• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

Fidelity Super Resolution in 2021

Wrinkly said:
I've always stuggled to be drawn in to 3D games due to the cardboard cutout look, with floating NPCs/Objects. I wasn't blown away by CP2077 as such, but I did at last feel I was looking at a 3D scene. At one point I forgot I had left it running instead thinking I had left the TV on. NPCs looked grounded, lights projected their shape rather than a point and the shadows were spot on.
Click to expand...
I have heard this a lot but this is not true for normal NPCs in Cyberpunk. They are still as floaty as hell. The only thing that grabs one's attention is reflections in certain areas but the game still has that plastic feeling for me. If we are talking about Metro EE; despite its numerous flaws it has one of the best and noticeable implementations of RT.
 
Last edited:
Gerard said:
I can see more people using it for single player, but for multi? Not a chance. That's all about the fps, not having 64 players gathered around a Bush arguing wether the ray traced shadow is more aesthetically pleasing than the rasterized shadow.
Click to expand...

The picture in my head of that scenario playing out is funnier than it really should be.
 
Harlequin said:
When a game - CP2077, needs to be played at a much lower resolution with DXR enabled, then the hardware isnt up to the job (as HUB says weekly). 1080p upscaling is just that - upscaling. Call it what you will, DLSS/FSR, its just fakery.
Click to expand...
Don't say it out loud, or you will be attacked by people who scream "NO NEED NATIVE!!! NATIVE RESOLUTION IS SATAN'S SPAWN!! IT IS UNNECESSARY TO CHASE NATIVE 4K!! COMPUTATIONAL POWER IS WASTED ON RES!"

TBH, I prefer native, sharp and clear 4K image over 960p to 1440p RT'ed image. Games these days just look so blurry that the 4K is a minimum for me to get acceptable sharpness. Everyone has their own preferences, but native 4K is something else when it comes to image quality.

It seems like some people just hate native 4k and want to push other graphical aspects instead... RT is one of them... Not quite sure I'm liking the direction.
 
oguzsoso said:
Don't say it out loud, or you will be attacked by people who scream "NO NEED NATIVE!!! NATIVE RESOLUTION IS SATAN'S SPAWN!! IT IS UNNECESSARY TO CHASE NATIVE 4K!! COMPUTATIONAL POWER IS WASTED ON RES!"

TBH, I prefer native, sharp and clear 4K image over 960p-1440p RT'ed image. Games these days just look so blurry that the 4K is a minimum for me to get acceptable sharpness. Everyone has their own preferences, but native 4K is something else when it comes to image quality.

It seems like some people just hate native 4k and want to push other graphical aspects instead... RT is one of them... Not quite sure I'm liking the direction.
Click to expand...
Completely agree with the point about the lack of clean, sharp image in games these days. Taking into account TAA, post-processing stuff, and now with the advent of DLSS/FSR it seems that the days of proper native resolution graphics are numbered.
 
Wrinkly said:
I've always stuggled to be drawn in to 3D games due to the cardboard cutout look, with floating NPCs/Objects. I wasn't blown away by CP2077 as such, but I did at last feel I was looking at a 3D scene. At one point I forgot I had left it running instead thinking I had left the TV on. NPCs looked grounded, lights projected their shape rather than a point and the shadows were spot on.
Click to expand...

https://youtu.be/PsBrkLq31eM?t=104

There's just a... weirdness in the graphics of Cp 2077. I can't quite pinpoint it, but I can't just see it as a "good looking" game. It looks very weird along the lines of looking crap and looking good.

It specifically shines at nights, where the contrast is darker and cool reflections are brought in, but in day light graphics, it just... falls flat. Despite the advanced global illumination, ray traced lighting and all that stuff.

I may even argue that it has the best night time graphics I've ever seen in a game, but on the other end of the spectrum, day light graphics just sucks... Day light GTA 5 seems "better" to me compared to Cyberpunk. A texture quality bump for GTA 5 would probably make it competitive against Cyberpunk (can't compete with lighting, shadows and night time reflections though)
 
Hedge said:
Why? What if solutions look no different unless viewed under a microscope?
Click to expand...
I guess it's the satisfaction gained from knowing you have the grunt to conquer the ultimate resolutions and image quality settings. I game at 75 FPS and expect to be able to achieve that if I've forked out for a top tier card. I'd be disappointed if I had to utilise a trick to be able to obtain satisfactory performance levels, just as I am when I have to lower any graphical settings.
 
heartburnron said:
I guess it's the satisfaction gained from knowing you have the grunt to conquer the ultimate resolutions and image quality settings. I game at 75 FPS and expect to be able to achieve that if I've forked out for a top tier card. I'd be disappointed if I had to utilise a trick to be able to obtain satisfactory performance levels, just as I am when I have to lower any graphical settings.
Click to expand...

If it looked the same youd likely use it. Because then you could say your top tier card can do 150fps while others do 100 :)
 
Hedge said:
If it looked the same youd likely use it. Because then you could say your top tier card can do 150fps while others do 100 :)
Click to expand...
Looked the same and almost the same (even if it is 99% ) are two different things. If upscaling can give an objectively better image than native for all scenarios then people like me would switch to it. Until then it's equivalent to lowering your settings.
 
Looks great.

AMD-FSR-4.jpg
 
Abhishek Shukla said:
Looked the same and almost the same (even if it is 99% ) are two different things. If upscaling can give an objectively better image than native for all scenarios then people like me would switch to it. Until then it's equivalent to lowering your settings.
Click to expand...

So if it offered double the framerate and looked 99% the same you'd choose to stick to a crap framerate out of principle lol.
 
People don't want to turn down settings yet they turn off graphical effects or turn them down which results in considerably worse IQ anyway as opposed to a "slight" loss in sharpness/clarity/detail :confused:
 
Hedge said:
So if it offered double the framerate and looked 99% the same you'd choose to stick to a crap framerate out of principle lol.
Click to expand...
Not on principle but quality. If I wanted higher framerates with lower settings I wouldn't be aiming for Ultra settings with all the bells and whistles turned on. Ideally, I want both and I can compromise if I have no choice but I can't lie to myself that I am getting the best possible IQ with DLSS/FSR.
 
Hedge said:
Why? What if solutions look no different unless viewed under a microscope?
Click to expand...
The irony being that people will turn on DLSS or FSR because "you need a microscope to see the difference"; but will leave ultra quality (or what ever the highest graphical setting is) turned on even though "you need a microscope to see the difference" between the two highest presets.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom