Md Ray
Member
They've said in the past I think it was in one of the DF weekly's that 400% zooms are for the users on mobile devices because there's a surprisingly large amount of people watching their content on mobile phones.
-
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.
Digital Foundry: Doom Eternal's Ray Tracing Upgrade Analyzed - Best PC Settings + PS5/Xbox Series X Comparisons
- Thread starter Arioco
- Start date
SkylineRKR
Member
I just beat it on the S. The 1080p doesn't matter, the game looks incredibly slick. The 120hz however is a game changer. Fast load times are nice as well. This game does cement that the S isn't that bad, gives a better user experience than last gen systems. The gameplay is incredible.
DenchDeckard
Moderated wildly
Just a heads up for anyone who may get the crashing issue I had on the game pass version. Turns out its the bloody WIndows / Xbox Game Bar. If you open the Task Manager and kill the process of the Game Bar the game stops crashing. Expecting a fix soon. Loaded up and it looks great as always but in the process of trying to fix this flipping crash it has corrupted my save so I am well and truly pissed off! Bleugh
Last edited:
CrustyBritches
Gold Member
To be fair, it's not as bad as it seems. It's a Razer Wolverine Ultimate controller, so 6 button presses are moved to back of the so I can always have my thumbs on the sticks(with the exception of Crucible activation) and reaction time is greatly reduced for jump, dash, chainsaw, and flame belch since fingers are almost always resting on the those back buttons...You've got some balls to upload a PC footage of DOOM playing using a controller.
The real problem of using a controller is the weapon wheel. I wish there was additional little embedded analog sticks on the back that you could use to assign number keys from PC keyboard, so you could just use your middle fingers to swap weapons. This game is too much for just thumbs, I can understand why many controller people are overwhelmed.
Shmunter
Member
Don’t forget vrs is creating double height and double width pixels. Aka quarter the rez
Mister Wolf
Gold Member
Too bad they couldn't implement AMD's Super Resolution tech.
They COULD, but id probably has a much better in-house solution than FSR.
Mister Wolf
Gold Member
If they do then where is it? This game has TAA right? Haven't heard about their engine having any form of Temporal Reconstruction.
you do know vrs is dynamic and only applies to surfaces hardly seen from players pov that there’s no reason to shade. It’s why you have to zoom 400% at a far off corner to see how it work. Any texture you run up on won’t show it at all
Shmunter
Member
Yeah, just like DRS but only in parts of the screen. Here it’s doing both DRS and VRS.
JackMcGunns
Member
VRS so far only degradates IQ while giving so small performance increase in return it's not worth using at all.
What is criminal in 2021 is low/non existent AF on consoles... this shit is almost free since ~2006 and yet devs use it like it's MSAA or something
True about AF, but VRS has shown a good percentage of performance improvement and every ounce counts on a closed platform where you can have a locked 60fps vs something with dips into the 50s.
cyberheater
PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 Xbone PS4 PS4
One of the best optimised games on console I’ve ever seen.
Armorian
Banned
It only shows some few % in Gears 5 (I tested it myself) and only in resolutions like ~5120x2160 if I remember correctly, it's way less difference in lower resolutions (that are actually used on consoles). In any other game performance gains are very low.
DLSS, temporal upsampling and FSR affect image quality but at least they give 50% and more framerate for what they're doing (and in the case of DLSS, sometimes it's better than native and TAA).
JackMcGunns
Member
Some games will benefit more than others, but there's a gain to be had nonetheless, this will be even more significant in a closed box with limited resources, you were likely running these tests on a very powerful rig with an extreme amount of overhead on a game that's not necessarily the best example.
Also, FSR will of course show a much more significant framerate boost, but they're not competing with each other, you can have both FSR and VRS T2 for maximum benefit.
For consoles later down the road when you're struggling to hit your target framerate, you're going to appreciate a boost in performance wherever you can get it from, but I was only responding to someone who was expecting better image quality from VRS T2, that's not what VRS is there for, in fact just like FSR, they will degrade quality, FSR everywhere because it's dealing with resolution in general, but VRS T2 only in areas where the player won't necessarily notice, but in focused areas the level of shading will be at maximum quality.
Last edited:
Apollo Helios
Member
Yeah! Like people LOVE to just 'forget' mentioning details like that while praising one piece of box over the other as if it is not with drawbacks.
I remember the shit PS4 Pro got (may I add rightfully) for JUST double width pixels on RDR2 over native 4K on Xbox One X, AND it was pretty obvious on that even with one part of aspect ratio, so it is half rez. This however has parts of the screen at half width AND HEIGHT, at quarter rez.... "but but but the output rez is higher" well shit ofc it is higher output rez when it RENDERS parts of it at quarter rez LOL