While the Baba Yaga DLC is out for the Xbox consoles, the PC version of Rise of the Tomb Raider is coming tomorrow. If you need one more look at it, Square Enix has released a PC tech trailer and new screenshots.
Loakum @Driftwood Awesome! I’m loving it! It does show a much crisper picture and the frame rate looks good! I was playing Stella Blade and Dragonball Soarkling Blast! :) (2 Weeks ago)
Driftwood @Loakum: enjoy, the one Sony sent us will be there on launch day. Coverage will follow asap. (2 Weeks ago)
Loakum *takes a large sip of victorious grape juice* ok….my PS5 pro arrived early! So much winning! :) (2 Weeks ago)
Driftwood @reneyvane: non ils l'ont publié le 1er octobre et je crois que tu l'avais déjà linkée. ;) (5 Weeks ago)
CraCra Y a un souci sur les forums ? (8 Weeks ago)
nostradamus very few with religious beliefs are naive or zealots, but for sure don't find amusing their beliefs being thrown in for clout. maybe STFU with that discourse? (11 Weeks ago)
Driftwood Download is now functional again on Gamersyde. Sorry for the past 53 days or so when it wasn't. (> 3 Months ago)
Driftwood Another (French) livestream today at 2:30 CEST but you're welcome to drop by and speak English. I will gladly answer in English when I get a chance to catch a breath. :) (> 3 Months ago)
Driftwood GSY is getting some nice content at 3 pm CEST with our July podcast and some videos of the Deus Ex Mankind Divided preview build. :) (> 3 Months ago)
Driftwood For once we'll be live at 4:30 pm CEST. Blim should not even be tired! (> 3 Months ago)
Driftwood More Quantum Break coverage coming in a few hours, 9:00 a.m CEST. (> 3 Months ago)
Driftwood We'll have a full review up for Firewatch at 7 pm CET. Videos will only be tomorrow though. (> 3 Months ago)
Driftwood Tonight's livestream will be at 9:15 GMT+1, not GMT+2 as first stated. (> 3 Months ago)
All comments (21)
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2...
As anyone would pretty much guess the PC version gets multiple options + 60fps, however the XB1 version still holds up surprisingly well none the less.
XB1
http://images.eurogamer.net/2015/articles//a/1/8/0...
PC Ultra
http://images.eurogamer.net/2015/articles//a/1/8/0...
XB1
http://images.eurogamer.net/2015/articles//a/1/8/0...
PC Ultra
http://images.eurogamer.net/2015/articles//a/1/8/0...
XB1
http://images.eurogamer.net/2015/articles//a/1/8/0...
PC Ultra
http://images.eurogamer.net/2015/articles//a/1/8/0...
Another interesting read - "First and foremost, the venerable DF budget PC with an i3 processor and GTX 750 Ti finally met its match with Rise of the Tomb Raider. Running with settings similar to Xbox One, we found that testing areas saw the game turn in frame-rates between 13 and 25fps."
GTX750 Ti is a 1.7 Tflops GPU btw.
Other than that in a year from now the XB1/PC versions will be dirt cheap with all content anyways, but that's If you're willing to wait that long. If you buy an Nvidia GPU right now you get the game bundled for free as an incentive. I would recommend that to anyone who's into PC gaming.
https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=de...
So it's pretty much a given that PS4 will have to optimize for 1080p with 900p cut scenes, or reduce some other features and make it a constant 1080p.
In the same graph i posted the GTX770 is 20fps struggling at 1080p + FXAA for this game, and its a 3.2 Tflops card. Either way, currently all higher-end gaming rigs are using FXAA for this game. So it comes down to features and pixels, or a balance of both. Me thinks the devs will chose XB1 configuration with a stable performance of 30fps. considering stronger setups are experiencing harsh dips when pushing more features.
Nixxes did an excellent job on the PC version - just like they did with the Xbox 360 version. Nixxes is an incredible Port developer, even better than Bluepoint Games in my humble opinion.
Here's a gif example from one of the comments on the Digital Foundry's article: http://i.imgur.com/mccZrLw.gif
Nixxes' work on the Xbox 360 version not only excellent graphically, but even delivered a better gameplay experience than the Xbox One version developed by Crystal Dynamics itself.
As for the PC version, the extremely fast input response plus the higher framerate make for a much more smoother and pleasant gameplay experience, specially during combat.
It's really great to see all the praise and love Rise of the Tomb Raider is receiving now that most of the "timed exclusivity" debate is gone and it doesn't have to compete with Fallout 4, Call of Duty: Black Ops 3, Fifa 16 and Star Wars: Battlefront.
It's a brilliant game that's definitely worth playing.
PS. For those waiting for the PS4 version, if you have a good PC or plan to buy one later in the year, it might be interesting to consider the PC version since by then it will be much cheaper and will give the best experience possible. Plus you won't need to wait till November, can play it in April-July when the price will have dropped considerably or even wait for a Steam Summer Sale in June.
Here's a gif example from one of the comments on the Digital Foundry's article: http://i.imgur.com/mccZrLw.gif
Nixxes' work on the Xbox 360 version not only excellent graphically, but even delivered a better gameplay experience than the Xbox One version developed by Crystal Dynamics itself.
yet these settings are present in the XB1 version. (according to DF)
So the XB1 version has it's own custom attention with of course some trade-offs.
Now, What i think is that Nixxes will use a custom preset of the PC version for PS4. PC version has quite a few advantages but performance isn't one of them exactly, not unless a really high-end GPU is used. Another benchmark article was posted today - the lowest tested AMD card (R9 370) which is 2.3Tflops (stronger than PS4) is reaching 22 fps @ 1080p + FXAA.
http://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/rise-of-the-t...
It isn't until the R9 380 (3.4Tflops GPU) is used where 30fps is stable at 1080p + FXAA. The R9 370 in particular can reach a stable 30fps at 1600x900 in high quality cinemas, or 1080p 30fps with toned down settings.
AMD optimized drivers will probably help as well.
In the same graph i posted the GTX770 is 20fps struggling at 1080p + FXAA for this game, and its a 3.2 Tflops card. Either way, currently all higher-end gaming rigs are using FXAA for this game. So it comes down to features and pixels, or a balance of both. Me thinks the devs will chose XB1 configuration with a stable performance of 30fps. considering stronger setups are experiencing harsh dips when pushing more features.
Digital Foundry's Face-Off on the PC version states:
"With frame-rates unlocked and settings maxed at 1080p, the Nvidia card provides a 47.5fps average, matched up against 48.8fps on AMD - but it doesn't tell the full story. Some sections of gameplay see the GTX 970 pull ahead by up to 5fps, while interior scenes, cut-scenes and close-ups see the R9 390 dominant."
And
"So what about locked frame-rate gameplay at 1080p30 and 1080p60? For the former, GTX 960 with a 30fps cap provides an absolutely rock-solid experience, giving us improved levels of consistency over the Xbox One version in terms of performance plus no reduction in resolution on cut-scenes (where the Microsoft console renders at 1440x1080). It even offers some overhead for boosting settings, where we can start by bumping anisotropic filtering up to 16x. The pursuit of 1080p60 at these same settings takes a little more grunt of course, something we can achieve using a GTX 970. Even with tessellation enabled it sits at a solid 60fps, with only The Village level causing frame-drops below. This is a one-off problem area, and the simple solution is to switch this option off - though alternatively, the issue can be mitigated to a degree via overclocking."
While I'm not saying you're wrong and that it isn't true, I find it hard to believe that a Titan X won't do 1080p@60fps at max settings, when a GTX 970 achieves 47.5fps average at 1080p with max settings. Even a GTX 780 achieves a locked 30fps experience at 1440p with mostly very high settings - which the Digital Foundry article also mentions.
I believe even a GTX 980 is enough to reach 1080p@60fps with everything maxed, let alone a GTX 980 Ti. A Titan X is just overkill, and is meant to be used at 1440p or 4k resolution with everything maxed.
Maybe there's a different benchmark that proves it, but it's very hard to believe.
Digital Foundry's Face-Off on the PC version states:
"With frame-rates unlocked and settings maxed at 1080p, the Nvidia card provides a 47.5fps average, matched up against 48.8fps on AMD - but it doesn't tell the full story. Some sections of gameplay see the GTX 970 pull ahead by up to 5fps, while interior scenes, cut-scenes and close-ups see the R9 390 dominant."
And
"So what about locked frame-rate gameplay at 1080p30 and 1080p60? For the former, GTX 960 with a 30fps cap provides an absolutely rock-solid experience, giving us improved levels of consistency over the Xbox One version in terms of performance plus no reduction in resolution on cut-scenes (where the Microsoft console renders at 1440x1080). It even offers some overhead for boosting settings, where we can start by bumping anisotropic filtering up to 16x. The pursuit of 1080p60 at these same settings takes a little more grunt of course, something we can achieve using a GTX 970. Even with tessellation enabled it sits at a solid 60fps, with only The Village level causing frame-drops below. This is a one-off problem area, and the simple solution is to switch this option off - though alternatively, the issue can be mitigated to a degree via overclocking."
While I'm not saying you're wrong and that it isn't true, I find it hard to believe that a Titan X won't do 1080p@60fps at max settings, when a GTX 970 achieves 47.5fps average at 1080p with max settings. Even a GTX 780 achieves a locked 30fps experience at 1440p with mostly very high settings - which the Digital Foundry article also mentions.
I believe even a GTX 980 is enough to reach 1080p@60fps with everything maxed, let alone a GTX 980 Ti. A Titan X is just overkill, and is meant to be used at 1440p or 4k resolution with everything maxed.
Maybe there's a different benchmark that proves it, but it's very hard to believe.
http://images.nvidia.com/geforce-com/international/images/rise-of-the-tomb-raider/rise-of-the-tomb-raider-nvidia-geforce-gtx-900-series-performance.png
They have a full article on their site but I did not bother to read the whole article. Just saw some stats. I should think GTX 970 should run like a butter since it is itself 350$ gfx card. Having said that for me 30fps is fine and game looks beautiful already in medium, high settings which I guess is used in Xbone version ?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uJ3PuclVyK4