Comments
justrandomnam3s t1_jdhijn5 wrote
Tbh Elden Ring doesn't have high-fidelity graphics, just good art design. FromSoft games just run terribly, even on my Series X
FallenShadeslayer t1_jdibioa wrote
Really? The game runs flawlessly on my Series X. It has since day one.
justrandomnam3s t1_jdjsyxo wrote
Yeah, my framerate would noticeably fluctuate a lot, especially in the open world. I was embellishing by calling it terrible but it never really felt smooth
FallenShadeslayer t1_jdkslqr wrote
May wanna be careful with that. Someone may see that and decide not to get the game because of that.
EsquireOne t1_je93gh4 wrote
The game never ran at/does not run at a locked 60fps on Series X on Performance mode. You may not notice this depending on your frame rate tolerance. It has been improved somewhat since launch, but still experiences frame drops and inconsistent frame pacing on Series X.
Trickster289 t1_jdh99bl wrote
To be honest what it says to me is that FromSoftware aren't that good at optimisation or polishing their games. There's a reason Soulsborne fans, especially the PvP players, joke that the jank and bugs are part of the experience.
Stockpile_Tom_Remake t1_jdi0m4g wrote
As a huge fan with several hundred hours in each of their souls games. Can confirm.
I don’t know if it’s that they’re not good but also I don’t think they care.
Manoreded t1_jdk4xyh wrote
Multiplayer has never really worked well any of the times I tried.
Singleplayer is pretty solid, the "jank" is mostly on things that don't matter that much, like how rough terrain is strangely "slippery". You eventually learn to beware of rough terrain edges and specially things like walking on branches or roots, which is something the games like to make you do a lot despite the engine not being a fan.
theblackfool t1_jdhkibz wrote
I'm pretty over graphics modes in games now. I understand that objectivy it's good for consumers to have choices, but I just feel like I'm choosing between two half assed settings instead of one that's actually optimfor the hardware. Which is supposed to be one of the benefits of console gaming
Siukslinis_acc t1_jdi48t9 wrote
As a pc player, the 2 modes on console seems limiting. I would like to tweak some details individually (i always turn the shadows to medium/low so that the fans would work less, thus being more quieter). The modes could be like presets that could be tweaked further.
asunamyag t1_jdiblv1 wrote
As a consumer, I am all in favor of less choices. The work of balancing optimization with other considerations should be handled by the developers and should not be handed off to consumers.
Manoreded t1_jdk5abq wrote
I agree for consoles, which are standardized hardware.
Not for PCs, for obvious reasons.
all_time_high t1_jdjni6u wrote
PS4 version on PS5 is the way to go. Got that recommendation on Reddit back at launch, and fully support it. Buttery framerate, great detail, nothing distracting going on with the graphics.
I play on a budget 4K 60hz TV, FWIW.
Shadowlomo t1_jdh52q3 wrote
Yes
Frogento1075 t1_jdk0bi9 wrote
I think you meant that the way to play it is the ps4 version on ps5.
sameguyontheweb t1_jdk9x57 wrote
At least this game still proves that if it's good enough, people will look past the flaws.
I can only imagine the shit storm if GTA 6 were to release in the same technical state as ER
gurebu t1_jdh0fjc wrote
In walks Breath of the Wild
asunamyag t1_jdia365 wrote
The PS4 version on PS4 is practically unplayable. The load times are well in excess of 20 seconds, so when you add in the death animation and the “you died” animation, you’re looking at almost 30 seconds between when you lose control of the character and when you regain control.
This is OK in games where respawning is rare, but in a game like Elden Ring where you die constantly it’s completely intolerable. Boss fights became literally a majority of my playtime on a loading screen.
It’s hard to overemphasize how much better the game became when I switched to playing the PS5 version on PS5.
flarelordfenix t1_jdioup1 wrote
I don;'t think the loading times are that bad, and I actually don't even care about a small load. It's cool they're trying to eliminate them, but I actually feel like a little loading downtime is *good* for Souls games. Breather. That said, I never found PS4/Ps4 Elden Ring frustrating., nor did I have issues' with loading blocks of vegetation slowly like I do with either version on the PS5, in ANY graphics mode. Which just kind of baffles me.
asunamyag t1_jdiz408 wrote
The problem the PS4 load times were enormous compared to the number of times you die in that game.
It was particularly awful when fighting bosses, where each iteration of the fight could be less than ten seconds. It literally meant a majority of my time “playing” the game while fighting a boss was spent waiting to respawn.
As I said, I don’t mind this sort of wait in a game where respawning is very infrequent, but in a game where you do it all the time it’s awful.
my_dogs_a_devil t1_jdh9g2d wrote
Good guy Pokémon over here trying to disinflate graphics expectations, but people just keep hating on it. /s Edit: adding /s because idk if people think I’m serious or just being downvoted by Pokémon fanboys…
RandallMcDangle t1_jdhgfmb wrote
Well yeah it’s also deinflating performance and stability expectations too.
Carl_Corey t1_jdhlch9 wrote
There is a LOT of grey area between pokemon and Elden Ring in terms of graphic optimization. We shouldn't be settling for either end of the spectrum.
DamonnnR t1_jdgwuwb wrote
Adds rtx but no dlss..
lexsanders t1_jdingg8 wrote
I think you are mistaking RT with RTX.
RT means ray tracing, agnostic of hardware or software.
RTX means you eat the entire nvidia library SDK and benefit from all the technology suite.
This game is not RTX ON, it's RTX OFF.
DamonnnR t1_jdmzn4p wrote
Oh that makes sense thanks for the correction
TheGreatGamer1389 t1_jdhedsh wrote
There is a reason for that. To sell 4000 series cards.
Kobi_Blade t1_jdhb0gj wrote
They only implemented RT Shadows, so DLSS is not needed.
[deleted] t1_jdhpx6w wrote
[removed]
PremiumOxygen t1_jdgxcyo wrote
This is one of those games that would still be fantastic even if it looked like n64 polygons, I can't say I care a great deal about the ray-tracing.
Slow_Owl810 t1_jdhd2rq wrote
I don't give a shit about ray tracing. If there's a performance mode I turn it on and don't look back. I don't notice ray tracing or even 4K vs 1440p from my couch, but I DO notice 60FPS vs 30FPS. I get that it's a bigger deal for PC gamers because (most of them) sit arm's length from their screen and can see and appreciate the details - but from 10ft away? Not so much.
MajinBuuMan t1_jdhip7m wrote
I'm still using a 1080p television and 1080p monitors from like 2010-2012 or something.
It works, games still look great to me. I'm not upgrading until the TV dies lol. Ray tracing, from what I've seen of it, is a resounding "meh" to me.
SingularityPrime t1_jdif4cb wrote
I scoot my couch up or grab a chair for game time. Gimme all the details!
Alastor3 t1_jdhhipf wrote
It's consoles that are keeping gaming being, devs want to put their games on as many players and that mean building a version for last gen and not prioritize this gen. Also to be fair, from soft aren't the best at performance to be honest.
HiddenWalrus t1_jdgyuqg wrote
RT performance is as bad on consoles as it is on PC due to the lack of DLSS/FSR, it's not a PC exclusive issue
Kobi_Blade t1_jdhb5bw wrote
This on maximum settings with RT, https://imgur.com/a/f53M9i5
So I don't see where the performance issue is, FromSoftware only implemented RT Shadows which is quite light on performance in comparison to RT Reflections.
boissondevin t1_jdhmw82 wrote
If the shadows are RT, why do characters and small objects still cast the blocky smudge of a 2011 Skyrim shadow? Why didn't they bother enabling RT shadow cast on more light sources like graces?
Kobi_Blade t1_jdhpybz wrote
Cause it uses hybrid RT Shadows as it should, the game does not use RT Reflections whasoever.
GloatingSwine t1_jdieyzs wrote
And yet it still drops framerates by about 25% for almost no visual difference.
Like you can see *a* difference but it's mostly "colours and shadows a bit softer now" not a meaningful change to illumination and shadows.
FailureToReport t1_jdh207j wrote
And ultrawide support still not a thing, even though every now and then you'll launch it and it loads flawlessly in 32:9 aspect ratio before "magically" rescaling itself into shitmode.
BrokenMemento t1_jdh8cxe wrote
Native Ultrawide support would’ve been an actual game changer unlike half-assed rtx.
Really annoyed that you have to jump hoops to play ultrawide and not get banned because of easy Anti cheat. Feels like the console version is the definitive version with the amount of weirdness happening
FailureToReport t1_jdhesjt wrote
Yep....I went over to Seemless Coop Mod & the Ultrawide Fix Mods so I don't have to worry about getting my hand slapped for playing the game in the actual resolution of my monitor without giant fucking black letter boxing.
But the fact that the game sometimes would "accidentally" load Ultrawide on it's own just makes me so fucking mad they are actively stopping it.
King_Mandu t1_jdhtkya wrote
It's bullshit and I bet their reasoning is for PVP "balance" or something incredibly dumb. Team Ninja's Nioh 2 and Wo Long had much smaller budgets, sell maybe half of what a Souls game does yet offer Ultrawide. Same goes for Returnal and that PC port is one of the best I've seen in a long time. From Software continually getting a pass for tech incompetence is crazy.
Imagine the shitstorm if console players had to choose between playing online or a 1/3 of their screen being black bars.
ecbulldog t1_jdhp7y5 wrote
Forget ray tracing, how about native widescreen support?
burntcornflakes t1_jdjcwn7 wrote
And rendering in ultrawide but blocking the extra screen space with black bars is such a disrespect. We get the performance loss, but no benefit. Until it bugs and the black bars disappear, and you get to enjoy it for a short time. Really wish they'd just let us have nice things. It costs nothing.
jollyhoop t1_jdhnykz wrote
Who could have seen that coming from the company that didn't fix the online on PC for 3 of their games for about 8-9 months. Yes I'm still salty about that.
taisui t1_jdj1ml7 wrote
original Dark Souls is running on frames instead of time slices so if you play at 60fps the enemies jump like Olympians to hit you and you can slide through the floor down the ladder.
NoDuck1754 t1_jdh69bt wrote
There hasn't been any games that have made RT worth turning on for PS5.
Such a minor change for a massive drop in performance.
PleaseRecharge t1_jdh3wh0 wrote
I think one of the worst things a game can do with its lighting is add rtx after a year of being released. No one's going to use it. People have been playing this game for a whole year now, people are used to the way it looks. Sure, there are some people who will use it, but 99% of players will turn it on once, notice ot's not worth the performance tradeoff at all, and turn it off forever. Halo: Infinite is experiencing the same thing right now, they just added rtx, not a single person cares (and that game DOES have DLSS I'm pretty sure).
JadowArcadia t1_jdhekk1 wrote
I completely agree. It's one of those things that you either add at launch or don't bother with. It's like ordering an ice-cream and then getting the sprinkles the next day. It's nice to have sprinkles but I would have rather had it with my ice-cream. I'm of the mind that we aren't really ready for ray tracing. Performance is rarely good enough to warrant turning it on and it seems like a lot of Devs have trouble with optimisation or just aren't bothering because they know DLSS has their back
HaliaIvory t1_jdi810k wrote
My exact experience. I turned it on PS5, swung the camera 360 a couple times, turned it off, and continued my playing.
boissondevin t1_jdjdmbr wrote
It's only worth doing if it makes a real difference. Metro exodus launched with some rtx effects, but the enhanced edition changed the visuals dramatically. Witcher 3 added rtgi, shadows, and reflections. This update apparently only affects shadows, yet they still look like ass.
Ok-Ambition-9432 t1_jdheztl wrote
No shit
Mindspace_Explorer t1_jdi0040 wrote
These games are made for a console. I'm fine with that. It's not the kind of game I would play on a pc. Much better in a couch in front of my big tv.
lexsanders t1_jdimshd wrote
You are right in the first half. But the second half just propagates a stereotype that PC gamers are too stupid to buy a TV and a HDMI cable...
Ryuuzoji t1_jdlp737 wrote
Or assumes the computer isn't in the living room for most people
Dirty_Dragons t1_jdi46ir wrote
You can use an HDMI cable to plug a computer into your big TV and then sit on your couch and use a controller.
TinyTenis1 t1_jdir942 wrote
Good, let it be an afterthought, especially if they're continually making GAME OF THE YEAR, year after year.
Clearly, they have an idea of what they're doing.
xIMxMCLOVINx2 t1_jdirf0p wrote
I find it fascinating that the highest end gaming pcs perform worse than my ps5… I know it’s about the developers prioritizing compatibility, but why would I make the leap into pcs at this point?! Every game that comes out I hear about these issues.
Dave10293847 t1_jdk1fzp wrote
It’s not fascinating at all. The PC fanatics are used to the phone processor PS4 generation (could literally build a better PC for the same price AT LAUNCH), and the failed experiment of the PS3 CPU.
The PS5 and Series X just punch hard. It’s good hardware. They’re both designed to limit bottlenecks, too. Lots of PC gamers don’t actually do that and it results in inconsistent frames at times.
PC is the superior option when it can simply brute force “x” game like it did easily in the early 2010’s. Also mods.
aprilmanha t1_jdh1j1r wrote
ITs not been jaw dropping in my own tests on PC but it has helped the lightling all feel more solid in the world. Its not had much of a performance hit as far as I can telll, but then again I have not run an FPS counter ofr anything. That and Butterflys all seem more visible now!
McSupergeil t1_jdhee2f wrote
Why is the engine still capped at 60fps in 2023?? (Not interested in because of Physics comments)
Its 2023 they had plenty of time to rework the complete engine
120+fps feels so much smoother than 60 hell even 90.. just imagine how much crisper the animations and hitboxes would be ....
lexsanders t1_jdin0zr wrote
Looks like all the frame data is hard coded like in Mortal Kombat.
High punch is 6 frames, so FPS must be 60 or else the game makes no sense...
McSupergeil t1_jdinmjr wrote
Kinda sucks :/ My graphicscard sits at maybe 20% utilization i wish i could use more of its power and just play at silky smooth 120fps.. how can Engine fps caps still be a thing in 23.. shouldnt all engines be updated by now for the new consoles and dx12 etc. Are they just straight up refusing to review their code or why..
lexsanders t1_jdio6p1 wrote
As I said it's a fighting game thing. They must have really wanted the look and feel of mortal kombat/street fighter/smash bros...
The combat must be so important to their game design, they want it fixed.
rivalgaz t1_jdhjw9l wrote
Didn’t you hear that PC is not high end in the gaming market?
datalinklayer t1_jdhqdlx wrote
Yawn
MyStationIsAbandoned t1_jdklc1s wrote
Same story with 99% of Japanese studios and publisher. Japanese businesses in general only care about the Japanese audience. If they like or dislike something, that's all they care about regardless of if they have giant western audience.
Japanese gamers still aren't too hardcore on PC gaming. They're mostly console gamers. And if they play on PC, they'll probably go to a cafe. As long as they have a culture of thinking about their international markets as an after thought, we're always going to get dodgy PC ports from Japan. Look at Squaresoft ports, one of the few companies that actually does care about the west. The Nier Automata port is shit without mods and still kind of shit with mods...
They're getting better very very slowly, but I suspect it's only due to pressure from western publishers. That's just speculation though. But in most cases you have to be weary. Like...if the game is even a good port you have to get lucky and hope the controls are good.
huttyblue t1_jdljcgs wrote
I'm not sure what people expect from raytracing in elden ring, the game has a giant glowing tree that towers over the overworld doesn't act as a light source. Its lighting is inherently unrealistic. Reflections that aren't screenspace would be nice, but I have a feeling they would also have issues with a large, distant, complex object with stacked transparencies.
bingbongbungbeng t1_jdtytht wrote
I feel like all i ever hear is pc gamers complaining on this sub
Supafly22 t1_jdhjeoo wrote
Game? Still fucking rocks.
Iffykindofguy t1_jdi0s8s wrote
I dont know why you people dont get how capitalism works. PC ports will NEVER be well done because it simply doesnt make sense to invest the money in them.
guess_ill_try t1_jdkahrd wrote
This game is garbage. I don’t understand that overhype with it
Hobear t1_jdhhmw9 wrote
Honestly I'd be happy if games called the current gen graphics good. Let's stop racing to better. We have great. Who cares?
DataSomethingsGotMe t1_jdhk79j wrote
HZD and Control proved that you do not need pure ray tracing or a loan to buy a pointless GPU.
Nvidia love to go whaling as per usual.
Meh.
AnEpicBowlOfRamen t1_jdicgnm wrote
Bull-fucking-shit! FromSoft are great, enough of this artificial outrage.
flarelordfenix t1_jdgzxmj wrote
Frankly, the PS5 version of elden ring still pops in terrain like ass on Performance mode.
The PS4 version on PS4 is probably the best version of Elden Ring.
All this says to me is that Gamers^(TM) have overinflated expectations of graphics, and frankly . I wish studios would dial back trying to push multiple 'modes' and just create something that runs cleanly and with some polish, even if it isn't the most high-fidelity thing in the world. Prioritize the actual gameplay, world, characters, scenario and experience over the pure graphical power. Give us cool, smooth, 'okay looking' experiences over the 'Tripulh Ayyeeee' fidelity.