Well as someone who has played the PC version, I can immediately tell that this game is probably running on Medium or possibly even Low. There’s fewer confetti particles, the explosion is less detailed, the fur doesn’t look as real and the lighting isn’t as good. Not to mention that it’s running non-native resolution/no DLSS cause you can clearly see the ailiasing. That said, it looks great for a $500 machine. My PC was over $4K cause I just had to have a 4090 (after I saw how disappointing the rest of the RTX 4000 lineup was. I usually only buy midrange GPUs).
Tbf, the PS5 version of the game has two modes; performance and graphics. You can have it look really good and get raytracing features but play at 30fps or reduce some of those settings and play at 60+ (I think this one goes to 120 if you have a capable display).
But even on Performance, it has been the best looking game I have ever played, and I tend to keep up with the latest and greatest.
Yeah that’s what I’m saying. Furthermore, if you want a high framerate (120+ FPS) and no-compromise ray tracing, you’re going to have to spend way more than $500. The PS5 is an extremely good value for what you get.
Build on that. Boot to that os or emulator when you start up PC. Basically stop running anything else while gaming. Doesn’t seem to difficult to do on the future.
Especially when Xbox runs an emulator to run old games.
Honestly it’s probably the best idea going forward. Once you build a game for a single os or emulator. Then you can just port the emulator over in to everything. Hopefully means optimisation would be far better. Don’t need to run 4 or 5 different things. Just one and make it run on Nintendo Microsoft PC and PlayStation
An emulator has a performance overhead. Even a simple translation layer like valve’s proton has an overhead. The fact that most games are simply unoptimized and windows is so bloated means that the additional overhead of proton is not a performance bottleneck. But if one has a good hardware and a good dedicated OS, emulator is not really necessary, which is good for performances
To answer everyone: haveing a single piece of hardware to develop does help, absolutely. But the answer is simply… money.
Sony pays to have have games like R&C or Uncharted made. These games wouldn’t be profitable for the studio to make, with the level of detail and polish, but they get $60 million (example number, definitely varies) from Sonyand now the studio is in the green.
That’s it’s. Console hardware is more PC than ever, having x86 AMD CPUs that aren’t that different from ones other OEM could just order. These is no secret sauce, they aren’t some crazy in-house developed flop or some weird also-ran processor like PS3 and 360.
I don't think they're necessarily wrong but I'd love a nice ELI5 answer that's not just "there's one kind of hardware and the developers try really hard to make it run good"
They're targeting known hardware. They can optimise right down to the specific card in use. They don't need to consider hardware that doesn't support these optimisations.
They only have to target a single hardware configuration, the os has much less overhead than a typical desktop os, a graphics api that runs closer to the metal (also why the ps5 outperforms the more powerful series x) and some good development tools all go a long way to boosting the performance of the hardware.
I have an r5 3600 with an rtx 2070 and would not be surprised if the ps5 performs better with multiplatform titles.
It’s a little easier when the machine is dedicated to that and only that. The OS doesn’t have all this extra crap running in the background that takes resources from the game because it was designed for that in mind.
That and devs have just one machine to design their game for versus trying to make their game run on hundreds of machines with very different specs.
Some devs, especially first party devs who work closely with or directly for the manufacturer also have insider knowledge of the system they’re developing the game for. The Crash developers did this in the PlayStation 1 era by tapping into resources that other games weren’t using to push out even more performance from the hardware.
I doubt windows either has or wants to have that functionality, given their more business/general purpose oriented focus, also the steam deck runs on Linux.
A part of me wonders if it would be possible to put the Linux distro/is of a steam deck onto a dedicated gaming computer to get some of the optimisations from it like that.
It’s a little easier when the machine is dedicated to that and only that. The OS doesn’t have all this extra crap running in the background that takes resources from the game because it was designed for that in mind.
At best you’re looking at a 10% performance penalty, closer to the 1-3% range without known bad background software.
I not a dev or anything. But my understanding is that it all comes down to leveraging all the capabilities of 1 single hardware configuration. You can tune and optimize your code to extract every bit of performance out of the consoles hardware because the hardware (and software too I guess) doesn’t change. PC games are much MUCH harder to optimize. Users can have a near limitless variety of hardware, driver, and OS combinations that prevent such a high level of optimization.
I think this is the main bit of it. Just look at the Baldur’s Gate drama on the Xbox because there are two configurations and one of them is less capable.
Or if you just actually take the time to have your programmers optimize the game, knowing the hardware is nice but sooooo much of modern games are just generally unoptimized.
Add comment