Yes it's 99% an API, not hardware, thing. It reminds me the NoAF problem in some early PS4 games.
Digital Foundry Article Technical Discussion [2024]
- Thread starter Shifty Geezer
- Start date
definitely? You’re right, I guess I can’t say that.Definitely ?Imo you cant say that if you are not dev working on xsx/ps5 versions of this game
But We saw a similar issue with Hifi Rush. (Heck Oli covers it) Even ultra settings on PC exhibited the same issue. Its odd behaviour for PC.
It’s a different thing if you code for PC, but if you’re using XDK base and doing a multiplatform deployment, then it’s reasonable that there’s an issue here with the XDK and UE4 that they overlooked. This only ever appears to be an issue here with MS based titles being ported out to PS5. We didn’t know there was an issue until we started seeing ports.
Last edited:
I don't really consider ANY of these Xbox to PS5 ports being an issue or odd behavior at all.. outside of Pentiment's 120hz mode not being ready on Series X for the time the PS5 version launched. That's a legitimate unnecessary oversight IMO.
Outside of that.. the differences in these ports can simply be attributed to varying engine revisions and dev kits. You can't convince me that Series X couldn't run those shadows, or that draw distance with exactly the same performance... it's just simply the PS5 version having a newer codebase which has seen improvements since the years old Xbox versions of these games.
Yes, it looks bad on MS' part, as we know the usual suspects will run with their chosen narratives... but realistically minor improvements and additions should be expected when these older games come to new platforms. That should go both ways whenever it does happen.. regardless of first or third party.
Outside of that.. the differences in these ports can simply be attributed to varying engine revisions and dev kits. You can't convince me that Series X couldn't run those shadows, or that draw distance with exactly the same performance... it's just simply the PS5 version having a newer codebase which has seen improvements since the years old Xbox versions of these games.
Yes, it looks bad on MS' part, as we know the usual suspects will run with their chosen narratives... but realistically minor improvements and additions should be expected when these older games come to new platforms. That should go both ways whenever it does happen.. regardless of first or third party.
snc
Veteran
It makes sense but usualy what I would expect form devs focused on pc/xbox development is worse performence on ps5. Thats what we saw for example in MLB conversion for xsx. Also conversion from ps5 to pc is not always so smooth.
It shouldn't be though. If there's been improvements to an engine over the course of time, I'd expect any ports which are ported in the far future to take advantage of them.
Developers aren't creating these ports so that people can compare them side by side.. they're making them so more people can play their games and they make more money. Realistically they'll try to make parity with the other versions, or improvements over them.. because things that are improved have a better chance of selling more.
This is a very old game now for Xbox players.. it really shouldn't bother them that the PS5 version has some quite superficial improvements. If the game released day and date on both and the PS5 version had better performance or visuals.. then I'd be asking what the hell.
Not every dev studio will have the same resources, or timeframe to make a port either. The MLB games were day and date on Xbox and Playstation, so it could explain why less effort was put into the Series X version in comparison.
I dont think many people are seriously suggesting that these results are indicative of any inherent superiority of Playstation, just more bizarre that MS would let this happen at all with their own 1st party titles. In a time when they need to be getting every win possible, making better versions of their games on Playstation(to whatever minor degree) absolutely looks bad, and makes existing Xbox owners feel worse, many of whom who are not exactly thrilled that Playstation was getting these games at all in the first place. It is just further devaluing their own brand.
No, it's not a huge deal on its own, just in combination with everything Xbox is dealing with at the moment, it's a little depressing to see them stumbling over such basic things.
Doesn't that vary over whether the port is contemporaneous or years later? If launching close to lead platform, I expect the port to suffer. If launching years later, I expect the port (if handled with due care and not being just a rough cash-in) to benefit from years of engine and platform and game refinement.
davis.anthony
Veteran
You've got a great take here. Furthermore, a secondary takeaway, this is why you need channels like DF. Most of this would have slipped under the radar, the differences are so miniscule, it would have been extremely difficult for people to notice or care. Warriors are really squabbling over nothing here, visually there is just no way to play on each console separately and someone being able to tell which platform is running it. But in the eyes of purchasers, this will matter. With the developers being in the know now, and Phil and team, they have to put their best foot forward here in maximizing the console and fixing things up for the final release on a competing platform.
Johnny Awesome
Veteran
I agree. But it's also hilarious to hear DF say that things like "disrupts the flow of gameplay" when it comes to a game dropping 1 or 2 frames every 1000. I seriously doubt most users would even notice.
It's still a PR problem for MS though.
It's still a PR problem for MS though.
That's been the negative side effect of DF's coverage, as much good as they have done and do - they highlight lots of 'issues' that people suddenly care about that they would have never cared about or noticed had it not been pointed out to them by DF. The folks at DF are necessarily more sensitive and perceptive to issues than 99% of gamers, yet it now feels like a non-insignificant percent of vocal gamers online think they care about all this stuff, but wouldn't if somebody else wasn't telling them it was a problem to begin with.
And I do think this is worth pointing out, because it feels like these gamers are creating an atmosphere where issues of any kind are becoming less and less tolerated, disregarding the absurd complexities and difficulties of game development, and making mountains of molehills at times, contributing to the further trashing and unappreciation of the work of game developers.
And this is ignoring how much platform warriors abuse DF coverage for ammo. I'm talking about people doing it more innocently.
Again, no knock on DF, it's not their fault this happens, and their views are valid from their own perspective of course, but it's unfortunate many people seem to basically adopt the opinions of DF as their own rather than make up their own mind about it.
EDIT: Sorry, bit of an aside rant from the actual topic.
Johnny Awesome
Veteran
DF does a great job. Best in the business by far. Glad they keep devs on their toes, but forum warriors abuse their coverage. I'm always fine with the truth, even when that means MS got caught with their Sea of Thieves trousers down. They should know better by now. Not DF's fault.
MS dev: It's a super controversial thing to release our games on Sony hardware. How about we really piss off hardcore Xbox fans that have supported us for 23 years and make these PS versions better without patching the X versions to match?
MS PR: Go ahead. No one will even notice.
#!#! Sound of the social media sites exploding #!#!
MS dev: It's a super controversial thing to release our games on Sony hardware. How about we really piss off hardcore Xbox fans that have supported us for 23 years and make these PS versions better without patching the X versions to match?
MS PR: Go ahead. No one will even notice.
#!#! Sound of the social media sites exploding #!#!
Last edited:
vjPiedPiper
Newcomer
As a dev, the most recent version of my software will 99% of the time be the best.
Thats just how Dev works.
Release on platform A, wait 2 years, release on platform B, guess which version will be better?
wait 2 months, do an update to platform A, low behold all of a sudden platform A is better.
Thats how software development works.
In a perfect world MS would be making every PS5 title get a day and date update for the Xbox platform too,
but you know how much work that is!!! it's just unrealistic.
Thats just how Dev works.
Release on platform A, wait 2 years, release on platform B, guess which version will be better?
wait 2 months, do an update to platform A, low behold all of a sudden platform A is better.
Thats how software development works.
In a perfect world MS would be making every PS5 title get a day and date update for the Xbox platform too,
but you know how much work that is!!! it's just unrealistic.
arandomguy
Regular
If you go by public sentiment it feels more like 50/50 for Microsoft if not inverted.
vjPiedPiper
Newcomer
I reckon your right there.
My statement is probably only true for software up to a certain size / complexity.
Now this is very much personal opinion territory, but I think that beyond a certain complexity it becomes very difficult to increase overall quality of a software application.
However while games certainly complex, they dont have the feature creep / sprawl of modern OS's, or even Office for that matter.
Obviously adding significant new features and functionality always has the possibility to increase the number of bugs and slow down performance, and almost always does.
But simply porting an application, is less likely to have a performance slowdown - assuming of course the port is given the same due diligence with regards to testing that the original had.
0:00:00 Introduction
0:02:16 News 01: PS5 Pro to receive “ultra boost mode”
0:15:50 News 02: Ghost of Tsushima PC requirements announced
0:31:05 News 03: Kingdom Come: Deliverance 2 revealed
0:38:38 News 04: Avatar devs disclose game tech
1:00:17 News 05: Hands-on with GeForce Now G-Sync
1:09:56 News 06: Apple opens the emulator floodgates!
1:18:45 Supporter Q1: What does a more PC-like console look like? Would it be worthwhile?
1:28:25 Supporter Q2: How could a 5090 improve on today’s gaming experiences?
1:36:16 Supporter Q3: Why can’t Nvidia obtain an x86 license and create x86 CPUs?
1:40:38 Supporter Q4: Will The Last of Us Remastered get a PS5 Pro remaster?
1:42:32 Supporter Q5: What are your most anticipated PS5 Pro patches to existing games?
1:48:36 Supporter Q6: Will Sony release their exclusives on PC on the same day as PS5?
1:55:07 Supporter Q7: Can FSR 3.1 save this console generation’s image quality?
2:03:36 Supporter Q8: If DF released a console motherboard shirt, would Alex wear it?
A game dropping 2 FPS every 1000 frames could be a 50 MS frame-time Spike in a 60 FPS game every 16 Seconds. That would be awful user experience in my book and I would pan that game. In fact I have panned such games, as that is how dead space performs in PC.
We really do not complain about minor frame-rate drops that are GPU Limited in nature, those have smooth fall offs especially in a VRR setting. Rather we complain about frame-times spikes which are subjectively intrusive and VRR does nothing for.
Flappy Pannus
Veteran
As Alex already said it's more of the large frame time spikes that stand out to them and that's what differentiates spikes like from shader compilation vs. just GPU load, but I would argue even if they were in a 16ms window, it would still be awful on the majority of displays people actually own. I don't think you've done the math here.
Best-case scenario, even if it's just one missed 16ms window, what would be a visible drop every 16 seconds on a fixed refresh display. Or with 2, roughly every 8 seconds. VRR could save that if they're only 16ms sure, but there are a lot of fixed refresh rate displays out there. Thankfully the majority of '60fps' games do not perform like this, and the ones that do are correctly considered flawed.
Flappy Pannus
Veteran
I've tried the PC version of this which performs fine...except, it's UE4 by a small studio. So you guessed it - no shader precompilation + traversal stutter.
The traversal stutter is annoying but relatively brief enough, the shader stutter is the key culprit though - it will have rooms halt and skip when you enter them and just pan around. Jesus man.
They dropped a patch for Alone in the Dark 2024 recently, which includes a 'Shader preload' option in the settings.
Welp, I'll let the video and the description explain the results.
Oh man.
Now it's all beginning to make sense why some devs have posted "we DO preload shaders!" and their games are stuttering messes.... they're probably just doing this exact same bs
Similar threads
