• 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.

Horizon Forbidden West - Digital Foundry Tech Review - A PS5 Graphics Masterclass

HDTVTest



That shifting brightness is distracting af.

What a fucking troll, am i right?

why? mostly fair critisim in my opinion.

i've been kinda distracted since i started playing this game.
im happy he pointed out the highlight / dynamic range fluctuation. something felt off, but i couldn't put my finger on it. im pretty confident this will be fixed pretty soon.

i played yesterday and the flimmering / aliasing issue on grass in IQ mode has already been lessened severly. seems like GG is on it.
 

SlimySnake

Flashless at the Golden Globes
why? mostly fair critisim in my opinion.

i've been kinda distracted since i started playing this game.
im happy he pointed out the highlight / dynamic range fluctuation. something felt off, but i couldn't put my finger on it. im pretty confident this will be fixed pretty soon.

i played yesterday and the flimmering / aliasing issue on grass in IQ mode has already been lessened severly. seems like GG is on it.
I was being called a troll for saying the same thing yesterday. I was being sarcastic.
 
Let us look into the Horizon
1YYQnMi.jpg
uW5gc8e.jpg
 

mejin

Member
I’m no tech expert, but that effect only occurs when you turn up the sharpness settings on your TV too high. That clown just needs to turn his TV sharpness down. Fixed.

The clown are the people who takes his config as "the best possible" and apply to their tvs even if they don't think it is as good they expect or want....they don't know each panel is different and what is good to some tv is not to another.
 

thatJohann

Member
The default HDR is def not ideal, saw the following HDR settings for using HGIG and gaming on an LG C1 or CX OLED and they do make the game look so much better. Try this:
  • Brightness: - 2
  • Shadows: 0 (default)
  • Highlights: - 8
So much more resolved detail in the clouds.
 

ByWatterson

Member
Id recommend you switch to 30 fps and change both Camera Sensitivity settings to minimum. Then completely turn off Motion blur. It is unplayable without these settings due to the brightness bug Vincent mentioned in his video, but if you turn down camera sensitivity to minimum, it becomes far more manageable. Doesnt seem to affect the combat either.

Oh man putting camera sensitivities on zero saves this for me. 30fps is now totally acceptable.

Thank you!
 

sncvsrtoip

Member
Yes, they said they are looking into the issues.

I dont think they can resolve the performance mode issues. They are using 1800 checkerboard which is way below native 1440p in pixel count. The game cannot run at a locked 60 fps at 1440p. its somewhere between 1080p and 1440p which is why you are seeing so much shimmering. Doubt they can get it to run at 1440p in a patch or two.
taking into account cb cost hard to say what is more expensive, 1800cb or 1440p native
 

Shmunter

Member
That doesn’t fix what the people issue with Framerate mode.
It is more game mechanics bugs patch.
Wouldn't the top issue be related?


  • The team is investigating with high priority, several graphical issues reported by players regarding shimmering, sharpening and screen saturation when moving the camera.
 

proandrad

Member
Your stubbornness and unwillingness to adapt (your brain can do it, just give it a chance) is only to your detriment.
30fps is not too bad in this game. You play for an hour or two and forget about it. 30fps is def not a slide show.
I don’t know how young you are but 30 fps games have been the norm for the last 4 generations of PlayStation. No one here needs to try 30fps like it’s a new thing they need to get used to. If you like playing games at low frame rate that’s fine, but clearly a lot people do mind.
 

Lysandros

Member
taking into account cb cost hard to say what is more expensive, 1800cb or 1440p native
'Checkerboarding is free' mentality is very stubborn, in reality it's quite an expensive technique.

ALvlLkj.jpg

To give an idea it's only ~13-27% faster compared to 'native' counter parts depending on resolution (here is Dark Souls 2 integration). Ethomaz did an actual calculation based on it showing that it's very possible that native 1440P is slightly faster than 1800pCB.
 
The patch definitely did nothing with the shimmering and aliasing in performance mode but to be fair no-where does it say it does.

There must be some kind of DRS in performance mode too as it was even worse than I remembered in town where there are lots of NPCs.

Not sure if anything can be done as 60fps with so much foliage and geometric detail must be hammering the PS5 but fingers crossed as I can't deal with 30fps on an OLED.

Checkerboarding obviously just really falls apart when there is so much granular detail and so much moving foliage.

I'd take 40fps if it was possible or a third option with a lower resolution native image even if it would be blurry as at least the alpha stuff wouldn't look so bad and on an OLED your eyes are drawn to all the aliasing.
 
The patch definitely did nothing with the shimmering and aliasing in performance mode but to be fair no-where does it say it does.

There must be some kind of DRS in performance mode too as it was even worse than I remembered in town where there are lots of NPCs.

Not sure if anything can be done as 60fps with so much foliage and geometric detail must be hammering the PS5 but fingers crossed as I can't deal with 30fps on an OLED.

Checkerboarding obviously just really falls apart when there is so much granular detail and so much moving foliage.

I'd take 40fps if it was possible or a third option with a lower resolution native image even if it would be blurry as at least the alpha stuff wouldn't look so bad and on an OLED your eyes are drawn to all the aliasing.
OLEDs are suffering from heavier shimmering due to their pixel refresh rates that are nearly 10 times higher then other panels.
Kinda wondering if they can solve this at all.
 

Hunnybun

Member
The patch definitely did nothing with the shimmering and aliasing in performance mode but to be fair no-where does it say it does.

There must be some kind of DRS in performance mode too as it was even worse than I remembered in town where there are lots of NPCs.

Not sure if anything can be done as 60fps with so much foliage and geometric detail must be hammering the PS5 but fingers crossed as I can't deal with 30fps on an OLED.

Checkerboarding obviously just really falls apart when there is so much granular detail and so much moving foliage.

I'd take 40fps if it was possible or a third option with a lower resolution native image even if it would be blurry as at least the alpha stuff wouldn't look so bad and on an OLED your eyes are drawn to all the aliasing.

40fps with slightly more aggressive DRS is the obvious solution. I just don't believe they couldn't make that happen.

I'm sure they could get a decent looking 60fps mode running if they cut a few settings and went for like 1440p to 1620p dynamic, but how much work that would be I don't know.
 

rofif

Can’t Git Gud
I don’t know how young you are but 30 fps games have been the norm for the last 4 generations of PlayStation. No one here needs to try 30fps like it’s a new thing they need to get used to. If you like playing games at low frame rate that’s fine, but clearly a lot people do mind.
but many people got used to 60 and 120 and now say they cant. They can in fact... they played like this and now they say it's slideshow or hurting their eyes.
It's a hyperbole
 

DeepEnigma

Gold Member
geez, 30fps in this game feels so smooth and i play most of my games on PC@60fps.
I thought the same thing. And same.

Even going back and forth between 60 and 30, while 60 has that noticeable "soap opera" effect in contrast (much smoother obviously), it's not as jarring or eye sore like other games with 30fps modes. TLoU2 was smooth as well for 30.

For example. Playing games at 60, then going to RDR2 on the consoles, your eyes get a little sore and have to adjust due to the "stutter". This game does not have that same stutter feel swapping between the two.
 
Last edited:

Lokaum D+

Member
I thought the same thing. And same.

Even going back and forth between 60 and 30, while 60 has that noticeable "soap opera" effect in contrast (much smoother obviously), it's not as jarring or eye sore like other games with 30fps modes. TLoU2 was smooth as well for 30.

For example. Playing games at 60, then going to RDR2 on the consoles, your eyes get a little sore and have to adjust due to the "stutter". This game does not have that same stutter feel swapping between the two.
just try to play the new Cyberpunk nextgen patch on Res mode and it feels off, 30fps is jarring and dosnt feel smooth at all, but Horizon have such a god like framepacing that 30fps is playable without problem imo.
 

SlimySnake

Flashless at the Golden Globes
The patch definitely did nothing with the shimmering and aliasing in performance mode but to be fair no-where does it say it does.

There must be some kind of DRS in performance mode too as it was even worse than I remembered in town where there are lots of NPCs.

Not sure if anything can be done as 60fps with so much foliage and geometric detail must be hammering the PS5 but fingers crossed as I can't deal with 30fps on an OLED.

Checkerboarding obviously just really falls apart when there is so much granular detail and so much moving foliage.

I'd take 40fps if it was possible or a third option with a lower resolution native image even if it would be blurry as at least the alpha stuff wouldn't look so bad and on an OLED your eyes are drawn to all the aliasing.
The problem is that increasing framerate disproportionately affects performance. It's not 1:1 like it is on PC for most games. What we are seeing here is what we saw in Dying Light 2 and Guardians of the Galaxy where a game that is basically locked at native 4k 30 fps has to drop its resolution all the way down to 1080p just to hit 60 fps.

So 40 fps at native 4k or even 1800p might not be possible. Thats an increase of 33% more frames at the cost of roughly 40% in pixels. In theory, it should be enough, but looking at how blurry this game is in performance, I highly doubt they can get 40 fps at 1800p. Maybe at 1440p.

Ratchet had to tone down a lot of graphics settings to hit 60 fps at 1440p even though they had it running at native 4k 40 fps. They turned down lighting, reduced skybox detail, NPC crowds as well as lower quality reflections. It lost a lot of its visual flair. They had to do the same thing in Miles. Reducing NPC counts and traffic density in performance modes. See below. From what I can see, GG didnt turn down any detail. The insane amount of foliage present in the quality version is all there even in performance. The draw distance of foliage is the same as well. The NPC counts are the same. If they maybe turn down some of those settings to PS4 Pro levels, we might get a 1440p 60 fps mode.

EsoI5tdXAAISvOz


EsoI0BFXUAU_ccO
 

SlimySnake

Flashless at the Golden Globes
Ah GAF. I guess it's typical that a game thread is dominated by discussion and argument about technical details instead of you know, the actual game. You guys really get hung up on this shit don't you.
I know right. Who wouldve thought that a thread about the Tech review of the game would be dominate by discussion of technical details of the game instead of game design and story details.
 

proandrad

Member
but many people got used to 60 and 120 and now say they cant. They can in fact... they played like this and now they say it's slideshow or hurting their eyes.
It's a hyperbole
I know there is a lot of joking and exaggeration, but 30 fps literally give me headaches so I try to to avoid 30fps games. The problem is people keep bringing up the resolution mode as a solution for the lackluster performance mode. If performance mode wasn’t up to snuff then they shouldn’t have put it in the game. It just seems like the performance mode was just a low effort “let just reduce the resolution until we get to 60.” They probably could have achieved a much cleaner picture by lowering some other settings; sort of like tinkering with settings in a pc game to get a better image quality without scarifying framerate. Sony is even charging an extra $10 for the PS5, our expectations should be higher.
 

ethomaz

Banned
I know there is a lot of joking and exaggeration, but 30 fps literally give me headaches so I try to to avoid 30fps games. The problem is people keep bringing up the resolution mode as a solution for the lackluster performance mode. If performance mode wasn’t up to snuff then they shouldn’t have put it in the game. It just seems like the performance mode was just a low effort “let just reduce the resolution until we get to 60.” They probably could have achieved a much cleaner picture by lowering some other settings; sort of like tinkering with settings in a pc game to get a better image quality without scarifying framerate. Sony is even charging an extra $10 for the PS5, our expectations should be higher.
Is this generation console your first one?
Because if you played console games before I'm 100% sure most games were 30fps.

That means in the past it didn't give you headaches?
 
Last edited:

Ulysses 31

Member
Is this generation console your first one?
Because if you played console games before I'm 100% sure most games were 30fps.

That means in the past it didn't give you headaches?
Displays in the past likely had much higher pixel response time which cause less 30 fps stutter.
 
Last edited:

ethomaz

Banned
Displays in the past likely had much higher pixel response time which cause less 30 fps stutter.
Display in the past... do you mean crap LCD?
I mean 30fps is not something from another era of TVs... it was with the same LCD tech we use today.

OLED is new... and PLASMA died but most played on LCDs.

It is not like we are back to CRT... PS3 and PS4 didn't even work well with CRT.
 
Last edited:

ethomaz

Banned
I have had a high end pc since 2004 every console since nes.
So 30fps was fine on consoles before? Did you had headache playing PS1, N64, PS2, PS3 and PS4 games? It just too weird to me from nothing all these people that got sick with 30fps after decades paying 30fps just fine.

My body condition is the same playing 30 or 60fps games.
 
Last edited:

rofif

Can’t Git Gud
I know there is a lot of joking and exaggeration, but 30 fps literally give me headaches so I try to to avoid 30fps games. The problem is people keep bringing up the resolution mode as a solution for the lackluster performance mode. If performance mode wasn’t up to snuff then they shouldn’t have put it in the game. It just seems like the performance mode was just a low effort “let just reduce the resolution until we get to 60.” They probably could have achieved a much cleaner picture by lowering some other settings; sort of like tinkering with settings in a pc game to get a better image quality without scarifying framerate. Sony is even charging an extra $10 for the PS5, our expectations should be higher.
This here we agree. I am all for 60 fps modes as longn as it’s not lazy
 

Ulysses 31

Member
Display in the past... do you mean crap LCD?
I mean 30fps is not something from another era of TVs... it was with the same LCD tech we use today.
Modern LCDs(LED are LCDs too) have much better response times making them worse for 30 fps.

So yes, if he went from plasma or lcd with higher response time to a modern display, 30 fps would look worse on the newer display.
 
Last edited:

sendit

Member
but many people got used to 60 and 120 and now say they cant. They can in fact... they played like this and now they say it's slideshow or hurting their eyes.
It's a hyperbole

I can switch from 60 to 120 FPS just fine. However, dropping down to 30 FPS is just way to jarring. Additionally, 30 FPS makes the combat or anything ultimately more unresponsive in comparison to the higher FPS option. The idea of getting upset because people want a better experience is strange.
 
Last edited:

ethomaz

Banned
I can switch from 60 to 120 FPS just fine. However, dropping down to 30 FPS is just way to jarring. Additionally, 30 FPS makes the combat or anything ultimately more unresponsive in comparison to the higher FPS option. The idea of getting upset because people want a better experience is strange.
So you get sick every time you play a 30fps game?

Man you guys are so unlucky because I used to play non-stop 30fps games for 24hours… just breaks to pee and eat… never felt anything bad with my body.
 
Last edited:

sendit

Member
So you get sick every time you play a 30fps game?

Man you guys are so unlucky.

Not sick, I just won't do it. Most of my gaming is done on the PC. If Horizon FW didn't have a performance option, I would have waited until a eventual PC release. The only thing good about the resolution option for FW is for screenshots/photomode.
 
Last edited:

ethomaz

Banned
Not sick, I just won't do it. Most of my gaming is done on the PC. If Horizon FW didn't have a performance option, I wold have waited until a eventual PC release. The only thing good about the resolution option for FW is for screenshots/photomode.
That is fine.

I just can’t take these guys that says they get sick with 30fps.
60fps after all is more responsible than 60fps.
 

ethomaz

Banned
Modern LCDs(LED are LCDs too) have much better response times making them worse for 30 fps.

So yes, if he went from plasma or lcd with higher response time to a modern display, 30 fps would look worse on the newer display.
Are you sure about that? Interesting to be fair but I believe my old TVs have better response time than my actual LG CX but the difference in IQ is really outstanding.
 
Last edited:

Dr Bass

Member
Not sick, I just won't do it. Most of my gaming is done on the PC. If Horizon FW didn't have a performance option, I would have waited until a eventual PC release. The only thing good about the resolution option for FW is for screenshots/photomode.
:rolleyes: I get having preferences and all that, but this is nonsense. The game is great fun, now. And it's extremely playable. Would I prefer resolution mode with 60fps? Absolutely. Would I wait years to play it on PC to do so when I can play it now and have just as much fun? No way.
 

Ulysses 31

Member
Are you sure about that? Interesting to be fair but I believe my old TVs have better response time than my actual LG CX but the difference in IQ is really outstanding.
I'm just talking about the 30 fps stutter, in all other areas the picture quality of modern displays blow older LCDs/CRTs out of the water of course.

Stutter is all about the motion.

I seriously doubt your older TV will have better response time than an LG CX. :messenger_winking_tongue:
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom