Dick Jones
Gold Member
Didn't Techland get help from Xbox studios? How much worse could it have been if they didn't get help? Techland should be ashamed here. Amateur hour.
One Video I've found regarding loading times.Well, they were limited by GPU in Series S (according to their twitter), so I guess they were limited by SSD on all the consoles
I agree. Game is very unoptimized.
i havent seen thatDidn't Techland get help from Xbox studios? How much worse could it have been if they didn't get help? Techland should be ashamed here. Amateur hour.
I thought they had. There was rumours last year Techland were in trouble and MS were going to acquire them. Phil must have seen the shit first hand and bounced out.i havent seen that
The game is selling in droves and most console owners are going to be satisfied with a stable 30 fps experience and especially with a 60 fps option on current-gen. Alternatively, Techland maybe couldn't spend a ton of time optimizing given how many platforms they had to develop for. Either way it's still stable according to tech videos. It's not like a Cyberpunk 2077 experience by any means.I’ve been watching some people play this on a 3090 and it is certainly not a looker, it’s like some of those late PS4 hen open world games with muddy textures and low LOD.
Considering other games on the market on the current gen consoles and the power available they should definitely be able to optimise better for them.
There’s a far larger audience on consoles you’d think Techland would be interested in optimising for the market needs more than boasting about how high end your rig needs to be to play the game in 60 frames at 4k.
No one’s spending a couple G to play DL2 at 4k60.
It like they went two generations back at onceIt's 38,30 Seconds on PS5 and nearly 2minutes on PS4.
The game look gorgeous on my ps5 in the resolution mode so I can only imagine how it would look at 60 fps will the full suite of RT options. Obviously, it's a cross gen game buy it's at the higher end of the cross gen spectrum. Sure, the Lods are not the best but textures and environmental detail is very nice. Lighting is beautiful. It looks a lot better to me than say, Far Cry 6.I’ve been watching some people play this on a 3090 and it is certainly not a looker, it’s like some of those late PS4 hen open world games with muddy textures and low LOD.
Considering other games on the market on the current gen consoles and the power available they should definitely be able to optimise better for them.
There’s a far larger audience on consoles you’d think Techland would be interested in optimising for the market needs more than boasting about how high end your rig needs to be to play the game in 60 frames at 4k.
No one’s spending a couple G to play DL2 at 4k60.
Plus there's a LOT more detail and density than Metro. Much better texture quality too.The game is selling in droves and most console owners are going to be satisfied with a stable 30 fps experience and especially with a 60 fps option on current-gen. Alternatively, Techland maybe couldn't spend a ton of time optimizing given how many platforms they had to develop for. Either way it's still stable according to tech videos. It's not like a Cyberpunk 2077 experience by any means.
And the game isn't breathtaking, but a 3090 with maxed out RT? It's definitely a looker with all that on. Up there with Metro Exodus EE imo.
I'm sure they could have if they had gone in and totally rebuilt the games but they didn't, they likely just raised the framerate cap and worked on the loading.I have a PS5 and for me is clearly underpowered, especially for a machine that is supposed to long for 5 or even 7 years. I mean, Tsushima or Uncharted not achieving 4k60fps means 1440p30fps when true next gen graphics, like Unreal 5, arrives.
Your logic is flawed. Miles Moralis runs at 1440p/60 fps with ray tracing and Far Cry 6 runs in higher resolution than 1080p in It's performance mode. If Techland can't to better than 1080p It's their fault.If you want better graphical fidelity, yOu should be playIng on PC not consoles.
Best get use to this.
When are you guys gonna stop making that stupid comment that is beside the damn point? Once again, who is saying that it should perform like it does on PC? The complaints are that it should be able to perform BETTER on next gen (which by the way are sold and marketed as being capable 4k machines), NOT that it should perform maxed out with RT at 60!If you want better graphical fidelity, yOu should be playIng on PC not consoles.
Best get use to this.
I love these comments. "Just play on PC". Little Timmy that just got a brand new PC with a 6500xt is in for a great experience that far surpasses consoles.....not.If you want better graphical fidelity, yOu should be playIng on PC not consoles.
Best get use to this.
In one second I thought was pokemon legends arceus.
Well said. The loading times are a joke.(1080p/60fps also)
Is the best option ever!!well time to get a pc console peasants.
First of all both of the current gen consoles arent some magical infinite power mashines, they are roughly equivalent to r7 3700x cpu with lowered clocks/cache(so in actual performance roughly i5 10400f max)combined with rx 6600xt gpu(xsx bit faster but still slower from 6700xt gpu and it varries on game by game basis), nvidia wise around rtx 2070s to rtx 2080 but way worse in raytracing.Ok so Playing Dying light 2 on my PS5 and I have 3 choices:
Performance: 1080p/60 fps sacrificing resolution and ray tracing
Resolution: 1800p/30fps sacrificing ray tracing (not even 4k)
Quality: 1080p/30fps with ray tracing a couple other effects!
My question is why? This game is good looking but I wouldn't call it a world beater. Even on the Series X its the same with the resolution being slightly higher at 1944p.
Why can't we play a game like this at 4k/30ps with ray tracing or at least 1080p/60fps with ray tracing? As stated this game isn't a mind blower as far as graphics and curious as to why we aren't getting more performance?
All you need is a low level answer. If you think it's an optimized game, and the PS5/series X is at their limits with it, then OK, LOL.The first guy nailed it and you respond with a low effort single sentence. Everything he said is pretty accurate though. If you switch between the fidelity and performance modes of the best looking ps5 games you'll see how cut back they are in terms of settings.
PhillyBoi92 has a point though, there are better looking games which run far better.kind of embarrassing that you'd post the PhillyBoi92 tweet instead of this designer's (very well mannered) responses tbh
Yahhh they are not exactly the same games.Your logic is flawed. Miles Moralis runs at 1440p/60 fps with ray tracing and Far Cry 6 runs in higher resolution than 1080p in It's performance mode. If Techland can't to better than 1080p It's their fault.
No need to buy a PC because Techland chose to easy way to achieve 60fps.
I am saying that console players shouldn't set any expectation nor care so much about the graphical fidelity in the first place. Just play the game?When are you guys gonna stop making that stupid comment that is beside the damn point? Once again, who is saying that it should perform like it does on PC? The complaints are that it should be able to perform BETTER on next gen (which by the way are sold and marketed as being capable 4k machines), NOT that it should perform maxed out with RT at 60!
Yeah the game looks like fucking ass compared to the e3 trailers
he doesn't have a point because it's really fucking dumb to expect every game to meet the same statistics as other titles.PhillyBoi92 has a point though, there are better looking games which run far better.
The techland engine must be a pretty big resource hog.
The one on the right looks like Assassin's Creed Liberation
The moment the console game industry started to be like PC and it just a profile the optimization goes downhill.
The changes to get out of that cage lies in Exclusives but the trend is really not optimistic.
Consoles are following what I always criticize in PC… little to no effort in optimization for specific hardware… if there is a game only coded to run on Core i9 and RTX 3090 people should believe it is something unbelievable while still running in actual PC hardware.
Ohhhh I don’t need to say mid-gen upgrades was a terrible decision for console developers.
There is a reason matrix demo looks like it looks, and back in the day the order 1776 looked like it looked on base ps4 so 1,7tf mashine, u can say optimalisation was/is awesome on both which ofc is true but on top of that, in both cases there wasnt any big/complicated game mechanics lying underneath.PhillyBoi92 has a point though, there are better looking games which run far better.
The techland engine must be a pretty big resource hog.
kind of embarrassing that you'd post the PhillyBoi92 tweet instead of this designer's (very well mannered) responses tbh
The original Twitter talks about their stopping to play the game because the motion blur, FOV, 30fps, etc on Series X and S.I don't understand the developer's initial reply. What does the Series S gpu and its 30fps mode have to do with what the original tweet was asking for in terms of reduced motion blur and increased fov? Series S results seem fine in comparison to what Series X and PS5 can manage with this game.
PhillyBoi92 has a point though, there are better looking games which run far better.
The techland engine must be a pretty big resource hog.
he doesn't have a point because it's really fucking dumb to expect every game to meet the same statistics as other titles.
The only comparable open world enhanced game I can think of to DL2 is AC: Valhalla which is 1440p/30 on Series S. And even that has dynamic resolution scaling which drops it closer to 1080p under load. I don't recall if Series S runs the same settings in Valhalla as Series X like it does in Dying Light 2, either.
I agree with you on your point about the engine but the twitter comment was unnecessarily rude and came off as if he knew better than the dev. The dev isn't calling the console or consoles weak, but saying that based on how their engine is designed, which is clearly a resource hog (again, fair game to criticize) there will be limitations for all the consoles, especially the lower spec one.
Maybe?Devs can get away with brute forcing on the ps5/xsx in this cross gen period.
But games with poor visuals and performance will be criticised.
The bar keeps getting pushed. Progress is expected.
Im curious how the indie scene will deal with next gen. Because a game like "inside" does not really require hardware more powerful then an X1, hell its even on mobile. I wonder how games like these will improvements.
I love these comments. "Just play on PC". Little Timmy that just got a brand new PC with a 6500xt is in for a great experience that far surpasses consoles.....not.
I can vouch for gamer79. He’s not a warrior. I’ve seen him post a lot and even i can’t tell you if he leans right or left or PC.This thread is bait, isn’t it?
Everybody has every right to whine about what they want. You can always visit a different thread that aligns more with your interests.Console players has no right to whine about graphical fidelity.
Comparing is fine. It's projecting some expectation that every studio has to hit some criteria when it comes to visuals and resolution and framerate that's obnoxious. Dev is extremely complexAre you kidding... people compare and put games against each other a lot.
All these games are competing for players times, being visually and technically competitive is definitely a contributor in how successful a game is.