This is bad 😂

If this was reddit, I would have awarded this comment.

Yea. 1080p60. I honestly think it's ridiculous, that they marketed these machines as 4k60 powerhouses, woth 120hz even being mentioned. 2 games run at 120 right ? I have a 600 console with a 800 TV, to play at 1080p. Wtf

I couldn’t stand it, I just dealt with 30 fps and got used to it. This game at 4K is just too good

@@floatinggoose9197 Sorry, but this is simply not true. The consoles were never marketed in this way. 4K@60FPS is challenging for even the most expensive PC rigs still if you want high graphical fidelity in other areas. We also have games like Spider-Man which not only offer a 60FPS mode, but managed to still keep ray-tracing.

Exactly. I think you're the only person who's mentioned that it still struggles to maintain 60fps, even at 1080p. Absolutely shocking. If this was an open world game I could understand, but it's just a linear 3rd person shooter.

@@Zerobob26 Eidos need to work on optimizing the games more. The optimizations come at the last stage of development just before launch and it looks like they were stripped of the time needed to do that. But other than that, the game is awesome and i love it.

Maybe the developers aren't experienced enough on ps5 or Xbox series especially series x it's should easily run this game at least on 1440p and 60fps

Eidos needa pick up their optimization techniques. No way this game should have to compromise this much when Red Dead 2 chugs along just fine on a toaster like the Xbox One.

That's consoles for you. Already outdated hardware. Thank God I play on PC.

no no definitely not a false theory. I've played games that have definitely switched frame rates mid cutscenes to sustain the graphics aspect.

so the possibility of a mode with that same sorta aspect wouldn't be too far fetched!

Wtf?

That's what Dynamic res already does...in a way. But I see your point

Woah. Seems like Square took your idea and ran with it. Ff16 has this

RIP

True

This the deepest shit I've heard this year

RIP TB. But to be fair, this game is awesome.

Says it all about gaming in 2021. Companies sitting there laughing their ***** off. Going to be even funnier when people stop buying day 1 and the money drys up. Bye patch culture

Yeah, to me the game is just super heavy. Even on PC I feel like the game runs well but isnt super optimized. Still, this is a good showing. We have seen games just as good looking run at 60fps at higher resolutions. Look at Ghostrunner on PS5. It runs at 4k 60fps with RT on. Thats super demanding.

Agreed. I bought on Xbox assuming 60fps would still be a decent resolution. Returning and buying on PC instead.

Yeah, I could say there are other games that seems on par with the visual quality but runs better.

@@TheRockHardKeg It's one game and a bizarre outlier. By merits, 1440p is less than half the pixels of 4K, so no games should drop under 1440p for their 60fps mode. It's absolutely bizarre that they had to go 1080p and still fail to hit consistent 60fps.

@@chalpua8802 hey ratchet and clank on ps5 with their 60 fps raytracing mode runs at 1440p and it looks amazing,this game is definitely not well optimized

Same goes for the pc port in some GPU it doesn't launch at all

Its difficult to draw comparison with other games as you don't know how the games are built. Different games use different engines, have different priorities and design elements etc. For example, other games that target 60fps may have much more 'static' geometry, lower polygon counts etc. There are many reasons why two 'similar' style, similarly looking (to a 'gamer') games from two different developers/studio's may have very different performance profiles. I doubt this game is tapping into some of the 'next gen' features these consoles are capable of, but then I doubt many games are yet as they would of started development with 'Last' gen hardware in mind. For example, Returnal only runs at 1080/60 too yet there are numerous shooters that can do 4k/60 on PS5. At 60fps, each frame has to be calculated, rendered, texture filled, processed and sent to the TV in just 16.66ms (or 0.0166s - that's an incredibly short period of time - at 30fps, you have double that at 33.3ms. Twice as much time - and that's twice as much time for the GPU to spend on PQ, twice as much time for the CPU to calculate everything (AI, Physics etc), instruct the GPU what to draw, pull assets around etc. Different games will have different 'budgets' and different 'priorities' to budget for. If they target 60fps from the start for a specific 'hardware', they know that the CPU and GPU have a budget of 16.6ms so build the game and 'optimise' around that. If the game is built around 30fps to start with, they could have more 'expensive' elements (more complex AI, more Destruction, More Particles, more FX, Higher scene complexity/higher polygon counts etc). This game could be more CPU heavy and so dropping resolution to a quarter isn't enough to hit 60fps. Its not 'just' the GPU that has half the time to draw a frame, the CPU has half as much time too to do all the tasks the Developer sets it to do... The only thing you can really do is compare the 'SAME' game built by the same dev team with the same engine. Its not even fair to compare an UE4 game with another UE4 game by different studio's because they all have different priorities. Comparing GTSport with FM7 shows different priorities designing the 'same' type of game. Sony opt for a 'higher' polygon count on the Cars for example, but then the track side details are a bit lower. MS opted for Dynamic Weather too so that has a 'cost' to it but both manage a 'similar' resolution and performance - yet other games, like Driveclub was only 30fps and Project Cars struggled for a consistent 60fps...

This is a true next-generation game. Other games were also last gen games. That's my thought process on it.

@@BAMozzy69 get what your saying mate it just raises questions when it’s pretty much the only title running 1080p 60fps with other titles seemingly (even if you can’t see what the stress is on the hardware) doing more. The 1080p 30fps series s version which is a far more powerful system then the ps4 yet it’s running similar settings/performance tells me something not quite right and that’s before you consider it’s targeting last Gen with its render budgets first and scaling up

@@GameFanaTICK386 it’s target was last Gen ps4 and Xbox one. Started development around 3 years ago for those systems with a view to cross Gen i believe.

Well Ratchet and Clank is a 1st party game

@@craigharris41 for sure, definitely huge advantage, only having to optimize for playstation instead of a range of PC specs and 9 different consoles

Yep as the others said, unfair comparison to compare it to a console exclusive title.

1/4 the resolution and lower settings and doesn’t hold 60 fps

Its all to do with 'frame' time. Just because the 'resolution' is 'reduced' down by 25%, doesn't mean that they can ''instantly' save 16.6ms of frame time. There are other aspects - (like Input response, AI, hit detection, Physics etc) that still need to be calculated and not dependent on resolution. That's before the CPU instructs the GPU what to draw. Yes dropping the resolution will save on the GPU render and Processing time but may not save '50%' of the Frame Time to ensure a stable 60fps. Another example - Rise of the Tomb Raider which runs at 4k/30 on XB1X but cannot hold a locked 60fps at 1080p because the CPU is the bottleneck that prevents it. I am sure this is more CPU intensive and unless you scale down the CPU load (reduce the AI, Physics, destruction, draw calls etc) to 'fit' within the frame-time budget, Reducing the Graphical load may not be enough alone to hit a consistent 60fps.

@@BAMozzy69 You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about

@@teddyholiday8038 If you are too dumb to understand, don't insult others as it makes you look even more stupid!!! Frame Time is VITAL. At 30fps, a 'new' frame has to be ready in 33.3ms to hit a consistent 30fps. Increasing the frame rate to 60fps drops the frame time to just 16.6ms. Dropping the resolution can save a 'chunk' of rendering time, but it doesn't change the amount of NPC's and AI, doesn't change the amount of objects on screen, the physics, the hit detection etc all of which still takes 'time' to process. Games don't rely on 'just' the GPU - the Graphics Processing unit - to run a game. The Central Processing Unit (CPU) is the 'brains' behind games and tells the GPU what to draw and where everything is meant to be, often used for AI, Physics etc, often used for decompression and audio too (especially on last gen consoles) all of that takes time too. Dropping the resolution alone - even if it is by 25%, doesn't mean that the entire frame time drops by 50%. The entire frame time is not 'just' render time and whilst you will save time by dropping the resolution to reduce the 'render' and post processing time, it may still not come in at 16.6ms to deliver a consistent 60fps. Dropping the resolution may save 8-15ms so each frame takes 25ms (so get 40fps) or 20ms (50fps) and only when the CPU is not being pushed, do you get under that 16.6ms to deliver 60fps game-play. You may have to reduce other aspects to reduce the CPU load - reduce draw distance for example so the CPU doesn't have to send so many draw calls, reduce AI or Physics, reduce Particles etc all often the load on the CPU. If that is 'too' much for you tiny brain to comprehend or understand, maybe stick to nursery rhymes until you grow up!!

​@@ntz752 NO 4k is 4x 1080p. HD - 1920 x 1080p = 2073600 pixels 4k - 3840 x 2160p = 8294400 pixels 2073600 x 4 = 8294400 so 2160p is 4x larger or 1080p is a 'quarter' of the size. 1080 (or 2160) is the 'number' of vertical pixels so 1080p may only have 'half' the number of vertical pixels, but it also has 'half' the horizontal. You can fit 4 1920x1080p images inside a 3840x2160p resolution 2 vertically by 2 horizontally 2x2 = 4 How are some people so thick? don't they teach basic maths in school these days or have you not reached Junior school yet?

This game looks nothing like 1080p in surprsied they saying it is cause wow on 4k oled wow

Kind of disappointed that it only hits 1080p 60fps on ps5. They could atleast have given us 1800p

Yeah this game is very poorly optimized it seems. No reason this game should be struggling whatsoever

We've been sold a lie with this gen, it's why I switched 'full time' to PC

@@nickwiley9647 I wouldn't believe that, however it's Eidos Montreal, and the last Deus Ex did perform pretty bad

Sorry, but no. As a comic reader and a fan of the MCU, I'm pretty disappointed that they didn't invest in having the cast from the movie. They are the ones that made famous Guardians Of The Galaxy, and in a 3D world they're the ones to go, because they also are the only ones we saw outside the papers actually moving around and fighting outside our imagination. Also, IMO the cast for the movie was beyond perfect.

@@soundofreality Sorry but this game makes me hate the movies, the movie is so basic compared to this game, which is far far superior.

@@soundofreality how will it make any sense in having the mcu acters faces in a game that has nothingto do with the mcu

I do not know why people complain about the mcu depictions of these characters not being in the game when you can literally wear the mcu costumes

Yeah I like when they use original desings or the ones that comes from the comic books

Yeah I noticed that. It's a bit out of order as they were getting on average 45 to 50fps. They could have locked it to 40fps or given the option as I'm sure players would have been happy with that

@@benturner3458 40fps runs really smoothly on 120Hz TVs.

@@MaxIronsThird I was wondering about that. Locking to 48 would feel smoother than 30.

@@athenian221 Only in 144Hz screens

No 60fps No money

Lmao I was thinking the same thing. Literally every other game I've played since owning my PS5, I've chosen performance mode. But after seeing this video.... Definetly gonna be using quality mode

Is it that bad? Lemme watch the video

@@mistermidas11 I know, same here! I cannot believe how much of a difference there is in this game. I wonder if it’s telling for future game releases this gen..

@@JustAnotherGamerUS Nah. I honestly think they were fuckin lazy lol. There's no reason for it to be THAT huge of a difference between the two modes. Hell I just spent over 100 hours playing the directors cut version of Death Stranding, and quality mode almost runs just as well in terms of fps as performance. And performance, almost LOOKS just as good as quality mode. They key....is optimisation. This game doesn't have it at all

I have been playing it in quality on series x. It's one of the only games that I play in quality mode. But this game is honestly so good that I don't find myself caring too much about the performance options. I just love this game! But I bet they could get the resolution to 1440p at least if they optimized it more.

Nowadays it's fairly easy to get decent performance on Mankind Divided with a decent PC, but just through sheer brute force.

Wait, what?!? They also own the tomb raider engine? That game looks incredible. The last one, Shadow. Good question UberNoodle.

I imagine it comes down to the team working on this game was probably most familiar with this engine, and another team uses the other engine.

The foundation engine was borrowed from Crystal Dynamics, they just upgraded some components of that engine for shadow of the Tomb Raider

I was just going to say I've never seen this engine do wide Open spaces before.. but the engine for shadow of the tomb raider definitely doesn't do wide Open spaces, so that might have been the kicker I have no idea what the avengers game was done on but I don't really care about anything about that game LOL so that's that I guess... But I'm also excited to see this engine used again because the tech was really cool, same with Shadow though honestly I mean both are incredibly technically quality, and while I'm pretty sure shadow of the tomb raider it's popularity as a benchmark is because it has a benchmark, it's funny how that works.. yeah that's kind of a question cuz I actually no I think about it I don't think either of them were very open at all, so it might just come down to which one was easier to work on for the game and since mankind divided was already in RPG form from the get-go which is seeming to be the more traditional adventure game formula at this point. K, I'm not going to read into the fact that maybe they were trying to update the engine for another deus ex game cuz we can't have nice things so it's just easier to put them out of your head all together.. Just throwing a hint out for any developer sees this could have benchmark in your game if you want to get free press, technically speaking you have to also have some sort of technology in it that The benchmark benefits in terms of the wider audience and hardware, and that's where Shadow really comes in because it had the RTX shadows, as well as a very quality graph of CPU render and GPU render.. all things that are very useful for players just saying, but you know Free press Shadow is still being used as a benchmark, it's been out for a long ass time but the name is still out there, just saying.. feel free.. also probably helps if it's an accurate benchmark, don't see Red Dead too much because it was a inaccurate benchmark, Very cool that mankind had a benchmark as well which is a fairly accurate benchmark for the game although we never really saw it used as much despite being DirectX 12, possibly because it wasn't as popular of a game.. So you might have to do a whole bunch of things to get that Free press.. but that still don't explain ashes of the singularity being used because that's a benchmark as a game LOL... Which in all fairness, still a better system than fucking 3D mark, rather have a game to play at least in addition to my benchmark.. just saying.

Crystal didn't make this game. It was only Eidos Montreal who developed it. (Squares other studio)

Downside it that this is just usable for player with a 120 hz tv. For Multiplattform title this won’t be their main priority, while for exclusives there is enough room for such special graphic modes.

@@MisterReen 120hz is one of the consoles selling points... if someone is getting next gen console without planning on upgrading their display then that's on them. It's unfair that those who upgrade should be missing out.

@@MisterReen just drop it to 30 for low hz displays and keep 40 as lowest standard. Problem solved

@@MacikSeba "It's unfair that those who upgrade should be missing out" Consoles are mostly for TVs. Show me a 75 inch 4K OLED with 120 Hz that is broadly available since 2019 ... "120hz is one of the consoles selling points" ... not selling point, it's advertisement! The Reality is: Neither PS5 nor Series X are capable of constant 60fps in standard resolution (1440p, 4K) with the advertised Raytracing in most games! Dirt 5, Forza Horizon 5, Spiderman, Guardians ... not even close to 4K 60 (not to talk about RT). 120Hz means 120 fps. In this games the consoles deliver one fourth of it when you set "next gen graphics" as a standard (which is not 1080p). And 40 fps in Rachet and Clank still is very poor when the old game on ps4 had like 30 fps.

@@hassosigbjoernson5738 ratchet and Clank Rift Apart was great on Ps5. A stunning showcase. The 60 Fps RT mode was the sweet spot. For the 4K resolution 40 Fps played out very nice as well.

Yeah. This is worth the play. No need to pay full price if you can wait, but don’t forget about it.

On sale now for $38.99 on Xbox 😃

I picked it up for Black Friday for $25, the steal of the year considering it's just a month old, this game is awesome.

Or play it for free on Game Pass this week :)

Gears 5 did this on Xbox One X and DF said the transitions were jarring. I think Battlefield Hardline also did the same and they said the same thing so I doubt it will be any better of a solution now than it was those years ago

YES

I've always wondered why this isn't a thing for more games. Only a few do this, such as both splatoon games

I keep doing this manually, would def help if they just made it a setting.

I would stay in 30fps just because the game looks awkward at 60. It gets even more cartoony looking.

Was just thinking of that exact thing while watching the video.

Same, bought on a whim. Gameplay is okay but story is great and hilarious with some choices. Music is awesome too.

That's what you call gaming! You enjoy the game instead of being too technical about feetpersecond 😜

Maybe you don't notice because of vrr lol

@@DuplexCherry That's exactly it

Just picked it up for $25 bucks over Black Friday, same here. Playing on Series X this is one the best games I've played this year. And it looks great even in performance mode.

In an open word... Shame on EIdos

@@adrianalonso3891 Even Avengers got Dynamic 4K 60fps with all that crazy wide destruction for Series X

@@destroyermcw626 absolutely

After 34hrs completion time(I’m very methodical in my sp playthroughs), I can safely say that on a PS5, with a LG C1 OLED that quality is the way to go. I can’t speak for other displays. But on a OLED, quality mode really makes a massive difference. Either way, this game is a BANGER

But but dEvS aRe lAzY. /s

I got the Plat yesterday. It’s the first game this gen I’ve played on quality mode. Looks stunning. Performance mode is a blurry mess.

I could never change the fps for a higher resolution. For me it looks great in performance mode.

@@lepricon87 it’s a 1080p low quality blurry mess in performance mode and doesn’t stay at 60. Dips to 40

It was, but you get used to it then it grows on you

I know there playing it safe with 1080p ps5 and series x and do more

In a video that you’re watching them not hold 60, at 1080p with lower settings, you want 1440p60. Get a PC.

@@chuckmayhem1991 they should have optimised the game better but I don't want a PC for gaming, I have a ps5 and a series s for that, obviously PC is better but I don't want to pay like 4 grand just for PC gaming

@@pjm8395_ my 5700xt runs it at 60 fps at 1800p and with amd sharpening it simply looks 4k, that pc cost me 900 bucks last year 4 grands would get you a nasa pc

@@samdixon3719 I was being flippant haha

That seems likely.

@Lov Mir wtf was that sentence.

@Lov Mir if you think a ps5 or series x can outperform an rtx 3070 you are very very mistaken

@@brokeashellgaming999 Xbox series X can outperform 3080 easily.

@@piotrszewczyk6176 lol what have you been watching series x can't even outperform a 2080 super.

Exactly the avengers game runs at 4k60 so wtf is this

I think it’s acceptable on the PSX/N64/Saturn to have to run the game at 1080p for 60 FPS. Then again, I guess those 5th Gen consoles could to a little better for games such as 1958s “Tennis For Two”.

it’s not gen 5, it’s gen 9

Eidos Montreal sucks at optimizing. Just look at their track record.

4k/60fps requires 8 times more processing than 1080p/30fps. It's not that simple

The bottleneck is they don’t know how to optimize. This is embarrassing. Runs worse than Cyberpunk.

It's probably an optimization problem.

Yes it doesn't make any sense that with quarter the resolution and further drops in graphical settings they barely could get double the frame-rate. Probably an engine issue.

Bottleneck in the engine due to the density of the environments , that's what I'm guessing ,

@@mr_world_wide That might be it. They are using the Dawn engine that is a heavily modified Glacier 2 engine that was used in Hitman i believe.

Ps5 doesn't support 1440p which is probably why it's not on Xbox either. A shame on Sony's part.

@@BLitzRunner77 the XS logo is misleading on this game on my opinion. It is not truely optimised. Just adapted.

@@BLitzRunner77 PS5 doesn't support 1440p output, but it could perfectly run a game at native 1440p and then upscale to 4K / downscale to 1080p

@@BLitzRunner77 Not how this works.

@@BLitzRunner77 LOL, you think game's changing entire console output resolution when in-game pixel count changes? There's such thing like scaling, down-sampling etc. Game is running whatever set/DSR and it's resized (up or downscaled) to screen resolution (4K I guess), which is fixed. It's not PS1 era with resolution/refresh changes with every game or scene. LUL

It dims the screen a lot

Yeah, I enjoyed playing RDR2 on PS4 pro on Samsung au9000 at 4k with clear motion and outside game mode feeling like 60fps, but sometimes you can see artifacts, but it's better than juddering. Input lag goes from 10ms to 30ms still nice and much more pleasant than cloud gaming))

Doesn't that introduce input lag and Motion artifacts?

@@ThibautMahringer yes it’s not worth it

@@malazan6004 whoops I meant to say the TruMotion feature - you are right Motion clarity feature is just Black frame insertion that will dim the screen. I do not use BFI on this game. I only use TruMotion - Smooth Movement setting

Yeah no cap I couldn’t tell it was running 1080p but still had frame drops below 20 in later chapters

I've seen recently that people are buying gaming monitors for playing console games, in a desk probably too. so the "plying (console games) on a TV from a normal viewing distance" stuff is not always true anymore

@@ahumeniy some people were doing that long before this generation. But they were and always will be a minority. As a proof of that look no further than Sony not supporting 1440p on their consoles.

Ray tracing will def not be on 4K if it even offers it

That raytracing mode sounding more and more like a PC exclusive going by the video analysis here lol.

@@crazykenbei yeah consoles aren’t that strong to run 4K ray tracing. It’ll probably run at 2 FPS

@@adrianramirez8516 yeah the company pretty much lied. They were saying it was going to be a 4k 30 fps, a 1440p 60 fps and a 1080p 60fps ray trace mode 😂

@@adrianramirez8516 your absolutely right! It would probably be more like 1080p 30 with raytracing. That would suck.

Why would you need 120hz for 40fps? A vsync thing? Is that what performance RT is in ratchet?

@@Hijynx87 performance rt in ratchet is 1440p 60hz. The quality mode if you have a 120hz display is 40hz at a native 4k.

Same . 1080p at 60ish is unacceptable at this point.

I can notice a bit but I notice the difference in fps much more

Funny enough, from what I hear, the game looks much better on Xbox One X than it does on the Series S. Funny all these years later, the One X is still a resolution powerhouse.

Perhaps but would have been nice to have it as an option even if it was unstable for those with vrr displays. This image quality drop is rough.

The bugs and unstablity are definitely detailed

There is no Series S version of Cyberpunk though. Waiting for that Next Gen patch. I don't mind 30fps if it's stable and i have good graphics (the Series S is only 299$ so i'm ok with that) but i do think the Series S is able to do better than that. I'm not overestimating it cause it's still far from the PS5/Series X but it can do magic if used properly

There is no Series S version. You're running the Xbox One version at Xbox One settings on a significantly more capable machine. So yes it's understandable to get smoother gameplay.

Cyberpunk is a last-gen game.

@@Aggrofool It was stuck in-between, and that's what ruined it.

Not really tho it can go to 1440p but because of drs it's at 1080p or less

Yeah I wasn't planning on picking this up at all based off of the pre-release coverage. Then the reviews hit, I watched SkillUp's video, and bought the game. Well worth it - it's a fantastic game and likely a GOTY contender imo

For me it's not simply an advertising thing. I'm full to bursting of Marvel and if I weren't I think the MCU cast would have held greater appeal. I might check this out one day but I'm in no rush.

I don't think it was necessarily the marketing. Think it was more the backlash Avengers got. People just didn't trust the game

How's the exquisite writing and constant amazing dialogue between character's? Soo 👍

After the avengers fiasco, people were wary lol.

1440 should be the starting point on the new machines, even Series S. We definitely shouldn't be dipping under 1440 on the Series X and PS5.

I look at it more like 60fps is standard since it's been the baseline for PC gaming for over a decade now. 30fps modes are strictly for showcasing visuals and fidelity. Current-gen boasts 120fps and has hit it in more games than I would've thought prior to the start of this gen. So, I can't see going back to 30 being normal from here on out.

Most likely will

I think more games will be 30fps in the coming years when graphics will be better

@@gtavshortclips4740 it'll most likely just be what it is now they'll give you the option performance or quality mode

@@gtavshortclips4740 why though

Seriously, on pc when you drop 4k to 1440p it typically doubles frames instantly. When you drop to 1080p from 1440p that's when you see way less of a frame increase, but it still gives a little more. Bad optimization is bad.

Tech info in game reviews should be mandatory. How can massive frame rate drops not affect gameplay for example? Or crashing? So why doesn't IGN include it. Simple. A "review" on IGN ( and others ) is nothing more than an advert. Companies know full well the average consumer will see the review first and then make the purchase. Wouldn't want the little technical details getting in the way would we?

@@robsmall6466 well it has its ups and downs. I think df fawn over games like RE8 because the tech is good but the game was extremely underwhelming for me.

@@robsmall6466 I don't think console gamers are as sensitive to it as much as PC gamers are. Some are,most don't care. At least not enough to stay away from consoles. And how much do you think that should affect the score in the era of performance paches. If game had massive drops,more often than not,I am sure reviewers would mention it.

@@GameslordXY But they are NOT mentioning it. Check out IGN's 7 min review of Guardians or Nintendo Life's review of Pillars of Eternity. Far too many are not mentioning it. I wonder why? Maybe because they are not "reviews" but glorified paid for adverts

@@robsmall6466 dude chill out. They don’t mention it since not everyone cares about that stuff or even has the tools to measure it objectively like DF does. Let’s stop with the “X are sellouts” just because they don’t produce the content you want.

No game, on either PC or console, lets you do that. Oh wait, Doom on MS-DOS lets you do it when you hit F5.

Some might say that this is asking too much, but I actually like this idea a lot.

Ideally they could have separate settings for fights vs the rest so you could just set them separately and forget it. Plenty of 60fps games have 30fps realtime cutscenes.

Pretty easy to measure frame rate. You'll be able to see and feel it chugging. Xbox One and PS4 should have been included. But that would of been too easy really wouldn't it

@@robsmall6466 That's not a measurement. Yes I can see a game chug and guess its 20 fps or lower but I know the number. I tried plugging the X1 into a capture device and use OBS to get a frame rate but it was a static 30 despite the frame rate was all over the place.

@@baroncalamityplus Mine was more a comment on the quality of releases rather than a realistic way to record frame rate comment. Sounds like an uncapped framerate maybe. I'd rather have a consistent 30fps than something bouncing about depending what's going on. Can't see why we can't have separate reviews. A minute or two just to say how the game is technically on PS4 Base, Pro or Xbox One

This isn't 1080p at all. This looks like 900p if not 720p lmao.

That's strange, it seems like there's a memory leak somewhere maybe? If this is the case patches should fix it

How often should I restart ?

Yikes

@@franciscofarias6385 there was a patch recently, at least on steam, which addressed memory leak specifically

@@franciscofarias6385 someone didn't null a pointer somewhere.

Obviously that's not always possible thanks to time, not getting the code, not having the lastest patch etc. If you're that worried about how about you don't buy a game you're unsure about day 1 and wait 'til you've seen what you needed to see before you buy it? Also, most tech reviews would be covered by the same embargo that actual game reviews are, so if the embargo is launch day they couldn't post it earlier even if they'd got it done.

Don't buy games from lazy devs. It's simple. This was EXTREMELY poorly optimized.

Miles morales gets 60 with ray tracing

@@neonbible08 Insomniac is very very talented, that's why you can get a dynamic res above 1080p with ray tracing and 60 fps

It was his first day, y'all have no chill lol

The new guy needs more practice

It was okay, certainly not bad. With some time he will be good.

Didn't ask

@@turkeyleg1 🤣🤣🤣

Ver. 1.3.0 (Released October 26, 2021) Made adjustments in preparation for Expansion Pass Wave 2: Guardian of Remembrance. Addressed several issues, including a rare case that prevented game progress. Doesn't specify what was patched but hopefully it was that FPS laggy mess. I haven't had issues playing in Hyrule field.

Any other situation. PC Elitist: PC Master race

No one wins with 1080p modes

@@chesron456 Agreed. 1080/60 for next-gen is sub-par. Should be 1440 at least. Or some type of dynamic in that ballpark.