Bloodborne review embargo lifted, confirmed game of the generation - Polidicks

[QUOTE=L33t Pinez;47390572]I have Bloodborne, and the reviews arent lying. But of course, Facepunch MUST be critical on the FPS, which isnt even noticable even tho I play PC games all the time?[/QUOTE] I am a framerate apologist and I can't lie about this, the FPS on this game is pretty sub-par most of the time.

is this music made by the same guy who did black mesa soundtrack? the violin sounds almost similar

[QUOTE=L33t Pinez;47390572]I have Bloodborne, and the reviews arent lying. But of course, Facepunch MUST be critical on the FPS, which isnt even noticable even tho I play PC games all the time?[/QUOTE] hey, I'm just going by my thoughts on it. FPS is everyone's way of directly putting a number on how the game performs. For me, 30 is bad performance, less is impossible. Bad performance doesn't mean bad game, though.

[QUOTE=Matrix374;47392526]Shit gets down to sub-30 a whole fucking lot. Not to unplayable levels but I wished it was 60[/QUOTE] Yep; my opinion as well. Great, fantastic game from what I've played, but I really wish it had a stable frame rate.

[QUOTE=BusterBluth;47391356]Sub 30 fps is pretty sad and is noticeable to a lot of people. I wouldn't even say it is a slight against the game but the ps4. It shouldn't already be struggling to run games, which really are not all that demanding.[/QUOTE] "Looks demanding" and "is demanding" are two very different things. The game not look like it's pushing the hardware, but that doesn't mean From haven't fucked something up and are inadvertently causing the game to do extra work for the same results. We're still only a couple of years into the life of these consoles, give it a year or two more and I expect we'll start seeing many more 60FPS games as developers work out what they're actually doing. Everybody is in a rush to get their first few PS4 games out, they haven't taken time to fiddle I expect. It took a while for PS3 games to start looking decent and running consistently, and PS2 games, and PS1 games.

[QUOTE=L33t Pinez;47390572]I have Bloodborne, and the reviews arent lying. But of course, Facepunch MUST be critical on the FPS, which isnt even noticable even tho I play PC games all the time?[/QUOTE] The game is great, but I don't know how you [I]can't[/I] notice it.

[QUOTE=Skyward;47393652]The game is great, but I don't know how you [I]can't[/I] notice it.[/QUOTE] he probably has much older PC hardware, but, nothing wrong in that

True enough, but I'd assumed that, based on what he said, he's used to 60fps.

The asspain is real on the first page

[QUOTE=J!NX;47393654]he probably has much older PC hardware, but, nothing wrong in that[/QUOTE] No, I do not have older PC hardware, I actually have a brand new windows 8 computer which I am not using currently, but while it plays a tiny bit smoother then the console, it is barely noticeable. However, each to there own. Facepunch is more used to PC, I suppose.

[QUOTE=L33t Pinez;47390572]I have Bloodborne, and the reviews arent lying. But of course, Facepunch MUST be critical on the FPS, which isnt even noticable even tho I play PC games all the time?[/QUOTE] I don't have a PS4, but from what I've seen it has a tendency to hang around 20 fps and even dropping into the single digits sometime. So it's basically Blighttown: the game. I had a really, really hard time getting into Dark Souls because of the incredibly shitty framerates, even though Dark Souls 2 runs at 60 nearly all the time. Honestly if Dark Souls also had 30 second long loadscreens I would have given up on it very early. Took me months to gather up the willpower to go through the undead burg, the game was just very poorly ported. Felt like emulation. I honestly wouldn't buy Bloodborne on PC if its port was of the same quality.

[QUOTE=THAT SO CHI;47394430]I don't have a PS4, but from what I've seen it has a tendency to hang around 20 fps and even dropping into the single digits sometime. So it's basically Blighttown: the game.[/QUOTE] Well, what you've seen does not really match what I've seen. I have a PS4, and I have the game.

I don't know where everyone is getting these long load times from because the longest one I've ever counted was 12 seconds

[QUOTE=salty peanut v2;47394605]I don't know where everyone is getting these long load times from because the longest one I've ever counted was 12 seconds[/QUOTE] Have you installed an SSD in your PS4?

[QUOTE=THAT SO CHI;47394430]I don't have a PS4-[/QUOTE] Well I do, and I own the game. And as much of a bitch as it is for the game to be capped at 30fps, I can say [I]from experience[/I] it hangs pretty tightly around it.

This ost is fucking insane. [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DaoyKECQnPw&list=PLKzg0DeoAjD-cGZOEspgvDGpFal8S2aS-&index=4[/media]

[QUOTE=hexpunK;47393554]"Looks demanding" and "is demanding" are two very different things. The game not look like it's pushing the hardware, but that doesn't mean From haven't fucked something up and are inadvertently causing the game to do extra work for the same results. We're still only a couple of years into the life of these consoles, give it a year or two more and I expect we'll start seeing many more 60FPS games as developers work out what they're actually doing. Everybody is in a rush to get their first few PS4 games out, they haven't taken time to fiddle I expect. It took a while for PS3 games to start looking decent and running consistently, and PS2 games, and PS1 games.[/QUOTE] 60fps at what cost? How is that going to look in a couple years? The same as now? I don't think the rest of the playstations are good examples, those machines where relatively top or near top of the line when released. The PS4 was unarguably out of date the day it was released.

I gotta admit I find Bloodborne's combat to be a lot more satisfying than the previous games, I think they struck a good balance of agility and strength being important. The bosses feel so much more ridiculously punishing though. I guess that's because its easier to heal now.

[QUOTE=BusterBluth;47395613]60fps at what cost? How is that going to look in a couple years? The same as now? I don't think the rest of the playstations are good examples, those machines where relatively top or near top of the line when released. The PS4 was unarguably out of date the day it was released.[/QUOTE] I would hopefully expect them to look better than they currently do whilst performing better as that is how graphics technology has progressed since its inception. Developers will find optimisations they totally overlooked, they always have done and always will. Sony made their API to fit the most basic needs no doubt, given time the people who want to will surpass it and work around it for extra performance. Outdated hardware doesn't mean as much when the architecture is designed to squeeze everything it can from it. We see this every generation. Why are people still surprised by the earlier games not looking or running as good as they "should" do? This happens no matter the console, but I kept it to the Playstation line because it seemed more applicable.

I'm playing it off the hard drive (Got it from the playstation store) and I'm not having of the FPS/ long load times you guys are talking about.

So you are telling me they just published a game with that famous Dark Soul-ish gameplay I find seriously overrated, but with an incredible setting and music and without that cliche medieval fantasy crap? I'm in

[QUOTE=BusterBluth;47395613]The PS4 was unarguably out of date the day it was released.[/QUOTE] No it wasn't? Mid end =/= outdated. It's like saying a new car is outdated because it ain't got 2000 horsepowers. The PS4 isn't supposed to compete with the highest end PCs, it's price range is way lower.

[QUOTE=paul simon;47398236]No it wasn't? Mid end =/= outdated. It's like saying a new car is outdated because it ain't got 2000 horsepowers. The PS4 isn't supposed to compete with the highest end PCs, it's price range is way lower.[/QUOTE] It suppose to last for the next eight or so years, maybe longer, running on tech that, as you said, is already considered mid end. [editline]26th March 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=hexpunK;47396566]I would hopefully expect them to look better than they currently do whilst performing better as that is how graphics technology has progressed since its inception. Developers will find optimisations they totally overlooked, they always have done and always will. Sony made their API to fit the most basic needs no doubt, given time the people who want to will surpass it and work around it for extra performance. Outdated hardware doesn't mean as much when the architecture is designed to squeeze everything it can from it. We see this every generation. Why are people still surprised by the earlier games not looking or running as good as they "should" do? This happens no matter the console, but I kept it to the Playstation line because it seemed more applicable.[/QUOTE] You can only optimize so much. There isn't going to be some magic process in which the PS4 is going to be running gorgeous games at 60 fps in a few years. That's totally subjective though

[QUOTE=BusterBluth;47398251]It suppose to last for the next eight or so years, maybe longer, running on tech that, as you said, is already considered mid end.[/QUOTE] There is no way the PS5 will come out in 2021. The PS3 gen lasting 8 years is the exception. Most gens are about 5 or 6 years. Anyway, there is no framerate problem, there's a video which shows it's 30fps 99.9% of the time. The appearance of stuttering is due to frame times, not framerate. There are 30 fps, but not evenly spaced out. For example, a smooth looking 30fps on a 60hz display would be 1-1-2-2-3-3-4-4-5-5 But with Bloodborne it can be something like.. 1-2-2-2-3-3-4-5-5-5 They're patching this issue, and the loading issue also. [QUOTE=BusterBluth;47391356]Sub 30 fps is pretty sad and is noticeable to a lot of people. I wouldn't even say it is a slight against the game but the ps4. It shouldn't already be struggling to run games, which really are not all that demanding.[/QUOTE] The statement "X shouldn't already be struggling to run X" is flawed. It implies that hardware somehow degrades. That a system is going to weaken over time or something. It takes the blame away from the game makers and places it solely on the system itself. It doesn't really mean anything, because an ugly game could be sputtering at 25fps and a game that looks 3x better could run 60fps on the same system. Examples being NFS Carbon vs Gran Turismo 6. Or Tetris PS4 vs Metro Redux PS4.

[QUOTE=EliaMoroes;47397963]So you are telling me they just published a game with that famous Dark Soul-ish gameplay I find seriously overrated, but with an incredible setting and music and without that cliche medieval fantasy crap? I'm in[/QUOTE] "cliche medieval fantasy crap" -someone who clearly never played a souls game past the first area

[QUOTE=dark soul;47397728]I'm playing it off the hard drive (Got it from the playstation store) and I'm not having of the FPS/ long load times you guys are talking about.[/QUOTE] Yes you are. You are just too ignorant to tell. Really, I've played games with an FPS counter in the top right for probably a decade now - I can tell when something is 60, 30, and sub-30 easily but this is not something I expect ANYONE else to be able to do. I really have to doubt you know what anyone is talking about. [editline]27th March 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=CrimsonChin;47409201]There is no way the PS5 will come out in 2021. The PS3 gen lasting 8 years is the exception. Most gens are about 5 or 6 years. Anyway, there is no framerate problem, there's a video which shows it's 30fps 99.9% of the time. The appearance of stuttering is due to frame times, not framerate. There are 30 fps, but not evenly spaced out. For example, a smooth looking 30fps on a 60hz display would be 1-1-2-2-3-3-4-4-5-5 But with Bloodborne it can be something like.. 1-2-2-2-3-3-4-5-5-5 They're patching this issue, and the loading issue also. [/QUOTE] Oh I'm sorry, Dark Soul - THIS guy doesn't know what he's talking about.

[QUOTE=EliaMoroes;47397963]So you are telling me they just published a game with that famous Dark Soul-ish gameplay I find seriously overrated, but with an incredible setting and music and [B]without that cliche medieval fantasy crap?[/B] I'm in[/QUOTE] You fucking serious?

[QUOTE=Take_Opal;47410044] Oh I'm sorry, Dark Soul - THIS guy doesn't know what he's talking about.[/QUOTE] Stop, just stop. Frame rate is not the only aspect of smooth motion. Frame pacing is an actual thing, and it's the cause of the stuttering in this game . There is [I]no[/I] frame rate problem. If you could force 30hz output, the stutter would be eliminated. [url]http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2015-bloodborne-performance-analysis[/url] So maybe you should climb off your high horse for a moment.

[QUOTE=Geikkamir;47409416]"cliche medieval fantasy crap" -someone who clearly never played a souls game past the first area[/QUOTE] That may be, but seeing a couple friends playing in later areas, like Anor Londo or the Duke's Library, it doesn't seem that the environments really leave the whole medieval fantasy setting

tbh I think people don't understand what framerate actually means to people and why people are so pissy about 30 fps [video=youtube;YCWZ_kWTB9w]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YCWZ_kWTB9w[/video] people aren't pissy because it's some "Arbitrary number that doesn't matter above 30 fps", it makes a huge difference.