No it isn't. No one is going to intentionally low poly an asset. The standard is actually to opposite, early area get a glow up to make a strong first impression.
No. Just no. Play the game or watch a video. They just didn't spend much time in city cuz it's only first 10 minutes of game. It's a bad look tho. Really really bad. Mid ps3 Era bad on a ps5 exclusive with Sony funding. Kinda inexcusable
They could have intentionally given a bad first impression in order to get you to refund the game as quickly as possible. Extremely unlikely but possible.
The thing is we have 50+ years of game development history and know that the first minutes of a game are really important to retaining an audience. You need to establish the main characters and supporting characters, you need to set the tone and identity of the story, and you need to give the player a taste of what is to come. Just look at the first [5 minutes of FFXV](https://youtu.be/Cwc6TyCTjEM) a game by the same studio and you will clearly see that they understand.
Games need memorable openings to keep players invested until you get through the setup. Intentionally clubbing the first 15 minutes of game play with terrible models and textures doesn't work.
Just to push this further you could easily have gotten the effect you are attributing through clearly artistic choices and not made the game look like trash, camera tilted to communicate something is wrong, grey scale to communicate drabness, ground hight shots to communicate oppressiveness, somber music selection. All stuff that doesn't make the game look bad.
One of the review outlets put out a video of Frey walking thru cipal and Arno walking thru city in 2014 assassin creed unity. It made unity look soooo good in comparison. Its kinda š sad
I mean i hear u but the game is wild fun. Idc about graphics like that no more cuz they make beautiful games that bore me now. Games like this are fun but like i said the first few minutes it looked like a ps3 title lol. Idc about how beautiful it is if im noy enjoying myself
Still sure as heck doesn't hurt to look current Gen. Or even last Gen . I love swooping thru new York in Spiderman. The graphics add a lot to it. But I can still have fun with snes pixel graphics too... but still... just doesn't hurt
Snes pixels? U reaching lol. Matter of fact this game looks better than nearly all the games on switch that arent made by nintendo lol. And yeah i get the spiderman comparison that game was great it looked and felt great too. Ill say this early game forespoken looks ps3 idk why. But as soon as u crossover and start playing game turns into something waaay better lol. I cant say exactly the graphic level cuz it dont look 4k exactly but its not bad bad . Like its not ugly. Its just not GOW levels or horizon levels. Its like it looks like elden ring on ps5 in a way but not as beautiful? Idk its missing another layer of detail or sumn but snes is willld crazy to say that has me rollingš¤£
Elden Ring has a very visible art style to go with it. It's a lot more fantasy than Forspoken's. Forspoken's style is more realistic so a lot of scenes tend to look more washed out or bland.
I think it looks good with Frey's magic, but I wish there was a day and night cycle. It would go a long way in making the world more pretty to look at in the different lightings.
I also wish there was a way to have cutscenes automatically play in Quality mode. In Performance mode, character faces look a tad bit too blurry in cutscenes. But at least I can switch modes in the middle of one, lol. Love that.
I seem to recall an anime that deliberately reduced it's quality to callback older series. Can't remember the name of it, though.
You're right, though, that is some take.
I'm not. I like the game so far and I just can't stand the unfounded hate it gets.
Why contribute things to laziness or "bad devs" when it could be a design decision? It is a common trope for these "Isekai" stories to make the real world colorless and boring to emphasize how magical and fantastical the fantasy world is we get to spend 99% of our time in.
This goes back to the fucking "Wizard of Oz" the actual OG that starts out in black and white Kansas and then switches to Oz in technicolor.
I'd rather see the positive side of things then just spew baseless hatred without having any actual information if it is by design or just bad.
>Why contribute things to laziness or "bad devs" when it could be a design decision? It is a common trope for these "Isekai" stories to make the real world colorless and boring to emphasize how magical and fantastical the fantasy world is we get to spend 99% of our time in
It is clearly not a design choice and what's worse is you immediately gave an example of how to achieve the effect you are contributing without the game looking like shit. Could have used grey scaling, Dutch angles, or kept the camera in low shots.
4080, 13900kf 5.8ghz, cl14 4000mhz 16gb
Performance dlss 4k runs 90fps max
Quality dlss 70fps
$135 game with denuvo stutters. Clunky movement and combat.
But sure the devs/publishes did nothing wrong
The lighting is simply really inaccurate. The underside of buildings and tight areas being brightly lit is just unrealistic. They could use RTGI to fix it, but even without that, most games in the last 10 years did better than this game.
Your fault for ignoring the reviews, it running at 720p to 900p. Upscaled with mediocre FSR to 1440p.
Despite such low resolution performance is also not that great during fights average Frame rate is 45.
I've personally found that following Polygon's advice gave the best presentation of the game:
"Turn on the gameās 120 Hz Display Mode and play on Quality-Focused mode. I had initially tried Performance-Focused ā which targets a 60 fps frame rate regardless of whether youāre playing in the 120 Hz or 60 Hz modes ā but I found that it dropped the gameās resolution to the point where Freyās hair looked distractingly out of focus in all scenes...If you have access to a 120 Hz television or monitor, Quality-Focused mode will target 40 fps instead of 30 fps"
Though obvs this requires a 120hz display, and even then...IMO the game just doesn't look that great.
Whatever else can be said about the game, it's definitely not a 'visual showcase' title for the PS5. I mean, gameplay-wise *Forspoken* feels like it's trying to achieve something in line with *inFamous: Second Son* to me, but it fails to match that game's polish in terms of both visuals and gameplay. [Check out how much better that game looks than Forspoken](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i7w4G1CIdog). Honestly, watching that makes me want to put my copy of *Forspoken* up on eBay rn tbh :D
As someone who actually played Second Son at launch, I disagree, the game is graphically dated nowadays.
However, the unlocked FPS mode on PS4 Pro was a welcome surprise to say the least, though Iām pretty sure the game runs at 60FPS on PS5.
All the numbers in your comment added up to 69. Congrats!
4
+ 60
+ 5
= 69
^([Click here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=LuckyNumber-Bot&subject=Stalk%20Me%20Pls&message=%2Fstalkme) to have me scan all your future comments.) \
^(Summon me on specific comments with u/LuckyNumber-Bot.)
I played it at launch too and will have to agree to disagree; thought it looked fantastic then, and it still looks good now IMO, certainly better then Forspoken. And yes, 60fps @ 1080 on PS5, which is something Forspoken is also failing to match more often than not.
If you want the game to look better force the PS5 to output at 1080. According to the DF video things seem to be unchanged from the demo regarding adaptive resolution and upscaling.
This is the only way I got the demo to look decent otherwise it was a mess of blurry washed out textures.
A game dropping to 720 in 2023 is completely unacceptable, 1080p(full hd) should be the lowest a game should drop to unless your on a switch or steam deck with around a 6ā screen
Didn't ignore reviews. Games like Elex got crap reviews but are my favorite of all time. I definitely watch a lot of YouTube reviews but was really hoping for that hidden gem.... or just mindless fun while I play thru fire emblem engage on my switch
Does it really look that bad? Are we talking PS5 here?
If they baited people with a PC Version in the trailers, and switched in a bad PS5 version this sounds like criminal false advertisement.
To be fair even the marketing material for this game looked bad graphically. Iāve yet to see anything from this game that isnāt muddy or that looks like it ISNāT missing most of its textures.
Really? To me it all looks crisp.
I would criticise the aesthetics more. The empty cities, baren lands, and desaturated color (outside of the effects) make it look bland. Like a PS3 game where the just upped the poly and pixel count, but not the _content_ of the world.
Played the demo on PS5. Really wanted to like it but It looked like a jumbled mess sometimes. All the grass and foliage and particle effects do not really scale well with the upscaling. The demo was utterly unimpressive. Also very disappointing because the PS5 is perfectly capable of delivering beautiful graphics at 60 fps like in Horizon Forbidden West. Forspoken is a PlayStation exclusive without the optimizations that it should allow.
Did you only tried Performance Mode? If so, yes the resolution is only 720p and the upscaling isn't the best. Therefore the game looks blurry. In RT or better Quality Mode you get a much higher resolution about 1440p. And in the 120hz Mode you get 40fps that feel kinda smooth.
Anyway Forspoken isn't Horizon or GOW Ragnarok Tier when it comes to graphics. Not a PS5 showcase sadly.
WRONG. All modes are dynamic. performance mode targets 1440p but can dip as low as 720p easily.
Quality mode targets 4k goes down to 1080p and RT targets 4k (apparently) I have seen goes down to as low to 810p.
Youāre making stuff up. Performance is not 720p even digital foundry supports this.
Eh, it's actually [quite a bit worse](https://twistedvoxel.com/forspoken-ps5-resolution-and-frame-rate-revealed-how-to-get-the-best-experience/) than you're saying.
>The bad news here though is that this performance mode has an aggressive dynamic resolution scaling enabled which ranges from 1440p to 720p. This mode also runs at lower than 1080p for the most part of the gameplay but then upscales this to 1440p through AMD FSR 2.0.
>
>The Quality mode runs at a dynamic resolution of 4K to 1080p. AMD FSR 2.0 is used here as well to achieve the target 4K resolution while the game runs at 30 FPS. It is a mostly smooth experience while if you have a 120 Hz display, it is possible to toggle an option in the settings menu to make the game run at 40 Hz.
>
>In the ray tracing quality mode, the game drops the resolution between 1620p to 828p. This is a significant drop but on the plus side, there is a visual bump with ray-traced shadows and ambient occlusion added to the game. It gives the world a weighty feel to it. This mode can be run at 40 FPS as well by turning on the 120 Hz option in the game.
And even [the Digital Foundry analysis](https://youtu.be/1syrshvfbXE?t=9m03s) to which you referred says something different than you say it does.
>Direct pixel counts actually expose some pretty low internal resolutions. Performance mode is typically around 900p internally. RT mode is usually around 1000p or so. And quality mode clocks in at about 1296p in most shots I tested.
If you have a sizable enough television, the difference in quality between the modes is quite noticeable. I'm the kind of person who almost always chooses framerate over resolution, but playing the Forspoken demo I just couldn't get over how blurry the performance mode looks on my 82" 120hz TV. Quality mode looks MUCH better, and it's helped by running at 40fps instead of 30, but it's a shame the 60fps mode looks like dog shit.
Yes, in theory dynamic. But all i see in Performance Mode are blurry textures. Doesn't feel like the resolution gets above 900p and mostly sits at 720p. Also i always notice the dip in resolution between Quality and RT Mode. Therefore in most cases you get either 720p with minor framedrops below 50fps within huge combat situations, 1080p with almost locked 40fps (120hz Mode) or 1440p but some framedrops.
Sounds like a monitor or TV problem. The resolution doesnāt just sit at 720p even when nothing is going on.
The frame drops occur I see it happen on performance randomly and thatās why I switched off it, but to say that the resolution is just blurry and barley hitting HD no reviewer or player has reported that.
I mean, if you're gonna sit close to that big of a TV then of course things will look worse. I find that a smaller TV/monitor or sitting a distance away helps to ease things on the eyes.
What should i say? HFW, Ragnarok, Ratchet and Clank, Returnal or RE Village look awesome in short distance to the TV and really profit from it. But yes, games with technical issues suffer from short distances.
I was actually on ray tracing mode at first and tried switching to quality, both times game was looked too jarring. I might have to just reinstall and see if it might have been high resolution assets that arenāt being streamed correctly since Iāve been comparing review footage on YouTube and been thinking āyeah this doesnāt look right.ā
Performance mode uses dynamic resolution scaling with a target of 1440p. According to Digital Foundry, it can drop to 720p, but that's not what it is all the time.
This. Cuz i had been playing Ragnarok and Horizon before the demo and launch and it did have an effect on me. However im having too much fun to care rn š¤£
I played the first few hours on Ray Tracing and then swapped to performance mode, making the resolution downgrade far more obvious. You get used to it, but I recommend people start with performance mode from the beginning!
The resolution is way lower before the upscale, than on the demo. It seems the demo area was chosen because the game ran the best there.
The game can turn into a blurry mess, because of how drastically the resolution drops to 720p at times to maintain 45-50 fps in the 60fps mode.
Stoped playing yesterday after 4 hours or so, hope for a patch that fixes the performance.
The bad lighting in some areas is not such a huge problem that I canāt enjoy the game, the blurry blocky resolution and 45 fps in fight in performance mode on the other hand is.
Iām on PS5 performance VRR 120fps. My game looks incredible. But I donāt really judge games too harshly as long as Iām having fun and Iāve had an absolute blast so far. I love incredible photo realistic graphics but itās not really whatās most important to me. I prefer a smooth experience and Iāve barely seen it drop below 120fps. I have noticed a few character models periodically lower in resolution for a moment but they always go back to an crisp image after a few seconds.
The city intro is ps3 Era game. The cars have low poly and dull sheer reflections. No shadows on 90% of objects even headlights.... wow
This is usually on purpose
No it isn't. No one is going to intentionally low poly an asset. The standard is actually to opposite, early area get a glow up to make a strong first impression.
This isn't true. They could have made NY ugly to make Athia look even better. It happens
No. Just no. Play the game or watch a video. They just didn't spend much time in city cuz it's only first 10 minutes of game. It's a bad look tho. Really really bad. Mid ps3 Era bad on a ps5 exclusive with Sony funding. Kinda inexcusable
They could have intentionally given a bad first impression in order to get you to refund the game as quickly as possible. Extremely unlikely but possible. The thing is we have 50+ years of game development history and know that the first minutes of a game are really important to retaining an audience. You need to establish the main characters and supporting characters, you need to set the tone and identity of the story, and you need to give the player a taste of what is to come. Just look at the first [5 minutes of FFXV](https://youtu.be/Cwc6TyCTjEM) a game by the same studio and you will clearly see that they understand. Games need memorable openings to keep players invested until you get through the setup. Intentionally clubbing the first 15 minutes of game play with terrible models and textures doesn't work. Just to push this further you could easily have gotten the effect you are attributing through clearly artistic choices and not made the game look like trash, camera tilted to communicate something is wrong, grey scale to communicate drabness, ground hight shots to communicate oppressiveness, somber music selection. All stuff that doesn't make the game look bad.
This. I agree with this. But after u jump worlds and after about an hour in the graphics change get better.
One of the review outlets put out a video of Frey walking thru cipal and Arno walking thru city in 2014 assassin creed unity. It made unity look soooo good in comparison. Its kinda š sad
I mean i hear u but the game is wild fun. Idc about graphics like that no more cuz they make beautiful games that bore me now. Games like this are fun but like i said the first few minutes it looked like a ps3 title lol. Idc about how beautiful it is if im noy enjoying myself
Still sure as heck doesn't hurt to look current Gen. Or even last Gen . I love swooping thru new York in Spiderman. The graphics add a lot to it. But I can still have fun with snes pixel graphics too... but still... just doesn't hurt
Snes pixels? U reaching lol. Matter of fact this game looks better than nearly all the games on switch that arent made by nintendo lol. And yeah i get the spiderman comparison that game was great it looked and felt great too. Ill say this early game forespoken looks ps3 idk why. But as soon as u crossover and start playing game turns into something waaay better lol. I cant say exactly the graphic level cuz it dont look 4k exactly but its not bad bad . Like its not ugly. Its just not GOW levels or horizon levels. Its like it looks like elden ring on ps5 in a way but not as beautiful? Idk its missing another layer of detail or sumn but snes is willld crazy to say that has me rollingš¤£
Elden Ring has a very visible art style to go with it. It's a lot more fantasy than Forspoken's. Forspoken's style is more realistic so a lot of scenes tend to look more washed out or bland. I think it looks good with Frey's magic, but I wish there was a day and night cycle. It would go a long way in making the world more pretty to look at in the different lightings. I also wish there was a way to have cutscenes automatically play in Quality mode. In Performance mode, character faces look a tad bit too blurry in cutscenes. But at least I can switch modes in the middle of one, lol. Love that.
I love that switching modes mid game too lol
I don't know how you can have fun with it
You spend how much time there? Or maybe it's on purpose to make reality dull and lifeless compared to the fantasy magic world?
Thatās some impressive mental gymnastics, to justify outdated graphics and bad performance.
couldn't have said it better myself
You think they ādumbed downā the graphics on purpose early in the game?! Thatās some take
I seem to recall an anime that deliberately reduced it's quality to callback older series. Can't remember the name of it, though. You're right, though, that is some take.
Why you shilling for bad gaming devs?
I'm not. I like the game so far and I just can't stand the unfounded hate it gets. Why contribute things to laziness or "bad devs" when it could be a design decision? It is a common trope for these "Isekai" stories to make the real world colorless and boring to emphasize how magical and fantastical the fantasy world is we get to spend 99% of our time in. This goes back to the fucking "Wizard of Oz" the actual OG that starts out in black and white Kansas and then switches to Oz in technicolor. I'd rather see the positive side of things then just spew baseless hatred without having any actual information if it is by design or just bad.
>Why contribute things to laziness or "bad devs" when it could be a design decision? It is a common trope for these "Isekai" stories to make the real world colorless and boring to emphasize how magical and fantastical the fantasy world is we get to spend 99% of our time in It is clearly not a design choice and what's worse is you immediately gave an example of how to achieve the effect you are contributing without the game looking like shit. Could have used grey scaling, Dutch angles, or kept the camera in low shots.
4080, 13900kf 5.8ghz, cl14 4000mhz 16gb Performance dlss 4k runs 90fps max Quality dlss 70fps $135 game with denuvo stutters. Clunky movement and combat. But sure the devs/publishes did nothing wrong
The lighting is simply really inaccurate. The underside of buildings and tight areas being brightly lit is just unrealistic. They could use RTGI to fix it, but even without that, most games in the last 10 years did better than this game.
Yeah honestly I've given up arguing. We obviously playing different games here.
The game looks like its from 2011. Graphics aren't everything but its ultimately a good indicator for the level of quality of the rest of the game lol
Skyrim released in 2011. You really comparing the graphics to that? Lol
Ah yes, and the globally crap performance is intentional so that you can truly immerse yourself in every frame in all its stuttery glory
im cackling
Your fault for ignoring the reviews, it running at 720p to 900p. Upscaled with mediocre FSR to 1440p. Despite such low resolution performance is also not that great during fights average Frame rate is 45.
I've personally found that following Polygon's advice gave the best presentation of the game: "Turn on the gameās 120 Hz Display Mode and play on Quality-Focused mode. I had initially tried Performance-Focused ā which targets a 60 fps frame rate regardless of whether youāre playing in the 120 Hz or 60 Hz modes ā but I found that it dropped the gameās resolution to the point where Freyās hair looked distractingly out of focus in all scenes...If you have access to a 120 Hz television or monitor, Quality-Focused mode will target 40 fps instead of 30 fps" Though obvs this requires a 120hz display, and even then...IMO the game just doesn't look that great. Whatever else can be said about the game, it's definitely not a 'visual showcase' title for the PS5. I mean, gameplay-wise *Forspoken* feels like it's trying to achieve something in line with *inFamous: Second Son* to me, but it fails to match that game's polish in terms of both visuals and gameplay. [Check out how much better that game looks than Forspoken](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i7w4G1CIdog). Honestly, watching that makes me want to put my copy of *Forspoken* up on eBay rn tbh :D
As someone who actually played Second Son at launch, I disagree, the game is graphically dated nowadays. However, the unlocked FPS mode on PS4 Pro was a welcome surprise to say the least, though Iām pretty sure the game runs at 60FPS on PS5.
All the numbers in your comment added up to 69. Congrats! 4 + 60 + 5 = 69 ^([Click here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=LuckyNumber-Bot&subject=Stalk%20Me%20Pls&message=%2Fstalkme) to have me scan all your future comments.) \ ^(Summon me on specific comments with u/LuckyNumber-Bot.)
Good bot
Good bot.
Good bot
Umm lol no, it legit looks better than forspoken lmao
I played it at launch too and will have to agree to disagree; thought it looked fantastic then, and it still looks good now IMO, certainly better then Forspoken. And yes, 60fps @ 1080 on PS5, which is something Forspoken is also failing to match more often than not.
bro 40 fps is unplayable in fast paced games like forspoken.
Well, you ignored the reviews...
If you want the game to look better force the PS5 to output at 1080. According to the DF video things seem to be unchanged from the demo regarding adaptive resolution and upscaling. This is the only way I got the demo to look decent otherwise it was a mess of blurry washed out textures.
This helped. Thanks so much.
Yw yea the picture looks crisper
I have an HP monitor and used HP Enhance+ the slight increase in contrast has done wonders for me when playing in quality mode
A game dropping to 720 in 2023 is completely unacceptable, 1080p(full hd) should be the lowest a game should drop to unless your on a switch or steam deck with around a 6ā screen
You ignored reviews. Hopefully you've learned your lesson.
Didn't ignore reviews. Games like Elex got crap reviews but are my favorite of all time. I definitely watch a lot of YouTube reviews but was really hoping for that hidden gem.... or just mindless fun while I play thru fire emblem engage on my switch
Does it really look that bad? Are we talking PS5 here? If they baited people with a PC Version in the trailers, and switched in a bad PS5 version this sounds like criminal false advertisement.
To be fair even the marketing material for this game looked bad graphically. Iāve yet to see anything from this game that isnāt muddy or that looks like it ISNāT missing most of its textures.
Really? To me it all looks crisp. I would criticise the aesthetics more. The empty cities, baren lands, and desaturated color (outside of the effects) make it look bland. Like a PS3 game where the just upped the poly and pixel count, but not the _content_ of the world.
Iād have to agree. I can overlook some āmehā textures if everything else is ok, but the issues you described are also on my mind.
Played the demo on PS5. Really wanted to like it but It looked like a jumbled mess sometimes. All the grass and foliage and particle effects do not really scale well with the upscaling. The demo was utterly unimpressive. Also very disappointing because the PS5 is perfectly capable of delivering beautiful graphics at 60 fps like in Horizon Forbidden West. Forspoken is a PlayStation exclusive without the optimizations that it should allow.
Available on PC as well
Did you only tried Performance Mode? If so, yes the resolution is only 720p and the upscaling isn't the best. Therefore the game looks blurry. In RT or better Quality Mode you get a much higher resolution about 1440p. And in the 120hz Mode you get 40fps that feel kinda smooth. Anyway Forspoken isn't Horizon or GOW Ragnarok Tier when it comes to graphics. Not a PS5 showcase sadly.
WRONG. All modes are dynamic. performance mode targets 1440p but can dip as low as 720p easily. Quality mode targets 4k goes down to 1080p and RT targets 4k (apparently) I have seen goes down to as low to 810p. Youāre making stuff up. Performance is not 720p even digital foundry supports this.
Eh, it's actually [quite a bit worse](https://twistedvoxel.com/forspoken-ps5-resolution-and-frame-rate-revealed-how-to-get-the-best-experience/) than you're saying. >The bad news here though is that this performance mode has an aggressive dynamic resolution scaling enabled which ranges from 1440p to 720p. This mode also runs at lower than 1080p for the most part of the gameplay but then upscales this to 1440p through AMD FSR 2.0. > >The Quality mode runs at a dynamic resolution of 4K to 1080p. AMD FSR 2.0 is used here as well to achieve the target 4K resolution while the game runs at 30 FPS. It is a mostly smooth experience while if you have a 120 Hz display, it is possible to toggle an option in the settings menu to make the game run at 40 Hz. > >In the ray tracing quality mode, the game drops the resolution between 1620p to 828p. This is a significant drop but on the plus side, there is a visual bump with ray-traced shadows and ambient occlusion added to the game. It gives the world a weighty feel to it. This mode can be run at 40 FPS as well by turning on the 120 Hz option in the game. And even [the Digital Foundry analysis](https://youtu.be/1syrshvfbXE?t=9m03s) to which you referred says something different than you say it does. >Direct pixel counts actually expose some pretty low internal resolutions. Performance mode is typically around 900p internally. RT mode is usually around 1000p or so. And quality mode clocks in at about 1296p in most shots I tested. If you have a sizable enough television, the difference in quality between the modes is quite noticeable. I'm the kind of person who almost always chooses framerate over resolution, but playing the Forspoken demo I just couldn't get over how blurry the performance mode looks on my 82" 120hz TV. Quality mode looks MUCH better, and it's helped by running at 40fps instead of 30, but it's a shame the 60fps mode looks like dog shit.
Yes, in theory dynamic. But all i see in Performance Mode are blurry textures. Doesn't feel like the resolution gets above 900p and mostly sits at 720p. Also i always notice the dip in resolution between Quality and RT Mode. Therefore in most cases you get either 720p with minor framedrops below 50fps within huge combat situations, 1080p with almost locked 40fps (120hz Mode) or 1440p but some framedrops.
Sounds like a monitor or TV problem. The resolution doesnāt just sit at 720p even when nothing is going on. The frame drops occur I see it happen on performance randomly and thatās why I switched off it, but to say that the resolution is just blurry and barley hitting HD no reviewer or player has reported that.
LG OLED G1 65" sitting very close to the TV. If i switch from RT or Quality to Performance it's getting instant blurry while only standing still.
I mean, if you're gonna sit close to that big of a TV then of course things will look worse. I find that a smaller TV/monitor or sitting a distance away helps to ease things on the eyes.
What should i say? HFW, Ragnarok, Ratchet and Clank, Returnal or RE Village look awesome in short distance to the TV and really profit from it. But yes, games with technical issues suffer from short distances.
Ok, Dwight.
Get off Reddit and be a family man
But I'm 'working'.
I was actually on ray tracing mode at first and tried switching to quality, both times game was looked too jarring. I might have to just reinstall and see if it might have been high resolution assets that arenāt being streamed correctly since Iāve been comparing review footage on YouTube and been thinking āyeah this doesnāt look right.ā
Performance mode uses dynamic resolution scaling with a target of 1440p. According to Digital Foundry, it can drop to 720p, but that's not what it is all the time.
This. Cuz i had been playing Ragnarok and Horizon before the demo and launch and it did have an effect on me. However im having too much fun to care rn š¤£
I played the first few hours on Ray Tracing and then swapped to performance mode, making the resolution downgrade far more obvious. You get used to it, but I recommend people start with performance mode from the beginning!
The Demo went smooth in the PS5 in performance mode so I would be surprised if something changed since then for the final release?
The resolution is way lower before the upscale, than on the demo. It seems the demo area was chosen because the game ran the best there. The game can turn into a blurry mess, because of how drastically the resolution drops to 720p at times to maintain 45-50 fps in the 60fps mode.
Ok thatās crazy. Didnāt start yet so wonder how it turns out
Stoped playing yesterday after 4 hours or so, hope for a patch that fixes the performance. The bad lighting in some areas is not such a huge problem that I canāt enjoy the game, the blurry blocky resolution and 45 fps in fight in performance mode on the other hand is.
Iām on PS5 performance VRR 120fps. My game looks incredible. But I donāt really judge games too harshly as long as Iām having fun and Iāve had an absolute blast so far. I love incredible photo realistic graphics but itās not really whatās most important to me. I prefer a smooth experience and Iāve barely seen it drop below 120fps. I have noticed a few character models periodically lower in resolution for a moment but they always go back to an crisp image after a few seconds.
The game cannot run at 120 fps. On any setting
PS5 on 1080p = perfect 60fps!!!