I really don't see the so-called gulf in quality. Not at all.

Lighting and shadows are different too. Look at the building behind the fire. The shadows are slightly less aliased and more defined.

The bigger jumps in quality aren't necessarily going to come from a scene like that where everything's in close proximity.

 

[Beerman462]

Glad to see it confirmed that the i3/750Ti combo is still able to run with the PS4 performance wise. More than a few thought this game would be the one that finally broke the trend and that PS4 "optimization" would kick in.

Also I'm usually not to down on 900p, but the density of foliage in this game looks really bad/blurry at a sub native resolution.

 

[thelastword]

That's what I'm running it on right now (Alienware Alpha). The biggest draw is just the flexibility to tweak the graphics settings as you can do more with less on a PC.

Just as an example, I really think the PS4 people would hugely benefit if they had the option to drop the game's resolution down to 900p and max out the graphics settings.

On the 750ti, I am getting 30+ with most set to Ultra, including HBAO+, AA applied and 16x AF.

It was truly worth sacrificing a few pixels in this case.

What does most set to Ultra mean? That does not even make sense, why would you use the best settings at such a low resolution on PC...everything will become muddied and lose detail because of said low resolution. That's like saying you're playing Witcher 3 at 480p with all or most settings on Ultra, at least not too far off.

900p has not been a standard for pc for years now. I don't even game on PC anymore and there's no way I'm playing W3 at 900p on my 1440p monitor if I get it there. The game will look much better on your screen and run better too at native rez with some sliders turned down.

What does "holds up quite well" even mean?

It does the best it can with the tech it has, but here is a huge difference in quality as an end result of the difference in tech.

"Holds up quite well" doesn't tell us anything other than "ps4 does the best it can".

In order to solicit extra praise for the PC conversion you're blinding yourself to what is a simple statement. I agree with you that the PC version is superior, there is now evidence to show that, but it's not quite as dramatic as you're pretending. What the candyland video did is that it gave us a more normal perspective as to how we will see things when the game is being played on our screens, both pc and consoles that is. There won't be any zoomed shots whilst we play, so in that respect, in a normal viewing angle, the game looked quite close.

As for you saying that the PS4 did what it could, that's another false statement. Did the PS4 do only what it could in Alien Isolation, Dying Light (at release), GTA5, ACU, Xenoverse, Resident Evil Remake, Resident Evil revelations 2, etc..? No, for many reasons that you would know and that has been stated ad nauseum. The PC is superior if you have the hardware, there was never a century when that was not so. Doesn't mean this is the best consoles can do either.

Incorrect.

Hairworks runs on AMD hardware. It uses DCU and not CUDA like GPU Physx.
Look at the Hairworks perf difference on AMD/Nvidia hardware :
http://www.hardocp.com/article/2015/01/12/far_cry_4_graphics_features_performance_review/5#.VWBxMk882Uk

So, Hairworks didn't make it in either consoles skus because of performance. HBAO+ is also available even if you don't own an Nvidia GPU.

Never said AMD can't do hairworks, It's just that jmga has a knack of finding evidence that disproves what he says and proves my points even further.

Hairworks was planned but it was never categorically confirmed like it was for the PC version, hell, hairworks was planned for the android release as well, if that doesn't put things in perspective, I don't know what else will. Well, I do plan on running the 100 meter dash in 7secs flat at the next Olympics...but I'm sure you get my point.

I can tell you one thing, if I had seen that slide when the game was announced I would have told you right then that hairworks would never make it to consoles. First, the reason you stated, (which is one I never denied) and the fact that it's AMD hardware means that programming it into the non native console platform would be much more of a headache apart from the already huge performance penalty.

I'd also wager that Nvidia fur is just generally much less of a performance hog than hairworks, since the latter is more ambitious. Also, that part where they are comparing it's quite early in the game and they're just standing there watching the dead deer.

How do you explain the similar performance between Nvidia and AMD gpus when Hairworks is enabled then ?

Everything is on order. The 970 and 980 being stronger at tessellation really shows.

It does not seem biased towards Nvidia or AMD gpus and that applies to Far Cry 4 as well.

Thanks for the link though, interesting info in there. Are you telling me the Titan with 12GB's of ram can't run W3 at 60fps at 1080p? Also where is the 750ti with hairworks on?

 

[Dr_LucienSanchez]

This thread lol...

Here I was constantly in awe in how beautiful the game is playing on my PS4, I'd be liable to think it's the worst shit this gen going by these posts. Embarrassing.

How dare you actually enjoy the game on the vastly inferior PS4?! Don't you know that you can build a super PC for $100 and some parts found in the bottoms of cereal boxes?

Stop replying to alternate accounts of trolls.

Ouch.

 

[Y2Kev]

Say the person who seen fps is always higher on xbone when it's just because it uncapped. In any case fps it's quite stable on ps4 in the gameplay. There are some occasion where drops because swamp area and rain combined or other strange reasons, I don't know the hell you seen so many 20 fps drops in the video, honestly.

Stop replying to alternate accounts of trolls.

 

[mintylurb]

Both console versions hold a pretty steady framerate during gameplay which is pretty impressive.

 

[nelsonroyale]

The game looks very impressive in general. It is pretty obvious that there is little effective difference between the three versions other than linear upgrading. I don't think it makes much difference in the end. It seems the overal visual engine was targeted at console level specs and the PC version is console+

Either way, totally stunning game. Awesome open world environment.

 

[Beerman462]

Also where is the 750ti with hairworks on?

Why? We know it's a super expensive setting performance wise.

 

[entremet]

Wow @ the NPC differential. That's pretty jarring honestly.

 

[LCGeek]

You know I used to just ignore these types of evangelical PC messages but now I'm wondering whether PC is the answer. Not for this game (since I don't plan to buy it) but in general. I don't like these budget line consoles we get now. I never asked for that.

For multiplatforms pc is my preferred choice after that it's always the most powerful console of the generation. Yet as it has been the case for 2 gens now eventually most multiplatforms that come will hit pc and it will have fidelity advantages to say the least that are very clear if you have the power.

 

[Tagyhag]

The difference is Geralt's beard due to Hairworks is kinda funny, I wish that it wasn't such a performance hog.

While the game does look better in motion, I still think you can take some really nice screenies, and downgrade aside, it still looks great in all platforms.

 

[Dictator93]

Thanks for the link though, interesting info in there. Are you telling me the Titan with 12GB's of ram can't run W3 at 60fps at 1080p? Also where is the 750ti with hairworks on?

VRAM has nothing to do with how ultra w/ hairworks performs, let alone the fact that a Titan X has 12 GBs.

And yes, a Titan X, when overclocked can maintain a pretty constant 60 fps in most scenarios with hairworks on (no MSAA tweak). That is unless you are in the midst of about 5-7 wolves.

 

[ironcreed]

This thread lol...

Here I was constantly in awe in how beautiful the game is playing on my PS4, I'd be liable to think it's the worst shit this gen going by these posts. Embarrassing.

That said, no shit the PC version is the best. But it is still amazing on consoles.

 

[nelsonroyale]

Watching the videos, I can for sure see the PC version looks nicer. Youtube is not doing any of the versions any favours though.

 

[bananafactory]

Got the game on PS4 because I wasn't sure my PC would run it any better. I'm actually quite happy with the visuals (performance leaves much to be desired though). Glad that PC version got the care it deserves too.

 

[Kezen]

Never said AMD can't do hairworks, It's just that jmga has a knack of finding evidence that disproves what he says and proves my points even further.

Hairworks was planned but it was never categorically confirmed like it was for the PC version, hell, hairworks was planned for the android release as well, if that doesn't put things in perspective, I don't know what else will. Well, I do plan on running the 100 meter dash in 7secs flat at the next Olympics...but I'm sure you get my point.

I can tell you one thing, if I had seen that slide when the game was announced I would have told you right then that hairworks would never make it to consoles. First, the reason you stated, (which is one I never denied) and the fact that it's AMD hardware means that programming it into the non native console platform would be much more of a headache apart from the already huge performance penalty.

I'd also wager that Nvidia fur is just generally much less of a performance hog than hairworks, since the latter is more ambitious. Also, that part where they are comparing it's quite early in the game and they're just standing there watching the dead deer.

The "problem" with Hairworks is that it requires MSAA to look good. The PC version runs 8xMSAA in order to remove as much aliasing as possible, hence the huge performance hit. TressFX uses SSAA which is unfortunately very expensive as well. No way around the fact that hair/fur simulation is extremely taxing and we will need several rounds of hardware to achieve great performance with many other effects turned on. Hairworks also makes heavy use of tessellation but as you can see even pre Tonga hardware holds its own really well so based on those figures I doubt we can say Hairworks not present on consoles has anything to do with architectural bias, but simply everything to do with raw horsepower which is lacking on a wide spectrum of hardware, be it PC or consoles. Reminds when Morrowind PC had real-time reflections back in 2002, completely demolished the framerate no matter what hardware you had.

Thanks for the link though, interesting info in there. Are you telling me the Titan with 12GB's of ram can't run W3 at 60fps at 1080p? Also where is the 750ti with hairworks on?

The Titan X lacks the shading horsepower for Hairworks + 60fps at 1080p, nothing do to with the amount of VRAM.
Hairworks is too much to ask from a 750ti.....and from the consoles as well it seems.

 

[Malcolm9]

Believe me, I got your point.

Whether you like it or not, the fact that these consoles are underpowered relative to previous gens will (rightly) be brought up in tech threads. If someone can't handle that uncomfortable truth...well, then I'd question why they're snooping around this thread instead of enjoying the game.

I'd like to think people with realistic minds would know this already though coming into this thread, and can and will accept that fact, but calling the PS4/Xbox One versions shit is not needed to be honest.

Nothing wrong with saying the PC version is the best, I'd be very surprised if it wasn't. Remember the console versions will have a new patch coming which will hopefully iron out any kinks.

 

[Dennis]

I honestly can't see much difference between PS4 and PC versions but the difference between PS4 and XB1 is huge but that's to be expected given the gulf in hardware power between the two.

 

[EGOMON]

The only way PS4 can compete graphically and technically with high-end PC is through their first party output.
i.e. Multiplates can't look as good as high setting PC equivalent unless devs are willing to spend extra time to fully optimize a game on PS4 hardware.

 

[Corpsepyre]

Guys, do you get a lot of pop-in when you're travelling on a horse and see things like trees and grass come out of nowhere? Happens with me in many open world games. R9 270x and Core i3 here.

 

[bananafactory]

Guys, do you get a lot of pop-in when you're travelling on a horse and see things like trees and grass come out of nowhere? Happens with me in many open world games. R9 270x and Core i3 here.

Happens to me on PS4, figured it was just a low draw distance setting. It's pretty noticeable and jarring though

 

[RoboPlato]

This sounds very interesting. So under similar conditions, the frame rate goes back to 30FPS after restarting?

Yes, in my experience. I'm guessing that it had been hours since I fast traveled or died something got backed up along the way that was cleared up upon reload. That was the most drastic spot it's happened.

 

[Durante]

i.e. Multiplates can't look as good as high setting PC equivalent unless devs are willing to spend extra time to fully optimize a game on PS4 hardware.

Developers could spend the rest of their life optimizing the PS4 version and it still wouldn't match a high-end PC. It's a simple equation.

 

[Ysiadmihi]

I'd like to think people with realistic minds would know this already though coming into this thread, and can and will accept that fact, but calling the PS4/Xbox One versions shit is not needed to be honest.

Your post doesn't say anything about people calling the console versions "shit". You were very clearly bothered that people were calling the consoles themselves underpowered.

Now...if you meant something else, great, but it doesn't come off like that.

 

[Radec]

Framerate is awful in the ps4. Much like an AC game in the ps3. Same with the loading times.

Loving the game tho.

 

[CambriaRising]

Ps4 version still looks great even compared to PC. There are some issues to be ironed out, sure, but overall CDPR did a splendid job on that version.

 

[Kezen]

The only way PS4 can compete graphically and technically with high-end PC is through their first party output.
i.e. Multiplates can't look as good as high setting PC equivalent unless devs are willing to spend extra time to fully optimize a game on PS4 hardware.

I don't doubt first-party games would lead us to draw the same conclusions as multiplats featured in Face Off articles. Any first party game could be pushed much further (shadows, LOD, reflections etc..) on PC regardless of how much "optimized" they are.

 

[EGOMON]

Developers could spend the rest of their live optimizing the PS4 version and it still wouldn't match a high-end PC. It's a simple equation.

I don't know looking at The Order graphically it sure looks to me like a game running on high settings PC equivalent but that just me

 

[thelastword]

Couple of things I noticed in the faceoff.....Why is DF comparing a 1.03 PC game to a 1.01 console game. The devs have already highlighted that the 1.03 patch has some performance and visual enhancements, couldn't they have waited? Seems a bit odd for comparisons since people are still posting shots of cutscenes which everybody knows is bugged on PS4 and passing it as gameplay for bragging purposes.

As for the texture resolution and other settings besides FV and distant shadows, I'm still waiting on Nxgamer to get his take on all of this and for more lengthy frametests and observations, but I'm still quite skeptical on DF's findings in the texture department. First of all, there's some sort of sharpening filter applied to the PC version, wouldn't that make textures appear sharper than they really are, that coupled with the fact that the PC has 16xAF means just that. Based on this, I'm not seeing how and where they prove that the PS4 don't use the highest rez textures (2024 * 2024).

 

[Kezen]

I don't know looking at The Order graphically it sure looks to me like a game running on high settings PC equivalent but that just me

I don't believe for a second it would take a high-end PC to run The Order 1886 at PS4 quality, especially considering it's not 1080p.

 

[SlasherJPC]

I honestly can't see much difference between PS4 and PC versions but the difference between PS4 and XB1 is huge but that's to be expected given the gulf in hardware power between the two.

Interesting, since I'm playing both those versions, jumping back and forth and they each have small issues as times. Iverall, if it wasn't for the controller, I'd have a hard time telling a difference.

 

[ProvenDeadly]

I am playing on Xbone and think it looks pretty good and have not noticed any stuttering really.

 

[ProvenDeadly]

Interesting, since I'm playing both those versions, jumping back and forth and they each have small issues as times. Iverall, if it wasn't for the controller, I'd have a hard time telling a difference.

There is pretty much no discernible difference by looking at it between PS4 and Xbox unless you are a robot. I have seen both in person and can not tell the difference.

 

[UnrealEck]

They don't mention horrible and constant camera judder/stuttering on PS4 (I don't know if it's also present on XOne) ._.

I captured a video using share on my PS4.
Take a look at the video:

Notice just how bad the camera is stuttering all the time

That happens on my PC too but it's nowhere near as bad as that. That's really bad there.

 

[SlasherJPC]

There is pretty much no discernible difference by looking at it between PS4 and Xbox unless you are a robot. I have seen both in person and can not tell the difference.

So it's not just me. Good.

 

[Seanspeed]

This thread lol...

Here I was constantly in awe in how beautiful the game is playing on my PS4, I'd be liable to think it's the worst shit this gen going by these posts. Embarrassing.

And now you know how XB1 owners feel in so many PS4 vs XB1 FaceOff threads.

But yea, it still looks fine on consoles. Even on XB1, despite some extra blurriness, it still strikes me as a beautiful game overall from videos I've seen(honestly, screens don't do the game justice). Doesn't seem like CDPR did a bad job with any platform, so I don't know why anybody would be unhappy.

 

[nib95]

There is pretty much no discernible difference by looking at it between PS4 and Xbox unless you are a robot. I have seen both in person and can not tell the difference.

I think you mean unless you have bad eyesight, play on a sub 1080p native screen, sit really far from your TV, or game on a relatively small screen. Otherwise the resolution differences are pretty obvious. Easily discernible even when viewing on my Galaxy S6.

Hell I notice the difference in the screenshots thread even though the Xbox One shots are PNG's whilst the vast majority of the PS4 shots are highly compressed Jpegs.

 

[Rizific]

i think ive got to be running with almost console settings on my pc. shadows on low with everything else a mix of medium-high. except im getting 50-60 fps. looks like an upgrade is due this year.

 

[TimeEffect]

Man..... I feel deceived....

CDPR had said it will be equivalent to high settings on pc and this is the exact opposite. Fuck this POS. I am selling it as soon as I can, and I am never going to buy anything from CDPR again. Not on day one atleast.

Before anyone says I am overreacting, I already stopped playing because of tiny text and poor performance. I was just waiting for patch.

Well Im potentially interested in buying, so come on over to the BST thread and work out a deal



I usually see these comparison videos and barely notice differences, but the PS4/PC difference is quite significantly noticeable.

I may even consider getting this on PC instead

 

[ProvenDeadly]

I think you mean unless you have bad eye sight, sit really far from your TV, or game on a relatively small screen. Otherwise the resolution differences are pretty obvious. Easily discernible even when viewing on my Galaxy S6.

Hell I notice the difference in the screenshots thread even though the Xbox One shots are PNG's whilst the vast majority of the PS4 shots are highly compressed Jpegs.

Maybe if you are playing on a 70' TV and looking at the pine needle textures.

 

[nib95]

Maybe if you are playing on a 70' TV and looking at the pine needle textures.

I notice the differences on my 5.1" mobile device, my 15" laptop, and both my 50" and 65" TV's. Same way I noticed even smaller resolution differences between older 360 and PS3 multiplatform games.

 

[Noobcraft]

In motion I doubt many would be able to distinguish between the two console versions. They obviously aren't identical (resolution difference, AF, etc), but with motion blur like this I doubt they look all that different.

 

[Javin98]

This thread lol...

Here I was constantly in awe in how beautiful the game is playing on my PS4, I'd be liable to think it's the worst shit this gen going by these posts. Embarrassing.

Every DF thread is like this. It will eventually devolve into a platform wars thread. If I wasn't enthusiastic in video game graphics, I honestly would just avoid these threads. Feels like Youtube sometimes.

Yes, in my experience. I'm guessing that it had been hours since I fast traveled or died something got backed up along the way that was cleared up upon reload. That was the most drastic spot it's happened.

So reloading fixes frame rate? Sounds like something a patch can easily fix, then.