Cyberpunk 2077

Reserved for modern gaming discussions.
comchia
Posts: 33
Joined: January 4th, 2020, 9:20 pm

Re: Cyberpunk 2077

Postby comchia » December 20th, 2020, 8:55 pm

ThePixelatedGenocide wrote:
Voor wrote:Agreed. When I saw the trailers and what not, I just assumed it was going to be exclusive to PS5, PC, and SeX Box. Are watered down ports EVER successful?


Sure. Ms. Pac-Man on 2600. Duke Nukem 3d on Saturn. Marvel vs. Capcom 3 on Vita.

You've just got to be realistic about the system limitations.

And you can't rush the downgrade.

Cyberpunk 2077's PS4/XBoxOne ports weren't a priority, according to the people making them. They just didn't care, and they didn't want to hire anyone more qualified to do it.

They just wanted the money, without doing the work.


When I think of polished ports on weaker hardware, I think of Panic Button and their excellent Doom/Wolfenstein ports on Switch. While running at a lower detail and 30 FPS, for a handheld platform, you couldn't ask for much better, especially in how smooth they run under those limitations. If only CD Projekt Red could've had that energy for the PS4/Xbox One versions.

VicViper
Posts: 108
Joined: October 22nd, 2015, 2:36 pm

Re: Cyberpunk 2077

Postby VicViper » December 21st, 2020, 4:12 am

comchia wrote:
ThePixelatedGenocide wrote:
Voor wrote:Agreed. When I saw the trailers and what not, I just assumed it was going to be exclusive to PS5, PC, and SeX Box. Are watered down ports EVER successful?


Sure. Ms. Pac-Man on 2600. Duke Nukem 3d on Saturn. Marvel vs. Capcom 3 on Vita.

You've just got to be realistic about the system limitations.

And you can't rush the downgrade.

Cyberpunk 2077's PS4/XBoxOne ports weren't a priority, according to the people making them. They just didn't care, and they didn't want to hire anyone more qualified to do it.

They just wanted the money, without doing the work.


When I think of polished ports on weaker hardware, I think of Panic Button and their excellent Doom/Wolfenstein ports on Switch. While running at a lower detail and 30 FPS, for a handheld platform, you couldn't ask for much better, especially in how smooth they run under those limitations. If only CD Projekt Red could've had that energy for the PS4/Xbox One versions.


It's really not comparable though.

Doom for example is a fast FPS with lots of corridors and self-contained rooms. Even when you go outside the areas are compact enough to not ask too much from the hardware when it either needs to render or load new data. It's similar to how the Shenmue Passport's models look so good for Dreamcast, while in Shenmue 1 they're obviously not of the same quality, it's not the same context at all.

Also, Doom on Switch had a lot of early pain, it had to be patched several times for over a whole year to run as well as it does now, and even then it still drops frames and cutbacks like the effects running at quarter resolution are pretty obvious. And both Doom and especially Wolfenstein have to run at stupidly low dynamic resolutions to work on Switch, docked Wolfenstein in particular runs anywhere from 720p to 640x360p and scales towards the low end very often.

Cyberpunk is different, it's an open world game and constant loading & CPU grunt is the name of the game, and you can clearly see the cutbacks that have to be made for any of the console versions to run The Witcher 3. Yes, even the PS4/Xbox One versions once ran poorly, with models popping, visual glitches and frequent dips in framerates. That's where CDPR really did good by patching the game until it ran 95% of the time at a solid 30 FPS, but that took a year or two to get there.

The Switch version of The Witcher 3 in particular looks terrible and doesn't run very well even though it's supremely impressive for the system, and this is the mindset people should've gone with for the PS4/Xbox One versions of Cyberpunk.
Gaming on the Switch has a "take what we can get" or "settle for less" mentality, and I don't think anyone would really be happy on PS4 if a high end PS5 game managed to run on there but at a resolution that's lower than your typical Dreamcast game from 1999, like how Wolfenstein runs on Switch. Thing is... people seem to forget that the PS4/Xbox One are late 2013 consoles which didn't even have all that high end of a hardware at the time to begin with.

The PS4's GPU is pretty much equivalent to just a 750 Ti. That's a lower midrange GPU from early 2014, and just a notch above entry level. That's almost 7 years ago. And we also know that its CPU is pretty borked, worse than its GPU. (Xbox One has a slightly better CPU but worse GPU) Even considering the versions could be better optimised, it's very obvious the PS4/Xbox One are punching way above their weight.

There's a reason why it's recommended to install the game on an SSD for the PC version, and neither the PS4 nor the Xbox One comes with one. That's why the high quality models and zones take so long to load, and you get those low quality no-face replacements when they aren't properly loaded in.
If you need to load constantly, you also need decent CPU performance, and neither consoles are good enough at that in Cyberpunk's case, so that's a double disadvantage to loading, and it hurts the framerate further. There are way too many things to load in real time for the consoles to keep up.

The only way I see Cyberpunk run at a fully consistent 30 FPS on PS4/Xbox One without stutters or obvious loading, would be to drop the details, model quality, texture quality, crowd density, etc. so hard that it'll inevitably butcher the art style of the game. It already has a very different look and feel from the PC's high settings as is, and I don't think many people would be happy if it downgraded further. It's a lose-lose situation.

ThePixelatedGenocide
Posts: 706
Joined: April 29th, 2015, 9:06 pm

Re: Cyberpunk 2077

Postby ThePixelatedGenocide » December 21st, 2020, 8:13 am

VicViper wrote:The only way I see Cyberpunk run at a fully consistent 30 FPS on PS4/Xbox One without stutters or obvious loading, would be to drop the details, model quality, texture quality, crowd density, etc. so hard that it'll inevitably butcher the art style of the game. It already has a very different look and feel from the PC's high settings as is, and I don't think many people would be happy if it downgraded further. It's a lose-lose situation.


They could have easily gone for an anime aesthetic (Ghost in the Shell) or a book-cover/80's movie poster feel.

This would allow them to also run basic texture effects and simplify their lighting for a more dramatic appearance.

You'd have style and performance, and anyone whining about realism would learn to deal with realistic expectations first.

Edit: A CRT filter at 480p would also be a theme appropriate way of saving on processing power.

User avatar
DrLitch
Posts: 523
Joined: July 19th, 2017, 12:57 pm

Re: Cyberpunk 2077

Postby DrLitch » December 22nd, 2020, 2:01 pm

While Cyberpunk 2077 is a CPU hog the old unlocked 4c/4t Haswell and Skylake i5's and the Coffee Lake i3 can still pull 60fps out of this ... with the right GPU. The PS4 CPU is based on AMD bulldozer chips so perhaps is like an underclocked FX 8320/8350. While Intel during the Ivy Bridge and Haswell era generally nuked an FX chip in gaming I would not be surprised if an FX 8350 could still pull playable frame rates in this game with the right GPU. At the end of the day, it is up to the individual user to adjust settings to move fps bottlenecks around. Low settings and resolution will typically see a CPU bottleneck while higher settings and resolution should move that over to the GPU setting the frame cap. Typically in a PC game, the CPU determines the maximum fps a game can run at while the GPU will typically be chosen to pull off the resolution and settings you want (and will usually be the frame rate cap since this is the component most likely to be bottlenecked if the bottleneck is not your monitor refresh rate).

CPU wise it is not unthinkable that the PS4 could handle Cyberpunk 2077 (and if not then trim some of the workload in terms of # objects). GPU wise.... yeah this is a problem. The PS4 uses an AMD GPU and the closest I can match up is the good old workhorse Radeon 7850. In contemporary GPU terms that is similar to the RX 560 or, on Nvidia side, somewhere between the GTX 750 TI and 760 (even the GTX 1050 comfortable edges ahead of what is on a stock PS4). In PC analogy, Cyberpunk would take a huge s**t trying to render the game at 1080p even on low settings - we talking frame rates in the teens or low 20's. You are going to have to dial that down to 720p low to get anything playable like 30fps or above.

PS4? I see no reason why they could not have ported the game. 720p low settings should be within range, particularly considering that the PS4 is dedicated hardware and possible to optimize in ways not possible for a PC.

Yes Cyberpunk is more advanced than Horizon Zero Dawn but I do not think it is absolutely next gen yet. A half gen or gen crossover title. Taking Horizon Zero Dawn, the PC port is a joke and conversely the PS4 port of Cyberpunk 2077 is a joke as well. Hugely embarrassing for the company, they either put the effort in or they make Cyberpunk 2077 a strictly next gen title.

This written by a disgruntled PC gamer that has seen a $1500 liquid cooled Gigabyte Aorus RTX 2080 TI take a fart trying to run Cyberpunk 2077 at anything resembling decent settings at 1440p let alone 4K. Game is poorly optimized for PC as well, the graphics are not that much better than some other titles that run A-OK on my rig (sporting 32GB Ram and an i9-9900K CPU).

One thing does bug me though. PS5 launches and GPU wise it probably can trade blows with an RTX 2070S or 2080. These are heavy hitting GPU staples that go on medium to high end rigs. The PS4 launches and GPU wise it is on the lower end of the spectrum - 780TI and 780 absolutely kuzump it. Hits around the GTX 750TI - 760 mark which were introductory gaming cards. I wonder why Sony went for such an underpowered Console in 2013 while in 2006 the PS3 easily rivalled high end Gaming PC's and similar is true with PS5 today.

User avatar
travistouchdown
Posts: 37
Joined: August 6th, 2018, 10:15 am

Re: Cyberpunk 2077

Postby travistouchdown » January 6th, 2021, 10:23 am

I will probably pick this up for my Xbox One X once it his $20 dollars in a few months. By then there will be 100GB worth of patches and it will be all fixed up! lol....the state of modern gaming.

In the meantime if you want to mill about in a futuristic cyberpunk-like city; just play Omikron: The Nomad Soul for Dreamcast :D

BlasteroidAli
Posts: 700
Joined: April 9th, 2015, 7:50 pm

Re: Cyberpunk 2077

Postby BlasteroidAli » January 7th, 2021, 8:20 pm

I will get it next December. Probably only time I will have the time to play it.

On Xbox 1 I was given Zombie army 4. That will do me for the year.

Though I do want to say that pacman 256 runs great on my xbox 1. Along with Pacman and Galaga.

User avatar
txsizzler
Posts: 62
Joined: April 12th, 2015, 8:21 am

Re: Cyberpunk 2077

Postby txsizzler » January 17th, 2021, 10:00 am

DrLitch wrote:
This written by a disgruntled PC gamer that has seen a $1500 liquid cooled Gigabyte Aorus RTX 2080 TI take a fart trying to run Cyberpunk 2077 at anything resembling decent settings at 1440p let alone 4K. Game is poorly optimized for PC as well, the graphics are not that much better than some other titles that run A-OK on my rig (sporting 32GB Ram and an i9-9900K CPU).


Sounds like Cyberpunk is the new Crysis for this generation of PC’s.. “can it run Cyberpunk?” will be the new catch-phrase!

User avatar
travistouchdown
Posts: 37
Joined: August 6th, 2018, 10:15 am

Re: Cyberpunk 2077

Postby travistouchdown » January 22nd, 2021, 10:22 am

It was $30 at Best Buy so i took the plunge. Plays just fine on my Xbox One X and looks great! No glitches notices so far. Cool game.

Shapur
Posts: 243
Joined: July 31st, 2015, 8:10 pm

Re: Cyberpunk 2077

Postby Shapur » January 23rd, 2021, 12:25 am

DrLitch wrote:While Cyberpunk 2077 is a CPU hog the old unlocked 4c/4t Haswell and Skylake i5's and the Coffee Lake i3 can still pull 60fps out of this ... with the right GPU. The PS4 CPU is based on AMD bulldozer chips so perhaps is like an underclocked FX 8320


Just a nitpick but the Xone and PS4 aren’t bulldozer related at all. They are Jaguar based cores. AMDs low power Atom competitor. So CPU wise it’s like two underclocked A8-6410s glued together. Much worse than an FX-8350.

Glad to hear the game runs on the One X just fine. I’m still interested, and sounds like my hardware is good to go.

User avatar
VideoGameCritic
Site Admin
Posts: 14898
Joined: April 1st, 2015, 7:23 pm

Re: Cyberpunk 2077

Postby VideoGameCritic » January 23rd, 2021, 9:35 am

travistouchdown wrote:It was $30 at Best Buy so i took the plunge. Plays just fine on my Xbox One X and looks great! No glitches notices so far. Cool game.


Glad to hear it. This looks like one of those new titles that actually justifies getting a next-gen machine.


Return to “Modern Gaming”