Support NeoGAF

[DenchDeckard]

That's what most of the discussion was about. It was about the constant stoppages and the drawn-out storytelling moments. It takes 20 minutes to start actually playing the game. Lots of long and boring walking sections that kill the pace.

That and then switching to Atreus and being forced to play those sections, was a serious blunder. Didn't affect any of the review scores though *shrugs*

 

[GymWolf]

That and then switching to Atreus and being forced to play those sections, was a serious blunder. Didn't affect any of the review scores though *shrugs*

Thank corey and his fucking one camera shot for that.

Hopefully he trash this shit in his new game.

But tbh, the combat with little shit wasn't that bad, it had good controls and was responsive, not as fun as kratos but not downright trash either.
I just like meleecmore than arrow combat but i thought it was more than fine.
It was more a question of his sections not being that good, seeing odin and thor was the highlight of his sections, because even if the writing for both wasn't great, the 2 voice actors were incredible, especially odin.

 

[Gaiff]

Most people that criticize the game talk like the game is complete trash when in reality, the game has way more things where it's better than 2018 than things where is worse.

I think it's mechanically superior to 2018. However, it's all bogged down by the awful pacing and questionable storytelling. It's much easier to replay 2018 than Ragnarok because there are way fewer unskippable cutscenes and they're also much shorter.

The first game also has a lot of slow moments, at worse we can argue that they were better written but i have no pity for people trying 2018 and expecting gow1-3 pace with barely any slowdown with ragnarock, i absolutely knew the game was cutscene heavy and i have no problem with that because you still play and fight and explore most of the time, it's the usual bullshit that people use to describe sony games even if they are open world where you can literally stop following the plot and fight stuff around the map for 50 hours straight without a simgle cutscene, i'm not gonna take these people seriously at all.
A slow start is not gonna make me hate the game because it doesn't represent anything other tham the game being an heavy story driven game with cutscenes here and there.

Can't agree with that. 2018 has cutscenes but they're usually quite short. This is in no small part due to the much smaller cast of characters. 2018 has around 6 prominent characters. Ragnarok has over 20. There are no Ironwood moments where you spend 2 hours doing precious nothing. There is no following Odin and wandering Asgard for 20 minutes doing nothing. It takes about 5 minutes for 2018 to give you full control of the game. Ragnarok takes 20. I love 2018. I despise Ragnarok. Not because of the combat, but because of the pacing that makes it a chore to play through. The Atreus sections suck, but at least, they're gameplay.

 

[GymWolf]

I think it's mechanically superior to 2018. However, it's all bogged down by the awful pacing and questionable storytelling. It's much easier to replay 2018 than Ragnarok because there are way fewer unskippable cutscenes and they're also much shorter.

Can't agree with that. 2018 has cutscenes but they're usually quite short. This is in no small part due to the much smaller cast of characters. 2018 has around 6 prominent characters. Ragnarok has over 20. There are no Ironwood moments where you spend 2 hours doing precious nothing. There is no following Odin and wandering Asgard for 20 minutes doing nothing. It takes about 5 minutes for 2018 to give you full control of the game. Ragnarok takes 20. I love 2018. I despise Ragnarok. Not because of the combat, but because of the pacing that makes it a chore to play through. The Atreus sections suck, but at least, they're gameplay.

Dude in 2018 you have an entire section where you have to bring ill atreus to freya, then a cutscene between the 2 and the a boat trip to recover the blades,that was a pretty long ass period of inactivity without combat or anything, like i said the problem is that those sections in 2018 were just more interesting and better written so they were more easily digestable, but they were still slow moments that should bother anyone that only want gow1-3 pace, because gow2018 fucking ain't that, like not even close.
I can give you that ragnarock has more sections like that, but the game is also much, much bigger so you also have more hours of pure gameplay, so you probably end up with more total hours of pure gameplay in ragnarock compared to 2018, i know i did, and by a lot (like 40 hours vs 100)

But none of that erase the fact that for all the gameplay elements, ragnarock is superior and some cutscene here and there is not gonna erase the fact that you still play 90% of the time, i can assure you that if the game was like hellblade 2, i would not have played it for 100 hours.

But i guess that if you really hated the plot etc. Those sections felt double the lenght and soured the game for you, personally, after enduring the absolute retardation and terrible characters of tlou2 to get to the good parts, no amount of little shit could stop me from enjoying the good stuff in rangarock

 

[mckmas8808]

Definitely a combination of things here but I think your first two points are the main reason.

And I hope Sony is watching and paying attention. They need to remember who their CORE audience is and not cater to the PC audience. They are Playstation for a reason and they better not forget that! PC is where they can make some secondary money.

Wow, I was off. Im sure I'd heard they all sold worse.

Because people like to lie about Sony's 1st party games now for console war reasons. Glad you have the correct information now though.

 

[ChiefDada]

this kind of difference on PC can easly be translated to very low from high. we don't even know what ps5 settings are at this point

PS5 fidelity mode uses ultra settings and is native 4k30, with a 120hz option raising framerate to 40fps with lower bounds of 1800p. Let's split difference and say native 4k mode averages 4k35fps. That is right around 7700xt performance.

 

[Bojji]

PS5 fidelity mode uses ultra settings and is native 4k30, with a 120hz option raising framerate to 40fps with lower bounds of 1800p. Let's split difference and say native 4k mode averages 4k35fps. That is right around 7700xt performance.

I don't think it was confirmed anywhere that PS5 fidelity=ultra on PC.

 

[MisterXDTV]

PS5 fidelity mode uses ultra settings and is native 4k30, with a 120hz option raising framerate to 40fps with lower bounds of 1800p. Let's split difference and say native 4k mode averages 4k35fps. That is right around 7700xt performance.

Wait, I thought PS5 Pro was a 7700 XT....

Now you are telling me that they were confused and they were actually talking about the standard PS5?

 

[JohnnyFootball]

lmao, no, they aren’t. You need to stop that silly narrative that PlayStation is treated unfairly. PC gamers hate this every damn time.

Wouldn’t go that far. As I recall, the performance on PS4 is very similar to the performance of 2018. It is more detailed, no doubt, but it’s nowhere near comparable to the jump we got between HZD and HFW.

Please show me games like Jedi Survivor or Outlaws being boycotted on PC or getting low reviews because of it.

I'll wait....

 

[Zathalus]

Wait, I thought PS5 Pro was a 7700 XT....

Now you are telling me that they were confused and they were actually talking about the standard PS5?

No, because it’s a single game with widely different results from multiple sources. It also has a bug with tesselation that can almost cut performance in half.

 

[MisterXDTV]

I hope we get a PS5 Pro patch for this game, it would be fun to watch

 

[Fess]

I don't but and play most of Sony's 1st party games that fast. I haven't even bought Astro Bot even LOL! And I just finished Stellar Blade a couple of weeks ago. Is it too much to ask for devs to make a game and for the Publisher to back the patching of that game for a minimum of 6 months after release?

If a game launches in the Fall of 2024, I want an all hands on deck approach for that game until Spring or Summer of 2025 with full support! NO work on the PC version is needed until after that 6-9 months of full console focus is completed. And then once you get to Summer of 2025, lets take the next 9-12 months to make the PC version. Make it as great as possible and then release it spring or Summer of 2026. All the bells and whistles and all DLC included for a LOWER price than what the PS version sold for.

If you’re often LTTP I can somewhat understand your stance. Especially if you have a PC too, I thought you were console-only. Being halfway through a game on PS5 when an improved PC version with all DLC included is released is not a nice feeling… I’ve been there It’s one of the reason I just wait on PC versions now. But then a 2+ year gap is too long, just means I’m not as excited anymore and want a cheaper price.
And story focused games with long delays aren’t all that exciting. Like TLOU2, cool if it comes to PC but I already know everything that happens so I would only play it for the gameplay.

 

[Gaiff]

Dude in 2018 you have an entire section where you have to bring ill atreus to freya, then a cutscene between the 2 and the a boat trip to recover the blades,that was a pretty long ass period of inactivity without combat or anything, like i said the problem is that those sections in 2018 were just more interesting and better written so they were more easily digestable, but they were still slow moments that should bother you if you only want gow1-3 pace, because gow2018 fucking ain't that, like not even close.

This moment did actually annoy me, but it's about 10-15 minutes of inactivity. We're very very far from the 20+ in Ragnarok and this is by far the slowest and longest moment in the game. Otherwise, you got slow parts like meeting with Freya or Brok but again, they only last 3-5 minutes and the game doesn't have many of them.

I can give you that ragnarock has more sections like that, but the game is also much, much bigger so you also have more hours of pure gameplay, so you probably end up with more total hours of pure gameplay in ragnarock compared to 2018, i know i did, and by a lot (like 40 hours vs 100)

It has more pure gameplay by virtue of being twice as long, but it also has more than twice as many cutscenes/walking sections, resulting in a much slower paced game overall. Cutscenes and cinematics take a much bigger chunk out of Ragnarok than they do out of 2018 which is a big problem. They crammed 2 games into one and ended up with a messily paced slop that completely killed the actual Ragnarok that was like 1 hour long and shorter than Ironwood.

But none of that erase the fact that for all the gameplay elements, ragnarock is superior and some cutscene here and there is not gonna erase the fact that you still play 90% of the time, i can assure you that if the game was like hellblade 2, i would not have played it for 100 hours.

Again, I love 2018. It's easy to play though. Ragnarok is not. It's a MUCH slower game. Just in terms of characters in 2018 you have: Kratos, Atreus, Baldur, Brok, Sindri, Magni & Modi, and Mimir?

In Ragnarok: Kratos, Atreus, Mimir, Freya, Thor, Brok, Sindri, Durlin, Tyr, Raktaskor (that squirrel thing) Thrud, Sif, Freyr, Heimdall, Odin, the Norns, and so many more. The cast of characters more than triples and a lot of them have way more lines than in the first game. There's no way around it, Ragnarok isn't as well paced as 2018 or even close. It easily has 3-4x as many slow moments for only twice the amount of gameplay.

Please show me games like Jedi Survivor or Outlaws being boycotted on PC or getting low reviews because of it.

I'll wait....

I sorted the reviews by negative on Steam.

I know you thought you had a gotcha moment, but this ain't it. And this is a year and a half after the game's launch. The game's bad performance is the biggest issue by far, but to pretend that players ain't bitching about the account is a farce.

Star Wars Outlaws isn't available on Steam.

Also this:

https://www.gamespot.com/articles/m...team-game-getting-review-bombed/1100-6525349/

So fuck no. Steam players aren't fine with any third-party account requirements. They hated Ubisoft, EA, Activision, Bethesda, and everything else. Now Sony is receiving the exact same treatment. That some of you sit here and are being willfully ignorant is comical. Imagine telling PC players that most of them are fine with accounts and that they only started bitching with Sony when it has been a problem for Steam users for over a decade.

 

[ChiefDada]

I don't think it was confirmed anywhere that PS5 fidelity=ultra on PC.

I do.

And not only that, but the RT cubemap isn't even available on PC because they weren't able to get it working properly.

Not only that, but similar to Insomniac ports (Ratchet, SM) even if you select highest quality textures, if your GPU memory system isn't sufficient the game will automatically swap in lower res textures. So 8gb PC gamers really think they're getting the best textures by selecting the preset when they're actually not.

How God of War Ragnarök was ported to PC

God of War Ragnarök is now out on PC, so we spoke to the team responsible to porting the game from PS5. We cover shader compilation, DX12 challenges and more.

www.eurogamer.net

 

[Zathalus]

And not only that, but the RT cubemap isn't even available on PC because they weren't able to get it working properly.]

Says it all in how much effort went into optimizing the game for PC.

 

[GymWolf]

This moment did actually annoy me, but it's about 10-15 minutes of inactivity. We're very very far from the 20+ in Ragnarok and this is by far the slowest and longest moment in the game. Otherwise, you got slow parts like meeting with Freya or Brok but again, they only last 3-5 minutes and the game doesn't have many of them.

It has more pure gameplay by virtue of being twice as long, but it also has more than twice as many cutscenes/walking sections, resulting in a much slower paced game overall. Cutscenes and cinematics take a much bigger chunk out of Ragnarok than they do out of 2018 which is a big problem. They crammed 2 games into one and ended up with a messily paced slop that completely killed the actual Ragnarok that was like 1 hour long and shorter than Ironwood.

Again, I love 2018. It's easy to play though. Ragnarok is not. It's a MUCH slower game. Just in terms of characters in 2018 you have: Kratos, Atreus, Baldur, Brok, Sindri, Magni & Modi, and Mimir?

In Ragnarok: Kratos, Atreus, Mimir, Freya, Thor, Brok, Sindri, Durlin, Tyr, Raktaskor (that squirrel thing) Thrud, Sif, Freyr, Heimdall, Odin, the Norns, and so many more. The cast of characters more than triples and a lot of them have way more lines than in the first game. There's no way around it, Ragnarok isn't as well paced as 2018 or even close. It easily has 3-4x as many slow moments for only twice the amount of gameplay.


I sorted the reviews by negative on Steam.

I know you thought you had a gotcha moment, but this ain't it. And this is a year and a half after the game's launch. The game's bad performance is the biggest issue by far, but to pretend that players ain't bitching about the account is a farce.

Star Wars Outlaws isn't available on Steam.

Also this:

https://www.gamespot.com/articles/m...team-game-getting-review-bombed/1100-6525349/

So fuck no. Steam players aren't fine with any third-party account requirements. They hated Ubisoft, EA, Activision, Bethesda, and everything else. Now Sony is receiving the exact same treatment. That some of you sit here and are being willfully ignorant is comical. Imagine telling PC players that most of them are fine with accounts and that they only started bitching with Sony when it has been a problem for Steam users for over a decade.

I just wanted to add that to me replayability means absolutely nothing when i play or a game, i don't judge something more negatively because it's gonna be a slog to replay or i should also trash some of my favourites games ever like mhw or mp3 that have unskippable cutscenes, or rdr2 that take its fucking sweet time to get going, that is also beyond terrible on replay, but i'm not gonna score stuff lower because of that.

So i can see why you judge slow sections more harshily than me.

So what you see as replayability flaws, for me are just...non-flaws (barely replaying games also help).

 

[ForAcademicPurposes]

Give me Jaffe style Kratos of War over this new shyte any day of the week.

 

[MisterXDTV]

Says it all in how much effort went into optimizing the game for PC.

Sure, it's always because of incompetent devs and bad ports

LOL

Then I read threads about a $700 PC being better than a PS5 Pro...

LOL

 

[ChiefDada]

Lol, it's been the cause of many tears flowing over the misnomer of "bad PC ports". PC struggles with equivalent settings of cross-gen ports like Horizon, Spider-Man, and the same will happen in September with Ragnarok. By the time true current gen only games like Demon Souls and SM2 get ported hopefully mainstream class hardware will catch up.

 

[Gaiff]

I just wanted to add that to me replayability means absolutely nothing when i play or a game, i don't judge something more negatively because it's gonna be a slog to replay or i should also trash some of my favourites games ever like mhw or mp3 that have unskippable cutscenes, or rdr2 that take its fucking sweet time to get going, that is also beyond terrible on replay.

So i can see why you judge slow sections more harshily than me.

So what you see as replayability flaws, for me are just...non-flaws (barely replaying games also help).

Nah, never replayed the game lol. Even the first time, I thought it was painful to sit through. I could have perhaps tolerated it if the writing wasn't so bad.

PS5 fidelity mode uses ultra settings and is native 4k30, with a 120hz option raising framerate to 40fps with lower bounds of 1800p. Let's split difference and say native 4k mode averages 4k35fps. That is right around 7700xt performance.

Maybe this needs more time in the oven, but Techpowerup gets significantly better performance than HU.

36 average and 31 lows vs 43 average and 39 lows is a big difference. We're talking a 20-25% better performance here. In fact, HU gets much lower performance than every other outlet, including live benchmarks. The 4K performance of the PS5 would be comparable to a 3060 Ti here (at least if we use 35fps as an average). Quite a bit better than usual, but still far from a 7700 XT.

 

[GymWolf]

Nah, never replayed the game lol. Even the first time, I thought it was painful to sit through. I could have perhaps tolerated it if the writing wasn't so bad.

Maybe this needs more time in the oven, but Techpowerup gets significantly better performance than HU.

36 average and 31 lows vs 43 average and 39 lows is a big difference. We're talking a 20-25% better performance here.

Yeah i get that you didn't replayed them, but you still consider things more harshily because you look at it from a replayability standpoint, i never do that, i just judge stuff in the moment, not related to future actions.

 

[Gaiff]

Yeah i get that you didn't replayed them, but you still consider things more harshily because you look at it from a replayability standpoint, i never do that, i just judge stuff in the moment, not related to future actions.

No, I mean that it's not even from a replayability perspective. My first time playing the game, I hated it. I damn nearly quit at Ironwood because I was fed up. I reached Asgard and then quit shortly after. I'm also not the only one. I think the game is a slog no matter how you look at it. I know I'm also not the only one who loved 2018 but loathes Ragnarok for the same reasons.

 

[Zathalus]

Sure, it's always because of incompetent devs and bad ports

LOL

Then I read threads about a $700 PC being better than a PS5 Pro...

LOL

They couldn’t get RT cubemaps working, which is one of the simplest techniques for RT, the game has a bug where tesselation can almost halve your FPS, there is a severe memory leak with DLSS, up until the patch that just came out frame generation wasn’t working properly, there are widely different FPS results from multiple sources, and even HDR was causing issues. Does that sound like a good port job to you?

Space Marine 2 drops to the 30s and 720p with a 2060 Super on the PC providing better results, so is that the “true” power of the PS5 or perhaps it might be indicating it’s a bit of a bad port?

 

[Bojji]

I do.

And not only that, but the RT cubemap isn't even available on PC because they weren't able to get it working properly.

Not only that, but similar to Insomniac ports (Ratchet, SM) even if you select highest quality textures, if your GPU memory system isn't sufficient the game will automatically swap in lower res textures. So 8gb PC gamers really think they're getting the best textures by selecting the preset when they're actually not.

How God of War Ragnarök was ported to PC

God of War Ragnarök is now out on PC, so we spoke to the team responsible to porting the game from PS5. We cover shader compilation, DX12 challenges and more.

www.eurogamer.net

Ok, I get it.

Nah, never replayed the game lol. Even the first time, I thought it was painful to sit through. I could have perhaps tolerated it if the writing wasn't so bad.

Maybe this needs more time in the oven, but Techpowerup gets significantly better performance than HU.

36 average and 31 lows vs 43 average and 39 lows is a big difference. We're talking a 20-25% better performance here. In fact, HU gets much lower performance than every other outlet, including live benchmarks. The 4K performance of the PS5 would be comparable to a 3060 Ti here (at least if we use 35fps as an average). Quite a bit better than usual, but still far from a 7700 XT.

Where they tested it? HU tests in probably the most intense area - dwarves land (I can't write full name, lol), while snow area runs like 50% better.

 

[Gaiff]

Sure, it's always because of incompetent devs and bad ports

LOL

Then I read threads about a $700 PC being better than a PS5 Pro...

LOL

So are we supposed to ignore every other game up until now and just run with this one? Furthermore, you've seen how live benchmarks don't line up at all with what HU got. Their numbers are much much worse than everyone else. Perhaps they tested an especially demanding section. Perhaps they experienced the tessellation bug. Whatever the case, I wouldn't draw a conclusion until we have side-by-side benchmarks with matched settings.

I mean, so far it seems the PS5 can range form slightly below a 3060 Ti to above a 7800 XT lol depending how you approach the results.

 

[MisterXDTV]

Right on the money....

 

[Zathalus]

What exactly did you call? Horizon works quite well on hardware equivalent to a PS5, only running into VRAM issues which is entirely expected. Nothing wrong with the Horizon port, or Ghost, or Returnal for that matter.

This game was ported by 4 developers, of course the amount of work put into it won’t be extensive. Compared to the number of developers optimizing this game for PS5 that is next to nothing. Hence the number of bugs and performance issues that come up.

Right on the money....

Man, for somebody who loves bitching about PCMR you seem to have zero problem shitting up PC threads with your fanboy drivel.

 

[Gaiff]

Ok, I get it.



Where they tested it? HU tests in probably the most intense area - dwarves land (I can't write full name, lol), while snow area runs like 50% better.

HU ran their tests in Svartalfheim. The problem is, we have other benchmarks running in the same area and their results are much better.

Here, the 7900 XT averages 126fps at 1440p Ultra on a 7900 XTX.



HU only gets 94fps. A 32% variance in the same place? At least, the 4K data is much closer. They average 80fps at 4K Ultra and HU 71. There's also some weird shit with HU such as the 3080 beating the 7800 XT by over 30% at 1440p. The 3070 outperforming the 7700 XT by over 10%, and more.

 

[Sanepar]

lmao, no, they aren’t. You need to stop that silly narrative that PlayStation is treated unfairly. PC gamers hate this every damn time.

Wouldn’t go that far. As I recall, the performance on PS4 is very similar to the performance of 2018. It is more detailed, no doubt, but it’s nowhere near comparable to the jump we got between HZD and HFW.

Imo it looks better than 90% of games this gen. Animations and graphics.

 

[Gaiff]

Right on the money....

Wait, are you guys telling me it's much harder to port exclusives designed for a specific platform? Are you suggesting that Chief perhaps noticed a trend of PS ports not being great and predicting the same thing would happen...as it has in the past?

I honestly thought the port was good. First impressions were very positive, but it seems that in addition to the PS account requirement, there is a memory leak problem, frequent crashes, and several bugs such as with the tessellation being too heavy, DLSS frame generation not working, and more. The joys of console to PC porting I guess.

 

[Zathalus]

Wait, are you guys telling me it's much harder to port exclusives designed for a specific platform? Are you suggesting that Chief perhaps noticed a trend of PS ports not being great and predicting the same thing would happen...as it has in the past?

I honestly thought the port was good. First impressions were very positive, but it seems that in addition to the PS account requirement, there is a memory leak problem, frequent crashes, and several bugs such as with the tessellation being too heavy, DLSS frame generation not working, and more. The joys of console to PC porting I guess.

I think the lesson learned with these PS5 ports is to wait a few weeks for all the bugs to be ironed out. And don't expect miracles if the port was done by 4 people.

 

[MisterXDTV]

The joys of console to PC porting I guess.

Spend thousands of dollars on a Super PC ->Port beg for games made for consoles first -> complain about bad PC port/optimization

The joys of PC gaming

 

[Gaiff]

Spend thousands of dollars on a Super PC ->Port beg for games made for consoles first -> complain about bad PC port/optimization

The joys of PC gaming

No idea who you're talking about, but you haven't contributed anything useful to this discussion. At least ChiefDada is genuinely trying to find data points to see where the performance lies. You're just here acting like a salty little troll. If you're just interested in warring, you can simply leave the thread.

 

[Bojji]

Spend thousands of dollars on a Super PC ->Port beg for games made for consoles first -> complain about bad PC port/optimization

The joys of PC gaming

So how you behave when Xbox versions of games perform/look much better (like Warhammer or Tales of Arise)? Bad and underpeforming ports are everywhere, many Sony games are in this category on PC. This game launched full of performance bugs as well.

 

[ChiefDada]

What exactly did you call? Horizon works quite well on hardware equivalent to a PS5, only running into VRAM issues which is entirely expected. Nothing wrong with the Horizon port, or Ghost, or Returnal for that matter.

All I'm saying is memory is just as important as compute when it comes to visual fidelity. Some PC gamers seem to forget/ignore that. So when we talk about GPU comparisons, we should include memory into the equation.

Wait, are you guys telling me it's much harder to port exclusives designed for a specific platform? Are you suggesting that Chief perhaps noticed a trend of PS ports not being great and predicting the same thing would happen...as it has in the past?

Hey I thought it was a good port to. But people downplay the significance of low level API and memory setup. And I knew Ragnarok on PS5 took advantage of PS5 streaming tech which is why I made the prediction. Even with the 4090, you see textures take a couple secs to snap into place going from one realm to another. Not terrible, but noticeable.

 

[MisterXDTV]

No idea who you're talking about, but you haven't contributed anything useful to this discussion. At least ChiefDada is genuinely trying to find data points to see where the performance lies. You're just here acting like a salty little troll. If you're just interested in warring, you can simply leave the thread.

Why should I leave, just ignore me if you don't like what I post

Are you a moderator or something?

 

[Gaiff]

Why should I leave, just ignore me if you don't like what I post

Why should a troll leave a thread? You tell me lol.

 

[Senua]

Spend thousands of dollars on a Super PC ->Port beg for games made for consoles first -> complain about bad PC port/optimization

The joys of PC gaming

This is the post (among many) of a very odd person, seek help my warrior amigo.

 

[Zathalus]

Spend thousands of dollars on a Super PC ->Port beg for games made for consoles first -> complain about bad PC port/optimization

The joys of PC gaming

Complains about PCMR constantly -> Proceed to dunk on PC gaming every chance you get. -> When called out on it, loudly claim how PC sucks anyway and slinks away.

The joys of a troll.

All I'm saying is memory is just as important as compute when it comes to visual fidelity. Some PC gamers seem to forget/ignore that. So when we talk about GPU comparisons, we should include memory into the equation.

I fully agree, hence just stating a 3070 beats a PS5 doesn’t paint the full picture. Sure in a lot of ways it does, but PS5 can take the lead with VRAM limited scenarios.

But in this case the problems seem to go beyond just memory.

 

[MisterXDTV]

All I'm saying is memory is just as important as compute when it comes to visual fidelity. Some PC gamers seem to forget/ignore that. So when we talk about GPU comparisons, we should include memory into the equation.



Hey I thought it was a good port to. But people downplay the significance of low level API and memory setup. And I knew Ragnarok on PS5 took advantage of PS5 streaming tech which is why I made the prediction. Even with the 4090, you see textures take a couple secs to snap into place going from one realm to another. Not terrible, but noticeable.

Here SSD is considered the "Cerny scam"

I'm not surprised at all

 

[yogaflame]

It is a Sony product, that is why, for me, I'm okay that PC ports of PS games, requires PSN account in PC. It's Sony's fund and labor used for this project and it is there business.

 

[Gaiff]

All I'm saying is memory is just as important as compute when it comes to visual fidelity. Some PC gamers seem to forget/ignore that. So when we talk about GPU comparisons, we should include memory into the equation.



Hey I thought it was a good port to. But people downplay the significance of low level API and memory setup. And I knew Ragnarok on PS5 took advantage of PS5 streaming tech which is why I made the prediction. Even with the 4090, you see textures take a couple secs to snap into place going from one realm to another. Not terrible, but noticeable.

I’m uncertain how much memory plays a part in this. For a game like Spider-Man where there is super fast traversal and loading of assets, even in the remastered version, I get it. For this though? Doesn’t seem like it should be any more memory intensive than most games.

It’s not majorly more impressive than the first game like how HFW looks much better than HZD. In fact, I think it runs almost the same as 2018 on PS4. Sure, PS5 is significantly better, but the scope and scale are still PS4. It’s not a Spider-Man 2 or FF XVI.

 

[mckmas8808]

If you’re often LTTP I can somewhat understand your stance. Especially if you have a PC too, I thought you were console-only. Being halfway through a game on PS5 when an improved PC version with all DLC included is released is not a nice feeling… I’ve been there It’s one of the reason I just wait on PC versions now. But then a 2+ year gap is too long, just means I’m not as excited anymore and want a cheaper price.
And story focused games with long delays aren’t all that exciting. Like TLOU2, cool if it comes to PC but I already know everything that happens so I would only play it for the gameplay.

No, you were right. I am console only. I just hate buying games day one now, knowing they'll next at least one month worth of patches to be better.

 

[Gaiff]

No, you were right. I am console only. I just hate buying games day one now, knowing they'll next at least one month worth of patches to be better.

And that's being generous in many cases. Some games like BG3 or Cyberpunk 2077 might as well be different games.

 

[mckmas8808]

And that's being generous in many cases. Some games like BG3 or Cyberpunk 2077 might as well be different games.

Exactly!!! I'm gonna buy GTA6 day one, because come on............how could I not. But most games need at least 1-3 months worth of patches to be their best versions. And other like you listed need 6-12 months worth of patches. I remember The Witcher 3 was kinda like that too.

 

[Gaiff]

https://www.techpowerup.com/review/god-of-war-ragnarok-dlss-vs-fsr-vs-xess-comparison/

Upscaling comparisons.



All three seems competent, but Jetpack screwed up a few things. For one, new sharpening slider, which is odd because the 2018 port also didn't have it at launch, but after repeated requests from the players, they added it, only not to include it in this one. When you enable upscaling, it only shows the input res, not the output one, which is silly, especially since the first one had both.

Upscaling Quality

Speaking of overall image quality with upscaling enabled, all upscaling solutions are producing similar image quality with minor differences:

• As the game is using the latest version of FSR, the FSR 3.1 implementation in God of War Ragnarök is one of the least problematic FSR implementations in terms of image clarity and stability, compared to what we usually see from FSR. The visibility of disocclusion artifacts around Kratos and enemies is pretty low and not very distracting, even during intense combat. The overall image is stable and free of any ghosting artifacts, the typical shimmering of vegetation is not present as well, even at low resolutions such as 1080p. However, there is one aspect of the FSR 3.1 image that still has a noticeable flaw—it's the quality of particle effects. This quality loss is especially visible on fire, waterfalls and water effects in general. Water in particular in some instances has a very shimmery and pixelated look in motion, which might be distracting for some people when traversing through rivers on a boat.
• The XeSS 1.3 implementation in its DP4a mode is also one of the best XeSS implementations we've seen recently. It is free of ghosting, shimmering or disocclusion artifacts, producing a very stable and detailed overall image. The quality of particle effects isn't degraded, and the water effects are stable when traversing through rivers. On the negative side, the XeSS image has a slightly softer look in comparison to FSR 3.1 or DLSS.
• The DLSS Super Resolution implementation is great as well, producing the most stable and perfectly clean image across all resolutions and quality modes compared to other available upscaling solutions. With DLAA enabled, the overall image quality improvement is even higher, offering the best graphical experience overall when compared to the native TAA solution, FSR 3.1, DLSS or XeSS.

 

[Kacho]

Damn. Lackluster result over its debut weekend. Quite the decline. Wonder what this means for TLOU2.

 

[Gaiff]

Damn. Lackluster result over its debut weekend. Quite the decline. Wonder what this means for TLOU2.

 

[Zathalus]

Damn. Lackluster result over its debut weekend. Quite the decline. Wonder what this means for TLOU2.

Probably a mix of the reception to the game not being as positive as the first one, PSN issues, and launching right next to FF16.

 

[SlimySnake]

Probably a mix of the reception to the game not being as positive as the first one, PSN issues, and launching right next to FF16.

I think its that and the fact that the demand for sony games is simply not there on steam. This is a game that sold 15 million on PS5 and cant even hit 40k concurrent on steam? Sony is supposed to be growing their fanbase on steam and the opposite seems to be happening. Aside from GoT, everything has failed to match GoW which released 2 and a half years ago.

Space Marine 2 did 250k concurrent players just this month. These numbers are amost 1/10th of that. Really embarrassing stuff from Sony's biggest game in years.

Maybe Sony will wake up one day and realize that whoring out your IP to a fanbase that doesnt give two shits about their games is probably not worth the millions they will lose as ps owners tune out and go PC next gen. Just like the MS fanbase did this gen. But these guys are all in, and i am sure they will come up with stats that show just how profitable Sony's pc venture has been.