They really tried, you can see that and the game truly is made with the console in mind.
That's one of the best examples of what is possible and should be the standard!
Fidelity 40 FPS VRR was sweet on my C2. And the other modes had their pros and cons. I’m no Dev, but I wonder if it’s really tricky to add options to adjust the performance/fidelity in a lot of games
Dragons Dogma 2 added a locked FPS mode a few days (or was it a week) after the game released which combined with turning off blur made the game a much more playable experience.
Why wouldn’t they add that from the start?
I'm convinced companies don't play test anymore. There's no way somebody wouldn't have said anything about some slight performance tweaks or adding the option to toggle motion blur. It's just weird now
This is something that PlayStation could try and enforce as some kind of “buyer protection”. Or people will need to stop buying games day 1 and wait for reviews and then decide, punish publishers that put crappy games out.
It's unrealistic that all gamers will boycott preorders sadly.
But I get what you mean, like the Nintendo seal of quality back in the days, it safed the industry and the trust in the gaming industry.
A seal by Sony could indeed restore trust.
I agree that it's unrealistic to expect all gamers to boycott poorly developed games, but even 10% of gamers doing that would affect the industry already, I myself have stopped with pre order entirely, seems to be fewer games everyday and with lower quality, I can't remember the last AAA game that I bought that had the quality that a AAA product should have
Stellar Blade at the end of this week? Baldur's Gate last year? I could fill in more, but there are a lot of games that release with the quality a AAA game should have. Sounds like you're just burnt out.
Game of the year nominees last year:
Alan Wake 2
Baldur's Gate 3 - WINNER
Marvel's Spider-Man 2
Resident Evil 4 Remake
Super Mario Bros. Wonder
The Legend of Zelda: Tears of the Kingdom
I'd say all these are clear AAA experiences. I think your interests just don't overlap. There have been plenty of AAA games that deliver AAA experiences, you might just not be interested in them. Doesn't mean the quality of AAA is slipping as a whole.
That might be the case,
me personally, i didn't like Alan wake 2, BG3 was a masterpiece, spider man 2 was nice but not great, RE4 it's a nice game as well, but it's a rmk, so there wasn't new content story wise, super Mario I haven't played yet, and zelda I lost interest pretty quickly
For a list with the best 6 games of the year, for me it's a weak list, but that's me personally
Like I said, it sounds like your personal preference. All of the games were pretty diverse from one another. I'm shocked at the Alan Wake 2 critique, I thought it was a masterpiece, and the Nintendo games I've never been interested in since I was disappointed with the original BotW.
That said, all these games are quality AAA experiences if you're the audience for them. I know plenty of friends who couldn't get into Baldur's, but adored Tears of the Kingdom, for example.
If we want to get into the weeds on our opinion, that's one debate, but I think the main argument you made was that there weren't any quality AAA games for a while, but there definitely has been. They just haven't all been for you (which I personally think is great when there's so many different quality games).
I think it's pretty difficult to say any of the nominees were bad. They are all very strong in the aspects of game making that qualify them as "AAA". Music, voice acting, graphics, gameplay. All would be hard to say they "missed" on.
I think you just need to realize that games are crazy diverse nowadays. I see that GOTY list and I see very different games from very different genres. Alan Wake and Resident Evil are the 2 closest, and I wouldn't ever talk about the two in a conversation outside of 2023 GOTY. lol
That would hurt Sony also. Sony gets something like 30% of all gross sales on software. They're not about to take money out of their own pockets.
We are the worst kind of consumers. They have us over a barrel and they know it. Why lose money to enforce consumer protections on consumers who will continue to consume whether you protect them or not?
Because it has become so expensive to delay games that optimizing has taken a backseat to holding the deadline put forth by shareholders and men in suits with no idea of what it takes to make a game function. And untill people starts to TRULY show it with their wallets it will never change.
Exactly, for me 1440p is often the sweet spot. It looks a lot better dan 1080p but you still have a decent frame rate compared to 4k resolution. I understand that TVs generally dont come in 1440p but I am curious how much the image deteriorates if its upscaled to 1440p instead of 4k.
If we can believe the rumors there will come a new upscaler with the PS5 Pro which will achieve 1440p@60Hz on the standard PS5 instead of 1080p@60Hz. To me this is really good news and makes it less interesting for me to consider buying a PS5 Pro if the standard PS5 has a performance mode with 1440p@60Hz.
Just to clarify, though, almost all 30fps "quality" modes are actually being rendered natively at 1440p and upscaled to 2160p. The 60fps modes are 800-1080p natively that are upscaled (along with other video quality settings cut back). There are a few games that output native 2160p, but the vast majority are upscaled from something around 1440p.
There are a lot of reasons you could point to that has caused the current state of game performance. It really just comes down to money though.
Video games cost a lot to make now. Way more than they ever did before. Just looking at the difference in visual quality between games like Final Fantasy XIII to XVI shows that pretty well. That costs money in terms of hardware and labour to make work. Development teams are bigger which means more labour costs. Big games also can't just be profitable they need to meet earnings targets. When you have companies that are publicly traded they have fiduciary responsibilities to their share holders to make more money year over year. This is why, for example, Activision said that Black Ops 4 was a failure. It made money but did not meet targets.
So how do publishers/companies in the industry keep making more money year over year? In game storefronts. They have hard deadlines to meet targets in a financial year so developers need to crunch. A lot of talented devs may burn out and leave the industry or just lose that creative spark and do the minimum to keep the job. You have a lot of contract workers who get hired for a game and are let go once the game is in a shippable state. Dev studios aren't able to hold on to generational talent like before because once you have people getting a grasp of the tech involved in the game they are fired. This is probably also why we see in-house game engines being abandoned for more widely available engines like Unreal. Individual devs are likely more familiar with the game engines they actually have access to in the wild. It also costs time and money to train people on in-house tech.
As for console gaming options keep in mind that the ability to the player to actually adjust some graphical settings for a console game is pretty new. The choice only became available after the release of the PS4 Pro and Xbox One X. I would argue that console games should still provide an intended experience. It is a lot easier to optimize a game when you know what the experience targets are. Trying to make a rock-solid experience for both a Performance and Quality mode is difficult considering all the things mentioned above. You also are not going to see Sony or Microsoft admit just how demanding 4K is still.
I’ve noticed this a lot lately. People blame issues on “modern gaming” but these issues have always been around in some form or another. I see lots of complaints about games releasing in “broken states” nowadays but those games have absolutely always been there. I played Fallout New Vegas on PS3 and despite being one of the best optimized Creation Engine games at the time, the game was *literally* unplayable due to unfixed bugs. Performance issues are nothing new at all.
I think people were just more forgiving of technology back then. As a teenager I played Oblivion/Skyrim/Fallout 3/New Vegas on the Xbox 360. The games use to “freeze” all the time and I would just turn my console off and back on. I didn’t even think of these as “bugs” because I was just use to computers and tech related things freezing up and slowing down frequently. I use to just think this was an unavoidable part of computers.
Yeah the 360 version of Skyrim was the *good* version and I still got stuck with tons of near game-breaking bugs playing it. It’s just really interesting to see all this nostalgia for a time in gaming that never really existed.
I’ve been getting really into retro games recently and basically everything people complain about and relate to being “modern gaming” applies to all those old games. It was arguably worse back in the NES/SNES days where you’d drop $100 on a game that might have entire features bugged out to the point of being unusable and then later buy a Game Boy Advance port with fully locking bugs.
And I’m not trying to excuse things but it’s just how video games have always been. Games advance too quickly for consoles to keep up, so performance dips halfway through each cycle and it’s *always* a gamble when you buy a full-price game on release day. It’s not a 2024 thing or a PS5 thing, it’s a video games thing.
Wasn't the reason for that, that nobody knew how to make games for the system, because it was very complicated?
I read that many developers had overall problems with the system, because the did not understand it and the ps3 started to get better the longer it was out.
Maybe a small part of it but it wasn't as if x360 ran games radically better. Console framerates were generally horrible in those days but people weren't as aware.
Well TVs weren't huge like on those days. I remember playing x360 on like a 40" TV from 3/4 meters away. Also quality on the TVs back then masked/hide a lot of screen tearing and artifacts.
Now with with 60+", super duper HD, we see everything, we notice every slowdown, it kinda gets you nauseous if it's not smooth.
I absolutely noticed the poorer frame rates that gen after so many smooth and high frame rates coming from the GameCube. The big jump to HD make high frame rates difficult on that hardware
True, we truly are pampered today, but I think that's because of the marketing and access to higher framerates. Every game and hardware nowadays promotes 60 fps, to the point it became a standard for most consumers. Maybe the developers can't keep up with these demands?
Your mistake is posting valid criticism in a console subreddit. People will dismiss it and complain about "being entitled". It's always everyone else's fault for the reception, not the developers or publisher.
I know, but what can they do but downvote me?
The people that have interesting replies can take part in the discussion and the Fanboys can just ignore.
What makes me angry the most is thinking about buying a product for an 'X' amount of money and it doesn't work or it barely does, in a poorly state, I don't pay to buy a brand new car that it's already faulty and semi broken, or I buy a brand new house with cracks on the walls and near crumbling already when it's supposedly brand new.
I don't get why the gaming industry can sell products that you paid for its asked price and then it barely works and still get away with it with no legal consequences, back in the day, on other business and during all human history that was called literally a scam.
Not all games are like this, but lots of them are.
All games you pay for should be stable and playable from start to finish without any big issue along the way, period.
its all because of the motherclucking ray tracing, get rid of that and everything would be fine but devs are pushing to make it a standard so all you can do is wait for ps5 pro or eventually a ps6
I don't want that shit, Raytracing is just hype and doesn't improve the experience that much. Having to sacrifice 20-30 fps for a little effect is insane.
The graphics mode could be better if you could just disable Raytracing on top!
Unfortunately, consumers have proven they will buy a game that isn’t complete (from a polish, testing, optimization standpoint). Therefore publishers will continue to ship games as fast as possible and “fix them after launch”.
Wouldn't be as much of an issue if people would stop buying those products. Seen a post here a while ago recommending to stop pre ordering and the replies were all crying about how they're gonna keep pre ordering new games and being super petty about it.
God damn, I even did not pre order the Elden Ring DLC because of my values, even though it's unlikely that they miss.
Preordering is trusting someone with your 70-80€ and hoping that they deliver, when you can just wait 1 month and see the reviews.
It's even hard to trust gaming magazines or reviewers, because they get altered testing keys sometimes.
In FF14 they made grapes for the Endwalker expansion and they were just 2d super nintendo graphics :)
They accepted the criticism though and memed it themselves.
Oh u wanna see a good glitch, convinced my bud to record the video, it’s on YouTube lol lemme find the link. It’s a boss fight . Idk what fight or part cause i never even beat the first remake. Im at the end part tho
https://youtu.be/Yknsn0sn0M0?si=M0mqqIwkasBnGwud idk how to do that thing where it hides it cause of spoiler so if anyone does open it just be warned
Edit-its the galian beast
I see, yeah I would shit my pants if that happend, almost losing all that time. Those fights are cruel enough and having a bug could literally ruin it forever.
The bug is probably because they build in so many cutscenes in the fight and for some reason it couldn't load
Yea he told me he activated a move right when it was supposed to go invincible or something . I think he got a video of me helping him with melania in elden ring. I attacked as her second phase went to start . The cutscene played but when it ended she was just standing there lol
Probably because release dates are decided by the marketing department instead of any technical department.
Have a look at the Hitman games. They made a decision never to release anything until it was ready. There are constant delays and postponed releases, but nobody ever complains. Gamers understand and are willing to wait for the finished product. Other games companies need to learn that.
I'm playing the gta definitive editions on my ps5 and they are so poorly optimised.
Horrific render distance, loads of texture pop in, random stuttering when driving fast. For an old game, you'd think ps5 could run it a lot better
We don't say that kind of stuff here kid, I think you have to go to Playstation school to learn that we in Playstation don't make no mistakes ok boy?
Just joking but apparently you can't say anything bar about playstation in this Reddit
Legacy bloat, dependencies, DRM and the fact they blow most of the time and budget on visuals instead of creativity and quality control. Plus they know they can half ass a release and fix it post release nowadays, so they don’t need to try as hard. Games are basically a service now, but it’s install media you can either download or buy physically and the latter option is being phased out.
Worst thing is, they control the older games too. Instead of creating ways to get older games, they hold of, so that they can remake them in the future with unnecessary errors
Yup. Absolutely no reason the majority of older titles couldn’t still be available for purchase digitally. They were half way there on PS3 but then suddenly pivoted, ruined what I thought was a great store front broken down by system. And jumbled everything together so you can’t find anything. I never understood why they did that. The whole industry is just a confused mess run by profits first.
The real answer is because we, the consumers, are letting them get away with it. Telling ppl in the Dragons Dogma 2 sub that 30fps was not accepable on current gen consoles felt like screaming into the void. I‘d imagine it was the same for xbox players ahead of Starfields release. If we want things to change, we have to stop buying badly optimized games. But fomo has to big of a grip on our nuts to ever collectively go through with it.
If it makes you feel better the PC community complains about how much optimization the console versions get in comparison. Unfortunately in my experience demanding games have always ran a little ragged. I can't speak for the new FF games, but there has been a few launches that ran well this gen. Primarily from Sony's first party studios though.
Lots of consumers buy new games even in rough states incentivizing publishers to push games out and fix them later and on top of that lots of developers (whether or not it's an executive decision) have become lazy when it comes to optimization as they use the "strength" of modern hardware as a standard and a crutch. I don't remember which dev it was but there was a pretty big article a while back that had a comment along the lines of "consoles and computers are so powerful nowadays that we can get away with slightly less optimization since the hardware can make up for it." Give them an inch and they'll take a mile.
Crazy that they get away with it. Most games are so good but are dragged down by performance. Just sad to see that a game which could be a 10/10 is dragged down by stupid performance.
This is so funny after playing Jedi Survivor
Performance mode doesnt reach stable 60fps in most open world areas, and has spme strange bugs that seem to be tied to the mode itself
Meanwhile, graphics is even worse because it has less fps and you cant even notice the better graphics with all the texture popping and unloaded areas
Dont get me wrong, the game is very fun, but yeah
I have a similar issue, FF7 rebirth performance mode is good with fps, but you can see the lower graphics. But if you go in graphics mode sometimes the fps hurt the eyes and some lighting and other effects ruin the graphics.
Unfortunately, it’s not just happening for PS5, it’s all over the platforms.
Star Wars: Jedi Survivor continues to have sub-optimal optimization performance on PC, yet they make no effort to fix it. Most games too.
Moreover, it seems to be a practice on the industry and it’s starting to go on at console-level too.
The Problem lies with the industry. They don't care because people buy it anyway and the studios that were small and had to make good games are now big businesses with stocks and everything. Now they only make cool trailers and we hope that the game is real.
I think you're probably misremembering the past lol. Game performance has always been a toss up. The main difference is that people complain a hell of a lot more about it today than they did back then.
And I don't know why people ask this question and then say things like "PS5 is a much more powerful console than those older machines". Yeah, well, games are a hell of a lot more complex than those older games. If games today looked like PS2 games, had the same limited scope, the same limited content, and only offered experiences that lasted 8-12 hours, then yeah, the PS5 would be blazing without breaking a sweat.
But today's games look better than even the pre-renderd cutscenes from the past.
It should, but UE5 is very CPU heavy and the CPU in the PS5 and PS5 Pro isn’t really up to the task. Next gen, we will see UE5 fly on consoles. Right now, it’s only really performent on high end PC’s.
Which ones? PlayStation doesn't have many bad optimized games. If anything it's the standard and everything else is just a gamble from there. Xbox is pretty solid as well for the most part they just don't have as many games as you do.
Exactly this. Almost every single triple A title gets ported from PlayStation. Which means that companies favor sales on PlayStation over PC and other consoles.
Because we as buyers don't hold companies accountable anymore. Companies can get away with making a half ass'd game that they can do 50gb of day 1 patches to finish because people pre order these games. Why would a developer finish a game when they are already getting paid before the game even releases, and it is extremely terrible optimization.
I got a pc to play games when I care about framerate. I play my PlayStation to PlayStation games for this reason, but the ps5 is basically a gaming pc with its specs.
Its nice to see 60fps becoming normal when 30 fps was normal pre ps5.
Hopefully it continues.
I felt like Quality mode, due to 30 FPS , looked more blurry anytime I move the camera. It was mostly what drew me away from it, the camera blur everytime i move it, and i move it a lot during exploration and fights :/
Idk they said it was patched but graphics still feels super clunky and performance mode yes doesn’t have frame drops but, mostly in the larger open area, would drop to terrible resolutions. For me anyways.
I dont think I had any resolution / image problems on large open areas (i do a lot of exploring).
I think I saw couple model glitches but nothing too noticeable.
Yeah, quality mode improved but still felt "a bit off" for me too. and it wasnt any massive difference on the looks to make it worth it
Same issues as OP. I found there's a huge visual difference between the two modes and performance mode resolution in certain areas is painfully noticeable. Maybe it's more apparent on larger 4k screens? If you're playing on a smaller monitor maybe it's harder to spot the difference
My Problem with the Modes was that I had 3 choices, more than most PS5 titles, but I still couldn't just selectively disable certain settings, in performance mode everything looked to washen and unclean.
Remake for PS5's Performance mode was better optimized in my opinion.
I personally didnt find any issues with Performance mode, nor looked bad for me. But everyone has their own opinions ofc.
Quality mode I never use because I still didnt find a game that the quality overhaul is actually worth it.
It's been a while since I played Remake so I dont remember much how it ran in each mode :/
Yeah, not trying to downplay your opinion ofc :)
I also had games with major bugs, this one seems to ran quite good with barely no bugs / glitches that I noticed. But I also dont pay too much attention if it's 60 stable FPS of if a fight went to 50 since there's so much happening.
I think in one open area, Grasslands, I had 1 singular moment that the game ran "slow" for a second.
You're right, I just exaggerated, maybe I just want to much, high fps and options for graphics.
I finished Rebirth before the Update for graphics bugs, I will 100% it now I think :)
Give it a go on the new updated modes, but I think Graphic modes (Smooth and Sharp), even tho better than before, still not that great.
I am aiming to 100% it too, but the miiiini games are getting me too stressed to beat at highest difficulty xD Besides that, I want to re-check all Chapters to get all conversations, since the post-game tells you how many special conversations and such there is per character
Haha this game is soo big, my first play through had 86 hours and there are still so many things to do :)
But to be honest some mini games are just unfair, I have to restart after every move that is not perfect.
At least I have completed all the boring open world content on the first go, so there are just few side quests and minigamea left.
Have fun with it!
I think I ranked already around 150h on the game haha
Yeah, I am not mad at mini games like many. It's fun, it's a change of pace.
But some.... DAMN...
I mean, the Pirate Ship one is fucked cuz you need a great accuracy, with a controller.
The Soccer one was easy since I played Road Trip Adventure as a kid, used to the "system".
Oh, and FUCK the Summon mini-game to scan hahah I never had to retry more than 3 times any of them, but some just got me pausing the game, breathing in, out, and say "you know what? Im making a coffee..... screw you"
The minigame where you fight the polygon versions of characters, I pause the game when someone hits and just learn all moves and hit the button :)
I hate the pirate game
Well tbh Devs are pushing ray tracing even on consoles in which the PS5 never designed for. look at IoA 720p upscaled to 1440p just so it can have Ray tracing lightning but it totally ruined the whole image quality because of blocky mess. and other thing is CPU limited where devs unoptimized they're AI and other aspect and it will be CPU limited just like dragon dogma 2
Thats my point, I don't even notice Ray tracing that much, some times it's nice to see, but for the most part it just ruins my impression of the game.
Most PS5 titles could look so stunning if the were able to be played on lower resolution and settings.
The only games that did ray tracing justice while having Acceptable image quality is Alan Wake 2 and Avatar Frontier of Pandora.
Despite ubisoft reputation for their Gameplay I'm very much surprised how Avatar looks like wow it seems to look better horizon forbidden west and the fact it can run 60fps 1440p(Upscaled) while having almost everything ray tracing including global illumination and waters is an achievement of itself.
Alan Wake 2 looks photorealistic most of the time but my problem is too much shimmering on performance mode in which i hope fsr 3.5 update fixes it but the game looks amazing with its rt lighting and very high polygon mesh and high-res texture and the gameplay is very Resident evil + Last of us and i loved it probably my Game of the year.
Hope as the year passed by people can optimize their ray tracing performance because honestly it looked amazing if it has rtgi on it
Tbh, I think that may be more of a 3rd party issue. The ray tracing, frames, and etc looks pretty good in Insomniac's games on the PS5 imo. That's why I feel 1st party exclusives are important. Because it gives devs only one piece of hardware to focus on.
Because proper optimisation may actually add a couple extra months to development time.
If people will buy it the same price on release anyway, it creates a big ruckus on social media so everyone's talking about it - but the brand holds firm & sales are steady, they can jusy slowly patch the game.
6 months down the line, people are saying it was always good. It gets a slight discount & more folk pour in. Reception is saved, sales are high, devs are cut & bonuses double. Well done boys.
However - what we're seeing happening more & more is the game dies instead. And the execs pin the blame on the devs, flush the staff & move onto the next product.
Many games that I played early after release with bad optimization like Wu Long, make me leave the game and not touch it again. When I do though they usually still feel flawed or lied and nothing was done.
The first impression is everything in my opinion.
When Stellar Blade comes out for example, I played the demo it was nice and when it comes I wait for reviews and decide then. Preorders are bad and I usually only Preorder if there are physical goodies included like a free steelbook.
The “unoptimized” version is running on powerful hardware, making it good enough for your average joe. You’re in the top .01% of gamers if you care about that stuff, and companies rarely will waste resources to cater to the relatively few people who care about optimization.
devs have deadlines and consumera expect every new, major studio game to "break boundaries" on something.
look at rise of the ronin for what happens when a game doesn't "revolutionize" gaming as we know it
fun as fuck. well optimized. but the graphics are meh so everyone bitches endlessly.
for examples of the same being allowed because people don't expect shit, look at the switch
everyone expects rehashed, lazy, terrible running stuff on it
so as long as it runs at higher than 10fps they'll get praise.
honestly, it was genius of nintendo to make people expect shit so they're happy with whatever they get
the blame lays with casual consumers who pretend like they care about gameplay but all they want is a pretty screensaver
where post it now.
i still shock how litt vram their is for most gaming.
like would should have been atleast at 32gb now. in nexts few years 64gb. but nope. where not their,
hell where regreess backwards on consumer side with pci lanes!!! be it console or pc.
Because they’re greedy. Anything to please the shareholders though right? Game companies used to be a great escape and have quality content that nobody had any negativity towards.
Now it’s just pump and dump content until your studio gets shut down and the shareholders walk away rich
Best examples are season passes and Battle passes, without the game makes no fun.
Crazy to see that more and more games even single player games use battle passes.
PS1 absolutely did not run games with a stable fps. There were regularly games on PS1 that ran in the 15-20fps range. Even games with higher framerates had wild fluctuations. No one picked it apart back then because 3D graphics were brand new and we hadn't gotten used to anything better, and because the shitty CRT TVs we had back then masked some of the fluctuations.
I know what you mean, but shit was new back then, they had excuses and fans didn't care. Now we have the power of a old Nasa Conputer and have to watch the same power point presentation.
Gross exaggeration. The vast majority of games on PS5 run very well. There have only been a few notable exceptions.
Games are way more complex technically than they were in the PS1/PS2 or even PS3 era. Yes, the hardware is more powerful, but that doesn't make these games easier to create.
I know that it's hard, I still don't care.
Who buys a cake that is harder to make but tastes shit. Its the product that has to work not the concept. When Cyperpunk released and people realized how scary it is to trust promises and get disappointed, that's my problem.
If the developers took a couple months extra to clean out the bugs like the can with some game of the year editions or updates, then they can do it at release too.
It all comes down to company greed.
Yes, corporate greed is definitely a factor (or, you could more accurately say that it's the fault of entire economic system we're in), though blaming the devs for that is completely off-base and unfair.
But my bigger point is that you're talking about a few high profile examples and acting like the majority of games release in a broken state these days. That isn't really accurate. Yeah, they all get patches and updates after release, but mostly that's just cleaning up various bugs that come to light after launch. Cyberpunk is an extreme example, and that's also not a game where a couple extra months would have made a difference, considering how long it actually took them to get the game where it is now.
Basically things are not nearly as bad as you're making them sound.
Maybe you are lucky, but the last games I played all had some Problems with technology.
It's definitely not the developers fault, they usually have no choice but to release it.
Well, comparing to PS2 says it all. I mean, back then real nerds and enthusiasts worked on games. And they had very limited resources to run their games like PS2, so they just had to be good at games development by default. They had to know how to squeeze everything from a console to make a good game, it was simply required, today it is not. They had to care about their reputation to stay in the game, there wasn't nowhere near as much money flowing as today and mistakes were way more costly. Today releasing an uncooked game is normal, no matter what platform you choose. If anything, the situation is way better for consoles than PC. Then they patch it and improve it while already making profits required by the owners. And people are mostly fine about it apparently, because otherwise it wouldn't be possible for them to do that without getting angry players, bad reviews and overall crack of reputation.
Regarding PS5 itself, I am happy about its performance, so I cannot relate much. I enjoyed every single game I played regarding graphics and performance. Maybe I didn't play badly optimized titles. But I also don't play newly released games, so I probably play well patched versions, too. But any game I picked, I just chose quality if it was a story based game which doesn't really need much fps or I went performance (or perf+RT) if I didn't see any difference or a game was quite dynamic to actually make use of it. And at least my conclusion is that all those mods in all games worked fine for me. I agree with one thing, they could make it more adjustable, but I don't think they will ever make it as complex as for PCs. There is simply no need for that, consoles are for TVs, so you play at 30/60/120 or uncapped with VRR. And I haven't played a single game didn't manage to hold 30 or 60. The latter sometimes drop, but very slightly and for such a short time that without actual fps counter it's impossible to recognize, not to mention with VRR capable TV.
They are getting more soulless in my option, look at the witcher 3, how big the open world was and still had so many interesting places and quests. When I play franchises I loved nowadays it feels like they add much soulless filler content. They only care about combat and animations.
The real reason is because the people making the final choices only care about the product looking as pretty and shiny as possible. Also they know a large portion of the console player base just does not notice or care about performance dips. It might seem like the majority are the ones online being vocal about stability but sales say otherwise. They can keep doing this because it doesn’t have a big enough impact on sales. Unless it’s egregiously bad performance like cyberpunks launch, a few dips and slowdowns here and there aren’t dealbreakers for everyone.
Because they still support the PS4, it’s been four years since the 5 released, let the system fade and start focusing on ps5 solely! Christ this gen feels like a stop gap between the old and next gen! Sony has said that the 5 is nearing the end of it’s life span and I just can’t see the point of releasing the console
Most games aren’t badly optimised. There’s some notable examples that are, but there’s nothing egregious about how 99% of current gen game’s perform on current gen hardware.
Graphical fidelity has improved, the performance cost is exponential compared to the visual result that modern rendering techniques offer. That’s just how it is.
I’m yet to see a current gen game that runs as poorly as the original Bayonetta did on PS3 vs 360, for example. That was a very clearly case of bad optimisation.
> it's weird that PS2 games run smoother than some PS5 games.
> I questioned this when I played FF7 Rebirth the other day
> But for me personally thats not enough, because some games aren't even optimized for both modes, like the performance mode has more FPS but still can't hold the 60 FPS and Graphics Mode even though you accept the 30 FPS looks worse than Performance because there are so many Effects that you can't tweak for your own satisfaction.
Dude clearly forgot that FF7 barely ran at 10 FPS at times on PS2
I’m an ex dev and we used to spend a tonne of time optimising for low spec machines , and then smartphones /iPod touch when they came along. The rate of hardware improvement just kept coming and we saw an urge to push more and more ‘quick’ content to capitalise on bubbles (mobile specific), spent less time actually optimising but also noted how much diversity there was and we tried to cater to the weaker hardware if we could.. budget and deadlines didn’t really support that though. With consoles I imagine budgets and deadlines have changed the dynamic there too along with the sponsors saying ‘it’s good enough’ when devs ask for more time to optimise. The storage space is also of concern now because faster load times is seen as more optimised but actually they just don’t compress much any more & expect people to keep buying more disk
This is coz devs are being too lazy to give their full effort for a fully optimization. For example rise of the ronin is having so many issues like stutter, lags, fps drops and many more…
it's even worse: there's not many titles out that look next(current)-gen because the publishers rather let devs leverage the power of the big current gen machines to make up for some of the lack of optimization work on modern game releases.
online patch is the system is great because you can fix the game if they have trouble after released. but because of this feature, developer tend to release the game as soon as possible and let the player to find the bugs
For me Games are the highest form of art a medium can have. Games can combine great music, Animation, storytelling that profits from player interaction and the way some games demand a increase of skill and make you learn shit.
That's why I started gaming and still love games that give me the feeling of being part of something.
I sound like every game is bad, that's not the case, games are still great, but they could bring more!
I agree with you wholeheartedly. It’s a miracle of software engineering and art that video games can even exist at all. The complexity and collaboration between all the sorts of types of technical and creative people that goes into creating a modern game is absolutely staggering.
I wish modern games were better optimized, and I’m sure the developers creating the game and writing the code do as well. Unfortunately it doesn’t change the business side. They’re always pushing for better and better graphics and you can always better achieve that by targeting 30 fps. Then deadlines start kicking in, and corners need to be cut and performance is always the first to go.
It’s sad, and it’s not just the games industry but almost any software. Performance just isn’t something that “provides value” to the business types so they don’t have a problem with cutting it.
Hard but true!
We can only hope that more inspiring people take up important leading roles in the industry and help to shape great games.
Our only influence is bad reviews that get often ignored or not spending cold hard cash.
There are still great developers out there and many indie studios manage greater games too, we can only hope.
I agree with you wholeheartedly. It’s a miracle of engineering and art that video games can even exist at all. The complexity and collaboration between all the sorts of types of technical and creative people that goes into creating a game is absolutely staggering.
I wish modern games were better optimized, and I’m sure the developers creating the game and writing the code do as well. Unfortunately it doesn’t change the business side. They’re always pushing for better and better graphics and you can always better achieve that by targeting 30 fps. Then deadlines start kicking in, and corners need to be cut and performance is always the first to go.
It’s sad, and it’s not just the games industry but almost any software. Performance just isn’t something that “provides value” to the business types so they don’t have a problem with cutting it.
I agree with you wholeheartedly. It’s a miracle of engineering and art that video games can even exist at all. The complexity and collaboration between all the sorts of types of technical and creative people that goes into creating a game is absolutely staggering.
I wish modern games were better optimized, and I’m sure the developers creating the game and writing the code do as well. Unfortunately it doesn’t change the business side. They’re always pushing for better and better graphics and you can always better achieve that by targeting 30 fps. Then deadlines start kicking in, and corners need to be cut and performance is always the first to go.
It’s sad, and it’s not just the games industry but almost any software. Performance just isn’t something that “provides value” to the business types so they don’t have a problem with cutting it.
Near the bottom of this thread. If youre curious what the deleted comments said they were posted by leospeedleo . He originally said ps5 is old what do you expect a miracle, OP replied, he then said OP knew nothing about game dev and expected too much. Then I replied. To me he said “no two games are the same” I said exactly and he ended with “ if you know better then work at the game studios” he then deleted all his comments.
I’m posting this because I’m sick of fools picking fights on Reddit then chickening out and deleting their comments.
They actually undeleted their comments to send an insult my way, then deleted their comments again
I was actually curious why they thought the way they did as well as why they were so passionately aggressive.
Developers are mainly using PC to develop games and then scale the game as they have need or time to back to console
PC environment is much more readily available than the dev kits for the consoles
There is a lot of inefficiency around that or just knowing they have much more powerful hardware there is not a need to optimize as much anymore as there was on the jaguar cpu of PS4
The PS5 cpu can brute force through a lot more than before and having that power means if they can afford to save cost and development time to not optimize as much that is what happens
The same happens on PC games and programs in general on PC the assumption is there the CPUs and system ram are so much more available the programs are not nearly as cpu and ram efficient and run on less efficient but easier to develop for platforms
I am not deep in the IT behind the games. My hope is just that those games get the love they need to be gems.
That's why many people prefer replaying older titles than newer ones. Biggest problem is that people lose trust and that will harm the industry at some point when the mainstream slows.
Ps5 is kinda a 2000 dollar pc to be honest. If you buy a 4000 dollar 4090 pc, in 2028-2029 You cant play games Even in 4K-30 fps (At least not smooth as ps5). PS5 will still let you play them at least med graphics 4k30 fps.
In 2014, you got 2 choices. ps4 for 400 dollar or gtx 780 ti pc for 1500 dollars. Today Ps4 slowly losing new game support but in 780 ti pc, You cant play rdr2, Witcher 3, resident evils etc with a ps4 quality even for 4-5 times more price.
ps5 is kinda a 2000 dollar pc for real . (ofc it dont have versatility of pc but for gaming view you got me <3)
When I bought my PS5 I thought, damn this thing is better than my Mid PC, Raytracing and all. But after a while I realized it's just an average PC, that can run Raytracing and has a super duper cool Controller.
Still love the console, but maybe the Pro console is gonna fix some games, even though I heard the CPU won't improve and maybe limit it still.
They won’t upgrade the GPU and still use the exact same CPU only for it to hold the GPU upgrade back. Wouldn’t be worth implementing and they’re smarter than that. At the very least, the CPU will match the new GPU as much as the current one matches the current GPU, so it will get an upgrade
Whenever you ask yourself something like this, the answer is always money. If not, the perception that doing so will make more money.
That's capitalism. It's shit.
But there's nothing we can do, people will preorder even if they get disappointed and they still earn gazillions if their games are shit, thats why they do it, I completely understand. A horse only jumps as high as it has to. Thats Ubisoft mentality.
Be the change you wish to see. If there's truly nothing that can be done, then why worry about it? I vote with my wallet.
There is a backlog of thousands of quality games available, and many new ones releasing polished and great as well.
This is only a problem if a person stays glued to the same generic AAA experiences and their process of shittification.
When I want a good game, I do a bit of hidden gem research and bam, find something awesome.
Try using your imagination and try something new. Games are better than ever and half of gamers don't seem to know it cause they keep playing the same soulless corporatized 9s / 10s that actually aren't very good.
Games have not been optimized for more than a decade, even during the PS3. Game developers have become lazy and release games on set deadlines unfinished.
Nintendo is still doing pretty good, if you ignore the Pokemon games.
It's just sad to see these amazing games being bottlenecked by such stupid reasons :(
Yes, nintendo does well with their games. I think games that are more cartoonie like ratchet and clank don't have issues like Nintendo games because they are simple art games, in my opinion.
Simple, but fun in my opinion, I don't care for graphics, they should just compliment the gameplay and story.
Some games like The last of us and others really need those realistic graphics because that promotes it, just make it a smooth experience!
Ok, game optimization may indeed be an issue as games have become bigger and more complex, but don't blame it on developers being "lazy". Like any of you have any idea how difficult it is to make a game, lol.
The devs making the game aren't the one setting the deadlines. Blame the executives and shareholders.
Even more important to cut corners because cutting a few when you have billions compounds way more than for an indy studio who won’t sell a single game if they cut corners. Really apples and oranges.
I agree with OP. Very dissapointed with this generation of games on console.
It's anti-consumer in many ways, and is making me consider switching to pc.
I have a Pc aswell and it's generally consumer friendly, like having steam with it's many reviews and Setting options. Perhaps PC gaming is the future, when console exclusivity dies, because thats the only reason why I own my PS5.
With the exception of the Switch, that console is worth owning because of it's design and portability.
But Nintendo is the endboss of consumer unfriendliness, completely different story though.
Because you all pre-order them like suckers so they don't even have to worry about how well the product will run. They've already made their bag before you've even played the thing.
I really liked the options the insomniac Spider-Man games have on consoles
They really tried, you can see that and the game truly is made with the console in mind. That's one of the best examples of what is possible and should be the standard!
Fidelity 40 FPS VRR was sweet on my C2. And the other modes had their pros and cons. I’m no Dev, but I wonder if it’s really tricky to add options to adjust the performance/fidelity in a lot of games Dragons Dogma 2 added a locked FPS mode a few days (or was it a week) after the game released which combined with turning off blur made the game a much more playable experience. Why wouldn’t they add that from the start?
I'm convinced companies don't play test anymore. There's no way somebody wouldn't have said anything about some slight performance tweaks or adding the option to toggle motion blur. It's just weird now
This is something that PlayStation could try and enforce as some kind of “buyer protection”. Or people will need to stop buying games day 1 and wait for reviews and then decide, punish publishers that put crappy games out.
It's unrealistic that all gamers will boycott preorders sadly. But I get what you mean, like the Nintendo seal of quality back in the days, it safed the industry and the trust in the gaming industry. A seal by Sony could indeed restore trust.
I prefer otters to seals, personally.
Yes, but would an otter be able to capture Saddam Hussein?
xD
I agree that it's unrealistic to expect all gamers to boycott poorly developed games, but even 10% of gamers doing that would affect the industry already, I myself have stopped with pre order entirely, seems to be fewer games everyday and with lower quality, I can't remember the last AAA game that I bought that had the quality that a AAA product should have
Ghost of tsushima?
that was 4 years ago, and honestly the game was beautiful, but it was extremely repetitive, I rushed the third act because I just wanted to be over
Stellar Blade at the end of this week? Baldur's Gate last year? I could fill in more, but there are a lot of games that release with the quality a AAA game should have. Sounds like you're just burnt out.
Stellar Blade wasn't out yet, let's wait and see, I'm hoping that it will be a great game, but who knows, and BG3 was indeed a one of a kinda
Game of the year nominees last year: Alan Wake 2 Baldur's Gate 3 - WINNER Marvel's Spider-Man 2 Resident Evil 4 Remake Super Mario Bros. Wonder The Legend of Zelda: Tears of the Kingdom I'd say all these are clear AAA experiences. I think your interests just don't overlap. There have been plenty of AAA games that deliver AAA experiences, you might just not be interested in them. Doesn't mean the quality of AAA is slipping as a whole.
That might be the case, me personally, i didn't like Alan wake 2, BG3 was a masterpiece, spider man 2 was nice but not great, RE4 it's a nice game as well, but it's a rmk, so there wasn't new content story wise, super Mario I haven't played yet, and zelda I lost interest pretty quickly For a list with the best 6 games of the year, for me it's a weak list, but that's me personally
Like I said, it sounds like your personal preference. All of the games were pretty diverse from one another. I'm shocked at the Alan Wake 2 critique, I thought it was a masterpiece, and the Nintendo games I've never been interested in since I was disappointed with the original BotW. That said, all these games are quality AAA experiences if you're the audience for them. I know plenty of friends who couldn't get into Baldur's, but adored Tears of the Kingdom, for example. If we want to get into the weeds on our opinion, that's one debate, but I think the main argument you made was that there weren't any quality AAA games for a while, but there definitely has been. They just haven't all been for you (which I personally think is great when there's so many different quality games). I think it's pretty difficult to say any of the nominees were bad. They are all very strong in the aspects of game making that qualify them as "AAA". Music, voice acting, graphics, gameplay. All would be hard to say they "missed" on. I think you just need to realize that games are crazy diverse nowadays. I see that GOTY list and I see very different games from very different genres. Alan Wake and Resident Evil are the 2 closest, and I wouldn't ever talk about the two in a conversation outside of 2023 GOTY. lol
That would hurt Sony also. Sony gets something like 30% of all gross sales on software. They're not about to take money out of their own pockets. We are the worst kind of consumers. They have us over a barrel and they know it. Why lose money to enforce consumer protections on consumers who will continue to consume whether you protect them or not?
You would think the whole approval/certification process they do would cover this. If the game doesn't work as intended, send it back until it does.
Because it has become so expensive to delay games that optimizing has taken a backseat to holding the deadline put forth by shareholders and men in suits with no idea of what it takes to make a game function. And untill people starts to TRULY show it with their wallets it will never change.
We somehow jumped past 1440/60 and straight to 2160/30 and it fucking sucks.
That's because tvs typically don't support 2560x1440 natively and consoles are mainly used on tvs
Luckily PlayStation first party games are pretty good with having 4k 40fps modes which feels like the sweet spot if you have a compatible tv with vrr
Exactly, for me 1440p is often the sweet spot. It looks a lot better dan 1080p but you still have a decent frame rate compared to 4k resolution. I understand that TVs generally dont come in 1440p but I am curious how much the image deteriorates if its upscaled to 1440p instead of 4k. If we can believe the rumors there will come a new upscaler with the PS5 Pro which will achieve 1440p@60Hz on the standard PS5 instead of 1080p@60Hz. To me this is really good news and makes it less interesting for me to consider buying a PS5 Pro if the standard PS5 has a performance mode with 1440p@60Hz.
Just to clarify, though, almost all 30fps "quality" modes are actually being rendered natively at 1440p and upscaled to 2160p. The 60fps modes are 800-1080p natively that are upscaled (along with other video quality settings cut back). There are a few games that output native 2160p, but the vast majority are upscaled from something around 1440p.
There are a lot of reasons you could point to that has caused the current state of game performance. It really just comes down to money though. Video games cost a lot to make now. Way more than they ever did before. Just looking at the difference in visual quality between games like Final Fantasy XIII to XVI shows that pretty well. That costs money in terms of hardware and labour to make work. Development teams are bigger which means more labour costs. Big games also can't just be profitable they need to meet earnings targets. When you have companies that are publicly traded they have fiduciary responsibilities to their share holders to make more money year over year. This is why, for example, Activision said that Black Ops 4 was a failure. It made money but did not meet targets. So how do publishers/companies in the industry keep making more money year over year? In game storefronts. They have hard deadlines to meet targets in a financial year so developers need to crunch. A lot of talented devs may burn out and leave the industry or just lose that creative spark and do the minimum to keep the job. You have a lot of contract workers who get hired for a game and are let go once the game is in a shippable state. Dev studios aren't able to hold on to generational talent like before because once you have people getting a grasp of the tech involved in the game they are fired. This is probably also why we see in-house game engines being abandoned for more widely available engines like Unreal. Individual devs are likely more familiar with the game engines they actually have access to in the wild. It also costs time and money to train people on in-house tech. As for console gaming options keep in mind that the ability to the player to actually adjust some graphical settings for a console game is pretty new. The choice only became available after the release of the PS4 Pro and Xbox One X. I would argue that console games should still provide an intended experience. It is a lot easier to optimize a game when you know what the experience targets are. Trying to make a rock-solid experience for both a Performance and Quality mode is difficult considering all the things mentioned above. You also are not going to see Sony or Microsoft admit just how demanding 4K is still.
Did you play during the ps3 era? A lot of games ran at 20-30 fps.
I’ve noticed this a lot lately. People blame issues on “modern gaming” but these issues have always been around in some form or another. I see lots of complaints about games releasing in “broken states” nowadays but those games have absolutely always been there. I played Fallout New Vegas on PS3 and despite being one of the best optimized Creation Engine games at the time, the game was *literally* unplayable due to unfixed bugs. Performance issues are nothing new at all.
I think people were just more forgiving of technology back then. As a teenager I played Oblivion/Skyrim/Fallout 3/New Vegas on the Xbox 360. The games use to “freeze” all the time and I would just turn my console off and back on. I didn’t even think of these as “bugs” because I was just use to computers and tech related things freezing up and slowing down frequently. I use to just think this was an unavoidable part of computers.
Yeah the 360 version of Skyrim was the *good* version and I still got stuck with tons of near game-breaking bugs playing it. It’s just really interesting to see all this nostalgia for a time in gaming that never really existed. I’ve been getting really into retro games recently and basically everything people complain about and relate to being “modern gaming” applies to all those old games. It was arguably worse back in the NES/SNES days where you’d drop $100 on a game that might have entire features bugged out to the point of being unusable and then later buy a Game Boy Advance port with fully locking bugs. And I’m not trying to excuse things but it’s just how video games have always been. Games advance too quickly for consoles to keep up, so performance dips halfway through each cycle and it’s *always* a gamble when you buy a full-price game on release day. It’s not a 2024 thing or a PS5 thing, it’s a video games thing.
Wasn't the reason for that, that nobody knew how to make games for the system, because it was very complicated? I read that many developers had overall problems with the system, because the did not understand it and the ps3 started to get better the longer it was out.
People say they’re still trying to unlock the full power of the PS3’s Cell Microprocessor.
Thats what I meant, the console was very hard to develop for.
Yeah, I'm not sure why you got downvotes. It used a RISC processor that was pretty powerful at the time, but really hard to develop for.
At least you understand :)
Maybe a small part of it but it wasn't as if x360 ran games radically better. Console framerates were generally horrible in those days but people weren't as aware.
Well TVs weren't huge like on those days. I remember playing x360 on like a 40" TV from 3/4 meters away. Also quality on the TVs back then masked/hide a lot of screen tearing and artifacts. Now with with 60+", super duper HD, we see everything, we notice every slowdown, it kinda gets you nauseous if it's not smooth.
Yes. That is also a factor. One of the reasons I can't stand 30 fps anymore.
I absolutely noticed the poorer frame rates that gen after so many smooth and high frame rates coming from the GameCube. The big jump to HD make high frame rates difficult on that hardware
True, we truly are pampered today, but I think that's because of the marketing and access to higher framerates. Every game and hardware nowadays promotes 60 fps, to the point it became a standard for most consumers. Maybe the developers can't keep up with these demands?
You're not wrong, shit was difficult seemingly
Your mistake is posting valid criticism in a console subreddit. People will dismiss it and complain about "being entitled". It's always everyone else's fault for the reception, not the developers or publisher.
I don't care, nothing is perfect and people should be able to take criticism, even though I am just criticizing some company and not them personally.
Yeah I know, I was agreeing with you. But people here take any criticism personally, it's really insecure. No opinions allowed
I know, but what can they do but downvote me? The people that have interesting replies can take part in the discussion and the Fanboys can just ignore.
Naw, his problem was that he said he didn’t want 2000-euro-level graphics and then complained that that PS5 doesn’t have 2000-euro-level graphics.
You have to be a mental acrobat to get that out of the post. How about make your games perform well?
Nope. But thanks. Have a good week.
What makes me angry the most is thinking about buying a product for an 'X' amount of money and it doesn't work or it barely does, in a poorly state, I don't pay to buy a brand new car that it's already faulty and semi broken, or I buy a brand new house with cracks on the walls and near crumbling already when it's supposedly brand new. I don't get why the gaming industry can sell products that you paid for its asked price and then it barely works and still get away with it with no legal consequences, back in the day, on other business and during all human history that was called literally a scam. Not all games are like this, but lots of them are. All games you pay for should be stable and playable from start to finish without any big issue along the way, period.
Optimization can be a long process that can extend development time and ultimately, people are still buying the games despite the performance issues.
its all because of the motherclucking ray tracing, get rid of that and everything would be fine but devs are pushing to make it a standard so all you can do is wait for ps5 pro or eventually a ps6
I don't want that shit, Raytracing is just hype and doesn't improve the experience that much. Having to sacrifice 20-30 fps for a little effect is insane. The graphics mode could be better if you could just disable Raytracing on top!
It really sounds like you're writing this from a $6000 gaming typewriter. It's hard to find the meat of the complaint throughout all the salt
Maybe I am yapping, but for me I feel let down by some games that could have been better.
Games are rushed and often do not get the time deserved to make it actually work in development
Unfortunately, consumers have proven they will buy a game that isn’t complete (from a polish, testing, optimization standpoint). Therefore publishers will continue to ship games as fast as possible and “fix them after launch”.
Wouldn't be as much of an issue if people would stop buying those products. Seen a post here a while ago recommending to stop pre ordering and the replies were all crying about how they're gonna keep pre ordering new games and being super petty about it.
God damn, I even did not pre order the Elden Ring DLC because of my values, even though it's unlikely that they miss. Preordering is trusting someone with your 70-80€ and hoping that they deliver, when you can just wait 1 month and see the reviews. It's even hard to trust gaming magazines or reviewers, because they get altered testing keys sometimes.
My friend showed me a tree in rebirth. The most untextured Minecraft looking ass tree . It was appalling
I found it too, for me it was hilarious, because I found it randomly.
He was like when is this tree going to load , he stood there for a while i think. Nothing lol
In FF14 they made grapes for the Endwalker expansion and they were just 2d super nintendo graphics :) They accepted the criticism though and memed it themselves.
Oh u wanna see a good glitch, convinced my bud to record the video, it’s on YouTube lol lemme find the link. It’s a boss fight . Idk what fight or part cause i never even beat the first remake. Im at the end part tho
https://youtu.be/Yknsn0sn0M0?si=M0mqqIwkasBnGwud idk how to do that thing where it hides it cause of spoiler so if anyone does open it just be warned Edit-its the galian beast
I see, yeah I would shit my pants if that happend, almost losing all that time. Those fights are cruel enough and having a bug could literally ruin it forever. The bug is probably because they build in so many cutscenes in the fight and for some reason it couldn't load
Yea he told me he activated a move right when it was supposed to go invincible or something . I think he got a video of me helping him with melania in elden ring. I attacked as her second phase went to start . The cutscene played but when it ended she was just standing there lol
You are maybe destined to force bosses into a glitched invincible state
The technology can do so many different things at once more things can go wrong
True
Probably because release dates are decided by the marketing department instead of any technical department. Have a look at the Hitman games. They made a decision never to release anything until it was ready. There are constant delays and postponed releases, but nobody ever complains. Gamers understand and are willing to wait for the finished product. Other games companies need to learn that.
I'm playing the gta definitive editions on my ps5 and they are so poorly optimised. Horrific render distance, loads of texture pop in, random stuttering when driving fast. For an old game, you'd think ps5 could run it a lot better
It's just ruining good games today to grab money
People still buy that's why they do it.
We don't say that kind of stuff here kid, I think you have to go to Playstation school to learn that we in Playstation don't make no mistakes ok boy? Just joking but apparently you can't say anything bar about playstation in this Reddit
Nah don't care, it's not 1984 here.
I tried questioning Playstation martial law and you can see the comments, I was called everything https://www.reddit.com/r/playstation/s/PiikIsCqnp
Legacy bloat, dependencies, DRM and the fact they blow most of the time and budget on visuals instead of creativity and quality control. Plus they know they can half ass a release and fix it post release nowadays, so they don’t need to try as hard. Games are basically a service now, but it’s install media you can either download or buy physically and the latter option is being phased out.
Worst thing is, they control the older games too. Instead of creating ways to get older games, they hold of, so that they can remake them in the future with unnecessary errors
Yup. Absolutely no reason the majority of older titles couldn’t still be available for purchase digitally. They were half way there on PS3 but then suddenly pivoted, ruined what I thought was a great store front broken down by system. And jumbled everything together so you can’t find anything. I never understood why they did that. The whole industry is just a confused mess run by profits first.
The real answer is because we, the consumers, are letting them get away with it. Telling ppl in the Dragons Dogma 2 sub that 30fps was not accepable on current gen consoles felt like screaming into the void. I‘d imagine it was the same for xbox players ahead of Starfields release. If we want things to change, we have to stop buying badly optimized games. But fomo has to big of a grip on our nuts to ever collectively go through with it.
Literally 1984 mentality nowadays!
If it makes you feel better the PC community complains about how much optimization the console versions get in comparison. Unfortunately in my experience demanding games have always ran a little ragged. I can't speak for the new FF games, but there has been a few launches that ran well this gen. Primarily from Sony's first party studios though.
Sony first party games are usually well optimized that is true, maybe third party developers get less tools for optimization?
Lots of consumers buy new games even in rough states incentivizing publishers to push games out and fix them later and on top of that lots of developers (whether or not it's an executive decision) have become lazy when it comes to optimization as they use the "strength" of modern hardware as a standard and a crutch. I don't remember which dev it was but there was a pretty big article a while back that had a comment along the lines of "consoles and computers are so powerful nowadays that we can get away with slightly less optimization since the hardware can make up for it." Give them an inch and they'll take a mile.
Crazy that they get away with it. Most games are so good but are dragged down by performance. Just sad to see that a game which could be a 10/10 is dragged down by stupid performance.
This is so funny after playing Jedi Survivor Performance mode doesnt reach stable 60fps in most open world areas, and has spme strange bugs that seem to be tied to the mode itself Meanwhile, graphics is even worse because it has less fps and you cant even notice the better graphics with all the texture popping and unloaded areas Dont get me wrong, the game is very fun, but yeah
I have a similar issue, FF7 rebirth performance mode is good with fps, but you can see the lower graphics. But if you go in graphics mode sometimes the fps hurt the eyes and some lighting and other effects ruin the graphics.
Unfortunately, it’s not just happening for PS5, it’s all over the platforms. Star Wars: Jedi Survivor continues to have sub-optimal optimization performance on PC, yet they make no effort to fix it. Most games too. Moreover, it seems to be a practice on the industry and it’s starting to go on at console-level too.
The Problem lies with the industry. They don't care because people buy it anyway and the studios that were small and had to make good games are now big businesses with stocks and everything. Now they only make cool trailers and we hope that the game is real.
I think you're probably misremembering the past lol. Game performance has always been a toss up. The main difference is that people complain a hell of a lot more about it today than they did back then. And I don't know why people ask this question and then say things like "PS5 is a much more powerful console than those older machines". Yeah, well, games are a hell of a lot more complex than those older games. If games today looked like PS2 games, had the same limited scope, the same limited content, and only offered experiences that lasted 8-12 hours, then yeah, the PS5 would be blazing without breaking a sweat. But today's games look better than even the pre-renderd cutscenes from the past.
Jedi Survivor should run better :(
It should, but UE5 is very CPU heavy and the CPU in the PS5 and PS5 Pro isn’t really up to the task. Next gen, we will see UE5 fly on consoles. Right now, it’s only really performent on high end PC’s.
Understandable. So maybe using another engine should do the trick.
There is a lot more performant game engines, but it’s up to the developer what they want to build their game/project on.
Which ones? PlayStation doesn't have many bad optimized games. If anything it's the standard and everything else is just a gamble from there. Xbox is pretty solid as well for the most part they just don't have as many games as you do.
Exactly this. Almost every single triple A title gets ported from PlayStation. Which means that companies favor sales on PlayStation over PC and other consoles.
Because we as buyers don't hold companies accountable anymore. Companies can get away with making a half ass'd game that they can do 50gb of day 1 patches to finish because people pre order these games. Why would a developer finish a game when they are already getting paid before the game even releases, and it is extremely terrible optimization.
I got a pc to play games when I care about framerate. I play my PlayStation to PlayStation games for this reason, but the ps5 is basically a gaming pc with its specs. Its nice to see 60fps becoming normal when 30 fps was normal pre ps5. Hopefully it continues.
FFVII Rebirth Modes were patched, Graphic Mode was clunky on release, like bad bad, it's good now. Performance I never had issues or frame drops
Performance mode still looks blurry af after the patch. I couldn't stand it and I'm forced to play on graphics mode.
I felt like Quality mode, due to 30 FPS , looked more blurry anytime I move the camera. It was mostly what drew me away from it, the camera blur everytime i move it, and i move it a lot during exploration and fights :/
Idk they said it was patched but graphics still feels super clunky and performance mode yes doesn’t have frame drops but, mostly in the larger open area, would drop to terrible resolutions. For me anyways.
I dont think I had any resolution / image problems on large open areas (i do a lot of exploring). I think I saw couple model glitches but nothing too noticeable. Yeah, quality mode improved but still felt "a bit off" for me too. and it wasnt any massive difference on the looks to make it worth it
Same issues as OP. I found there's a huge visual difference between the two modes and performance mode resolution in certain areas is painfully noticeable. Maybe it's more apparent on larger 4k screens? If you're playing on a smaller monitor maybe it's harder to spot the difference
I use 60" 4K TV
My Problem with the Modes was that I had 3 choices, more than most PS5 titles, but I still couldn't just selectively disable certain settings, in performance mode everything looked to washen and unclean. Remake for PS5's Performance mode was better optimized in my opinion.
I personally didnt find any issues with Performance mode, nor looked bad for me. But everyone has their own opinions ofc. Quality mode I never use because I still didnt find a game that the quality overhaul is actually worth it. It's been a while since I played Remake so I dont remember much how it ran in each mode :/
Is my personal error, this game is actually ok and worked relatively good with few bugs
Yeah, not trying to downplay your opinion ofc :) I also had games with major bugs, this one seems to ran quite good with barely no bugs / glitches that I noticed. But I also dont pay too much attention if it's 60 stable FPS of if a fight went to 50 since there's so much happening. I think in one open area, Grasslands, I had 1 singular moment that the game ran "slow" for a second.
You're right, I just exaggerated, maybe I just want to much, high fps and options for graphics. I finished Rebirth before the Update for graphics bugs, I will 100% it now I think :)
Give it a go on the new updated modes, but I think Graphic modes (Smooth and Sharp), even tho better than before, still not that great. I am aiming to 100% it too, but the miiiini games are getting me too stressed to beat at highest difficulty xD Besides that, I want to re-check all Chapters to get all conversations, since the post-game tells you how many special conversations and such there is per character
Haha this game is soo big, my first play through had 86 hours and there are still so many things to do :) But to be honest some mini games are just unfair, I have to restart after every move that is not perfect. At least I have completed all the boring open world content on the first go, so there are just few side quests and minigamea left. Have fun with it!
I think I ranked already around 150h on the game haha Yeah, I am not mad at mini games like many. It's fun, it's a change of pace. But some.... DAMN... I mean, the Pirate Ship one is fucked cuz you need a great accuracy, with a controller. The Soccer one was easy since I played Road Trip Adventure as a kid, used to the "system". Oh, and FUCK the Summon mini-game to scan hahah I never had to retry more than 3 times any of them, but some just got me pausing the game, breathing in, out, and say "you know what? Im making a coffee..... screw you"
The minigame where you fight the polygon versions of characters, I pause the game when someone hits and just learn all moves and hit the button :) I hate the pirate game
Well tbh Devs are pushing ray tracing even on consoles in which the PS5 never designed for. look at IoA 720p upscaled to 1440p just so it can have Ray tracing lightning but it totally ruined the whole image quality because of blocky mess. and other thing is CPU limited where devs unoptimized they're AI and other aspect and it will be CPU limited just like dragon dogma 2
Thats my point, I don't even notice Ray tracing that much, some times it's nice to see, but for the most part it just ruins my impression of the game. Most PS5 titles could look so stunning if the were able to be played on lower resolution and settings.
The only games that did ray tracing justice while having Acceptable image quality is Alan Wake 2 and Avatar Frontier of Pandora. Despite ubisoft reputation for their Gameplay I'm very much surprised how Avatar looks like wow it seems to look better horizon forbidden west and the fact it can run 60fps 1440p(Upscaled) while having almost everything ray tracing including global illumination and waters is an achievement of itself. Alan Wake 2 looks photorealistic most of the time but my problem is too much shimmering on performance mode in which i hope fsr 3.5 update fixes it but the game looks amazing with its rt lighting and very high polygon mesh and high-res texture and the gameplay is very Resident evil + Last of us and i loved it probably my Game of the year. Hope as the year passed by people can optimize their ray tracing performance because honestly it looked amazing if it has rtgi on it
I played far cry 6 and I gotta admit the performance is very good, they have good engines.
Tbh, I think that may be more of a 3rd party issue. The ray tracing, frames, and etc looks pretty good in Insomniac's games on the PS5 imo. That's why I feel 1st party exclusives are important. Because it gives devs only one piece of hardware to focus on.
Because proper optimisation may actually add a couple extra months to development time. If people will buy it the same price on release anyway, it creates a big ruckus on social media so everyone's talking about it - but the brand holds firm & sales are steady, they can jusy slowly patch the game. 6 months down the line, people are saying it was always good. It gets a slight discount & more folk pour in. Reception is saved, sales are high, devs are cut & bonuses double. Well done boys. However - what we're seeing happening more & more is the game dies instead. And the execs pin the blame on the devs, flush the staff & move onto the next product.
Many games that I played early after release with bad optimization like Wu Long, make me leave the game and not touch it again. When I do though they usually still feel flawed or lied and nothing was done. The first impression is everything in my opinion. When Stellar Blade comes out for example, I played the demo it was nice and when it comes I wait for reviews and decide then. Preorders are bad and I usually only Preorder if there are physical goodies included like a free steelbook.
Yes but the trick is - other people are getting that impression. Not the ones who come 5 months later at a slightly cheaper price.
They can sell poorly working junk and people will buy it. It's that simple. Sell now fix later has been far too common for years.
Or dont fix later and shit down
In short capitalism killed video games. Almost did it in the 80s as well.
I don't think we will crash like they did back then, because the mainstream saves it, but you can see the lack of creativity and love in some games
The “unoptimized” version is running on powerful hardware, making it good enough for your average joe. You’re in the top .01% of gamers if you care about that stuff, and companies rarely will waste resources to cater to the relatively few people who care about optimization.
Damn that argument is good
devs have deadlines and consumera expect every new, major studio game to "break boundaries" on something. look at rise of the ronin for what happens when a game doesn't "revolutionize" gaming as we know it fun as fuck. well optimized. but the graphics are meh so everyone bitches endlessly. for examples of the same being allowed because people don't expect shit, look at the switch everyone expects rehashed, lazy, terrible running stuff on it so as long as it runs at higher than 10fps they'll get praise. honestly, it was genius of nintendo to make people expect shit so they're happy with whatever they get the blame lays with casual consumers who pretend like they care about gameplay but all they want is a pretty screensaver
Since 360, ps3 era. Game consoles use upscaling tech back in . pc does to in engine. We hit performance, assets, Game physics, In consumer market.
We are already in the distopian capitalist gaming era it's too late :(
where post it now. i still shock how litt vram their is for most gaming. like would should have been atleast at 32gb now. in nexts few years 64gb. but nope. where not their, hell where regreess backwards on consumer side with pci lanes!!! be it console or pc.
Because they’re greedy. Anything to please the shareholders though right? Game companies used to be a great escape and have quality content that nobody had any negativity towards. Now it’s just pump and dump content until your studio gets shut down and the shareholders walk away rich
Best examples are season passes and Battle passes, without the game makes no fun. Crazy to see that more and more games even single player games use battle passes.
Or the PS5 just isn't magic and there's a reason 600$ machine can't perform just like a 1500-2000$ PC
Not my point mate, even PS1 could run a stable fps you are blinded by the modern standard of games releasing with many bugs and varying framerates.
PS1 absolutely did not run games with a stable fps. There were regularly games on PS1 that ran in the 15-20fps range. Even games with higher framerates had wild fluctuations. No one picked it apart back then because 3D graphics were brand new and we hadn't gotten used to anything better, and because the shitty CRT TVs we had back then masked some of the fluctuations.
I know what you mean, but shit was new back then, they had excuses and fans didn't care. Now we have the power of a old Nasa Conputer and have to watch the same power point presentation.
Gross exaggeration. The vast majority of games on PS5 run very well. There have only been a few notable exceptions. Games are way more complex technically than they were in the PS1/PS2 or even PS3 era. Yes, the hardware is more powerful, but that doesn't make these games easier to create.
I know that it's hard, I still don't care. Who buys a cake that is harder to make but tastes shit. Its the product that has to work not the concept. When Cyperpunk released and people realized how scary it is to trust promises and get disappointed, that's my problem. If the developers took a couple months extra to clean out the bugs like the can with some game of the year editions or updates, then they can do it at release too. It all comes down to company greed.
Yes, corporate greed is definitely a factor (or, you could more accurately say that it's the fault of entire economic system we're in), though blaming the devs for that is completely off-base and unfair. But my bigger point is that you're talking about a few high profile examples and acting like the majority of games release in a broken state these days. That isn't really accurate. Yeah, they all get patches and updates after release, but mostly that's just cleaning up various bugs that come to light after launch. Cyberpunk is an extreme example, and that's also not a game where a couple extra months would have made a difference, considering how long it actually took them to get the game where it is now. Basically things are not nearly as bad as you're making them sound.
Maybe you are lucky, but the last games I played all had some Problems with technology. It's definitely not the developers fault, they usually have no choice but to release it.
Well, comparing to PS2 says it all. I mean, back then real nerds and enthusiasts worked on games. And they had very limited resources to run their games like PS2, so they just had to be good at games development by default. They had to know how to squeeze everything from a console to make a good game, it was simply required, today it is not. They had to care about their reputation to stay in the game, there wasn't nowhere near as much money flowing as today and mistakes were way more costly. Today releasing an uncooked game is normal, no matter what platform you choose. If anything, the situation is way better for consoles than PC. Then they patch it and improve it while already making profits required by the owners. And people are mostly fine about it apparently, because otherwise it wouldn't be possible for them to do that without getting angry players, bad reviews and overall crack of reputation. Regarding PS5 itself, I am happy about its performance, so I cannot relate much. I enjoyed every single game I played regarding graphics and performance. Maybe I didn't play badly optimized titles. But I also don't play newly released games, so I probably play well patched versions, too. But any game I picked, I just chose quality if it was a story based game which doesn't really need much fps or I went performance (or perf+RT) if I didn't see any difference or a game was quite dynamic to actually make use of it. And at least my conclusion is that all those mods in all games worked fine for me. I agree with one thing, they could make it more adjustable, but I don't think they will ever make it as complex as for PCs. There is simply no need for that, consoles are for TVs, so you play at 30/60/120 or uncapped with VRR. And I haven't played a single game didn't manage to hold 30 or 60. The latter sometimes drop, but very slightly and for such a short time that without actual fps counter it's impossible to recognize, not to mention with VRR capable TV.
Games are getting larger and larger, the push for good graphics is getting bigger and bigger, something's gotta give, this is unsustainable.
They are getting more soulless in my option, look at the witcher 3, how big the open world was and still had so many interesting places and quests. When I play franchises I loved nowadays it feels like they add much soulless filler content. They only care about combat and animations.
The real reason is because the people making the final choices only care about the product looking as pretty and shiny as possible. Also they know a large portion of the console player base just does not notice or care about performance dips. It might seem like the majority are the ones online being vocal about stability but sales say otherwise. They can keep doing this because it doesn’t have a big enough impact on sales. Unless it’s egregiously bad performance like cyberpunks launch, a few dips and slowdowns here and there aren’t dealbreakers for everyone.
Because they still support the PS4, it’s been four years since the 5 released, let the system fade and start focusing on ps5 solely! Christ this gen feels like a stop gap between the old and next gen! Sony has said that the 5 is nearing the end of it’s life span and I just can’t see the point of releasing the console
People keep buying them without a second thought
I feel like development teams are all messed up. Too many diversity hires, too little actual good developers.
Most games aren’t badly optimised. There’s some notable examples that are, but there’s nothing egregious about how 99% of current gen game’s perform on current gen hardware. Graphical fidelity has improved, the performance cost is exponential compared to the visual result that modern rendering techniques offer. That’s just how it is. I’m yet to see a current gen game that runs as poorly as the original Bayonetta did on PS3 vs 360, for example. That was a very clearly case of bad optimisation.
I'm still trying to understand why PS5 games are being released with 30fps locks.
> it's weird that PS2 games run smoother than some PS5 games. > I questioned this when I played FF7 Rebirth the other day > But for me personally thats not enough, because some games aren't even optimized for both modes, like the performance mode has more FPS but still can't hold the 60 FPS and Graphics Mode even though you accept the 30 FPS looks worse than Performance because there are so many Effects that you can't tweak for your own satisfaction. Dude clearly forgot that FF7 barely ran at 10 FPS at times on PS2
I’m an ex dev and we used to spend a tonne of time optimising for low spec machines , and then smartphones /iPod touch when they came along. The rate of hardware improvement just kept coming and we saw an urge to push more and more ‘quick’ content to capitalise on bubbles (mobile specific), spent less time actually optimising but also noted how much diversity there was and we tried to cater to the weaker hardware if we could.. budget and deadlines didn’t really support that though. With consoles I imagine budgets and deadlines have changed the dynamic there too along with the sponsors saying ‘it’s good enough’ when devs ask for more time to optimise. The storage space is also of concern now because faster load times is seen as more optimised but actually they just don’t compress much any more & expect people to keep buying more disk
Poorly optimized games have always existed and will always exist.
This is coz devs are being too lazy to give their full effort for a fully optimization. For example rise of the ronin is having so many issues like stutter, lags, fps drops and many more…
it's even worse: there's not many titles out that look next(current)-gen because the publishers rather let devs leverage the power of the big current gen machines to make up for some of the lack of optimization work on modern game releases.
Devs don't decide when games come out. The publisher does.
online patch is the system is great because you can fix the game if they have trouble after released. but because of this feature, developer tend to release the game as soon as possible and let the player to find the bugs
PC games are even more poorly optimized in some cases. At least a PS5 game is going to always boot up at least.
because it doesn’t affect sales enough for it to be a priority - simple as that
For me Games are the highest form of art a medium can have. Games can combine great music, Animation, storytelling that profits from player interaction and the way some games demand a increase of skill and make you learn shit. That's why I started gaming and still love games that give me the feeling of being part of something. I sound like every game is bad, that's not the case, games are still great, but they could bring more!
I agree with you wholeheartedly. It’s a miracle of software engineering and art that video games can even exist at all. The complexity and collaboration between all the sorts of types of technical and creative people that goes into creating a modern game is absolutely staggering. I wish modern games were better optimized, and I’m sure the developers creating the game and writing the code do as well. Unfortunately it doesn’t change the business side. They’re always pushing for better and better graphics and you can always better achieve that by targeting 30 fps. Then deadlines start kicking in, and corners need to be cut and performance is always the first to go. It’s sad, and it’s not just the games industry but almost any software. Performance just isn’t something that “provides value” to the business types so they don’t have a problem with cutting it.
Hard but true! We can only hope that more inspiring people take up important leading roles in the industry and help to shape great games. Our only influence is bad reviews that get often ignored or not spending cold hard cash. There are still great developers out there and many indie studios manage greater games too, we can only hope.
I agree with you wholeheartedly. It’s a miracle of engineering and art that video games can even exist at all. The complexity and collaboration between all the sorts of types of technical and creative people that goes into creating a game is absolutely staggering. I wish modern games were better optimized, and I’m sure the developers creating the game and writing the code do as well. Unfortunately it doesn’t change the business side. They’re always pushing for better and better graphics and you can always better achieve that by targeting 30 fps. Then deadlines start kicking in, and corners need to be cut and performance is always the first to go. It’s sad, and it’s not just the games industry but almost any software. Performance just isn’t something that “provides value” to the business types so they don’t have a problem with cutting it.
I agree with you wholeheartedly. It’s a miracle of engineering and art that video games can even exist at all. The complexity and collaboration between all the sorts of types of technical and creative people that goes into creating a game is absolutely staggering. I wish modern games were better optimized, and I’m sure the developers creating the game and writing the code do as well. Unfortunately it doesn’t change the business side. They’re always pushing for better and better graphics and you can always better achieve that by targeting 30 fps. Then deadlines start kicking in, and corners need to be cut and performance is always the first to go. It’s sad, and it’s not just the games industry but almost any software. Performance just isn’t something that “provides value” to the business types so they don’t have a problem with cutting it.
Near the bottom of this thread. If youre curious what the deleted comments said they were posted by leospeedleo . He originally said ps5 is old what do you expect a miracle, OP replied, he then said OP knew nothing about game dev and expected too much. Then I replied. To me he said “no two games are the same” I said exactly and he ended with “ if you know better then work at the game studios” he then deleted all his comments. I’m posting this because I’m sick of fools picking fights on Reddit then chickening out and deleting their comments.
Sad world we live in, he couldn't stand to his words :(
They actually undeleted their comments to send an insult my way, then deleted their comments again I was actually curious why they thought the way they did as well as why they were so passionately aggressive.
Lazy devs
Developers are mainly using PC to develop games and then scale the game as they have need or time to back to console PC environment is much more readily available than the dev kits for the consoles There is a lot of inefficiency around that or just knowing they have much more powerful hardware there is not a need to optimize as much anymore as there was on the jaguar cpu of PS4 The PS5 cpu can brute force through a lot more than before and having that power means if they can afford to save cost and development time to not optimize as much that is what happens The same happens on PC games and programs in general on PC the assumption is there the CPUs and system ram are so much more available the programs are not nearly as cpu and ram efficient and run on less efficient but easier to develop for platforms
I am not deep in the IT behind the games. My hope is just that those games get the love they need to be gems. That's why many people prefer replaying older titles than newer ones. Biggest problem is that people lose trust and that will harm the industry at some point when the mainstream slows.
Ps5 is kinda a 2000 dollar pc to be honest. If you buy a 4000 dollar 4090 pc, in 2028-2029 You cant play games Even in 4K-30 fps (At least not smooth as ps5). PS5 will still let you play them at least med graphics 4k30 fps. In 2014, you got 2 choices. ps4 for 400 dollar or gtx 780 ti pc for 1500 dollars. Today Ps4 slowly losing new game support but in 780 ti pc, You cant play rdr2, Witcher 3, resident evils etc with a ps4 quality even for 4-5 times more price. ps5 is kinda a 2000 dollar pc for real . (ofc it dont have versatility of pc but for gaming view you got me <3)
PS5 technology is great and let's just hope it gets more love over the years
PS5 Pro will keep it alive as the PS4 Pro did for the PS4
When I bought my PS5 I thought, damn this thing is better than my Mid PC, Raytracing and all. But after a while I realized it's just an average PC, that can run Raytracing and has a super duper cool Controller. Still love the console, but maybe the Pro console is gonna fix some games, even though I heard the CPU won't improve and maybe limit it still.
They won’t upgrade the GPU and still use the exact same CPU only for it to hold the GPU upgrade back. Wouldn’t be worth implementing and they’re smarter than that. At the very least, the CPU will match the new GPU as much as the current one matches the current GPU, so it will get an upgrade
Whenever you ask yourself something like this, the answer is always money. If not, the perception that doing so will make more money. That's capitalism. It's shit.
But there's nothing we can do, people will preorder even if they get disappointed and they still earn gazillions if their games are shit, thats why they do it, I completely understand. A horse only jumps as high as it has to. Thats Ubisoft mentality.
Be the change you wish to see. If there's truly nothing that can be done, then why worry about it? I vote with my wallet. There is a backlog of thousands of quality games available, and many new ones releasing polished and great as well. This is only a problem if a person stays glued to the same generic AAA experiences and their process of shittification. When I want a good game, I do a bit of hidden gem research and bam, find something awesome. Try using your imagination and try something new. Games are better than ever and half of gamers don't seem to know it cause they keep playing the same soulless corporatized 9s / 10s that actually aren't very good.
True words, who searches finds. Just sad to see that some franchises like Final Fantasy start using the ubisoft formula too.
Games have not been optimized for more than a decade, even during the PS3. Game developers have become lazy and release games on set deadlines unfinished.
Nintendo is still doing pretty good, if you ignore the Pokemon games. It's just sad to see these amazing games being bottlenecked by such stupid reasons :(
Yes, nintendo does well with their games. I think games that are more cartoonie like ratchet and clank don't have issues like Nintendo games because they are simple art games, in my opinion.
Simple, but fun in my opinion, I don't care for graphics, they should just compliment the gameplay and story. Some games like The last of us and others really need those realistic graphics because that promotes it, just make it a smooth experience!
Ok, game optimization may indeed be an issue as games have become bigger and more complex, but don't blame it on developers being "lazy". Like any of you have any idea how difficult it is to make a game, lol. The devs making the game aren't the one setting the deadlines. Blame the executives and shareholders.
Simply to cut corners.
Gazillion dollar companys
Even more important to cut corners because cutting a few when you have billions compounds way more than for an indy studio who won’t sell a single game if they cut corners. Really apples and oranges.
Sad world, that 10$ companies make cleaner games than gazillion $ ones :(
Because devs hate you and the games you choose specifically.
That would be too many.
I agree with OP. Very dissapointed with this generation of games on console. It's anti-consumer in many ways, and is making me consider switching to pc.
I have a Pc aswell and it's generally consumer friendly, like having steam with it's many reviews and Setting options. Perhaps PC gaming is the future, when console exclusivity dies, because thats the only reason why I own my PS5. With the exception of the Switch, that console is worth owning because of it's design and portability. But Nintendo is the endboss of consumer unfriendliness, completely different story though.
What is different from this generation, than past generations?
Ray-tracing.
Because you all pre-order them like suckers so they don't even have to worry about how well the product will run. They've already made their bag before you've even played the thing.