OFFICIAL Cyberpunk 2077 Game Discussion

[oxrufiioxo]

I don't think a working speedometer is going to save cars. I fired it up yesterday, honestly? 3 years post launch, I can't for the life of me understand why people still play this game for either its gameplay OR its 'graphics'. This is the graphics poster child of the current gen... Ouch. Just Ouch. Adding a samey reflective layer over every surface isn't 'great graphics', but that's what it still is. A house of mirrors without the slightest dose of realism or grit to it. There is still a world of difference between the handful of truly nicely designed areas (mostly anything involved in lengthy conversation sequences and main quest) and the rest of town, which looks horribly unfinished with assets more akin to placeholders.

And beyond the graphics... the design. The city is still a strangely populated wasteland that barely makes sense (more often than not, streets are empty, and then you turn a corner and suddenly you're in a crowd?! Same with cars, desolate streets, turn camera 360 and turn the corner and we're in rush hour ) the lighting really isn't great at all (turning on RT hardly makes a difference other than boosting reflective surfaces EVEN MORE, GI is pretty terrible either way and the amount of point lights rendered is abysmal, but there are light sources everywhere!); objects in the distance are ultra low res and most surfaces are flatter than flat earthers can imagine. Pedestrian behaviour isn't much different from launch either. Police wanted stars are really the only addition I was really happy with coming from v 1.21. One thing that strikes me as it did on launch is the absence of the good ol'bump map. There is no depth to textures at all, instead you have this mirror sheen over everything adding to the sterility. CDPR can try selling me this as their visual / art direction but I'm not buying that. It looks horrible - and what's striking is that most of the nicer designed areas don't have an overload of reflective surfaces, all of a sudden.

I think I'm definitively in the uncanny valley with this game, and not because it aspires realism so closely, but rather because its so out there with how its perceived and what it really is. Check out a random scene in Darktide against one in Cyberpunk. Only in darkness are the two somewhat similar because lack of lighting hides Cyberpunk's shortcomings, but even thén. Light the place up and Cyberpunk is absolutely hideous to look at. Darktide litters every area with detail and more importantly, they've actually got distinct 'materials' - wood is wood, and not some polished plank. Concrete doesn't reflect light. Most surfaces in Cyberpunk are bare, flat, and sterile - even in the dirtiest places of the city. Every slab of asphalt and concrete reflects light as if its metal. Also, these magical surfaces never accumulate dirt and grime. Its amazingly immersion breaking.

One thing they DID improve with 2.0, which is great to see, is the actual gameplay. But you still need a lot of fantasy to call it a real game, its more a showcase of cool moves and stuff you can do and progress through. This isn't a bad thing to me. But a balanced game there is not, you're mostly just playing with a skillset to kill all the things. I play on hard and there is just no challenge, unless you act stupid. The removal of stat scaling is a good move forward, things have been moved to skillsets more so than scaling, I like the overhaul in that sense. Skill trees are hit/miss. Some shit's just strange but it does enable playstyles. Blades are still OP, because the AI is still pretty weak - movement/mobility is king and mitigation chance made it even better.

I'll dive into PL tonight, still looking forward to a more tightly organized experience. The open world part of this game is still an absolute shitshow though, both as a sandbox and as a themepark. I don't know how some individuals feel the city is alive on a different level... I guess they're hallucinating like those pedestrians walking around or something.

Everything has different expectations for games and that's fine BGIII I find terrible and don't like the characters, gameplay, and find the story extremely cheesy.

Where as this I like.

That's life we aren't going to always like what others do or hate what others do.

Just like too many people love Taylor Swift a little too much but good for them.

 

[TechHalp]

I don't think a working speedometer is going to save cars. I fired it up yesterday, honestly? 3 years post launch, I can't for the life of me understand why people still play this game for either its gameplay OR its 'graphics'. This is the graphics poster child of the current gen... Ouch. Just Ouch. Adding a samey reflective layer over every surface isn't 'great graphics', but that's what it still is. A house of mirrors without the slightest dose of realism or grit to it. There is still a world of difference between the handful of truly nicely designed areas (mostly anything involved in lengthy conversation sequences and main quest) and the rest of town, which looks horribly unfinished with assets more akin to placeholders.

And beyond the graphics... the design. The city is still a strangely populated wasteland that barely makes sense (more often than not, streets are empty, and then you turn a corner and suddenly you're in a crowd?! Same with cars, desolate streets, turn camera 360 and turn the corner and we're in rush hour ) the lighting really isn't great at all (turning on RT hardly makes a difference other than boosting reflective surfaces EVEN MORE, GI is pretty terrible either way and the amount of point lights rendered is abysmal, but there are light sources everywhere!); objects in the distance are ultra low res and most surfaces are flatter than flat earthers can imagine. Pedestrian behaviour isn't much different from launch either. Police wanted stars are really the only addition I was really happy with coming from v 1.21. One thing that strikes me as it did on launch is the absence of the good ol'bump map. There is no depth to textures at all, instead you have this mirror sheen over everything adding to the sterility. CDPR can try selling me this as their visual / art direction but I'm not buying that. It looks horrible - and what's striking is that most of the nicer designed areas don't have an overload of reflective surfaces, all of a sudden.

I think I'm definitively in the uncanny valley with this game, and not because it aspires realism so closely, but rather because its so out there with how its perceived and what it really is. Check out a random scene in Darktide against one in Cyberpunk. Only in darkness are the two somewhat similar because lack of lighting hides Cyberpunk's shortcomings, but even thén. Light the place up and Cyberpunk is absolutely hideous to look at. Darktide litters every area with detail and more importantly, they've actually got distinct 'materials' - wood is wood, and not some polished plank. Concrete doesn't reflect light. Most surfaces in Cyberpunk are bare, flat, and sterile - even in the dirtiest places of the city. Every slab of asphalt and concrete reflects light as if its metal. Also, these magical surfaces never accumulate dirt and grime. Its amazingly immersion breaking.

One thing they DID improve with 2.0, which is great to see, is the actual gameplay. But you still need a lot of fantasy to call it a real game, its more a showcase of cool moves and stuff you can do and progress through. This isn't a bad thing to me. But a balanced game there is not, you're mostly just playing with a skillset to kill all the things. I play on hard and there is just no challenge, unless you act stupid. The removal of stat scaling is a good move forward, things have been moved to skillsets more so than scaling, I like the overhaul in that sense. Skill trees are hit/miss. Some shit's just strange but it does enable playstyles. Blades are still OP, because the AI is still pretty weak - movement/mobility is king and mitigation chance made it even better.

I'll dive into PL tonight, still looking forward to a more tightly organized experience. The open world part of this game is still an absolute shitshow though, both as a sandbox and as a themepark. I don't know how some individuals feel the city is alive on a different level... I guess they're hallucinating like those pedestrians walking around or something.

Ah the bitter console player here to get revenge after 3 years, not worth reading after he used darktide as an example of good graphics. The game that looks blurry at 1.25x resolution for no reason and runs at 30 fps on most graphics cards. Oh wait, darktide's most common bug is to use your integrated CPU instead of GPU, because it's terribly made. The game that looks entirely like a instagram seppia filter circa 2018 while you're outside.

 

[Vayra86]

Ah the bitter console player here to get revenge after 3 years, not worth reading after he used darktide as an example of good graphics. The game that looks blurry at 1.25x resolution for no reason and runs at 30 fps on most graphics cards. Oh wait, darktide's most common bug is to use your integrated CPU instead of GPU, because it's terribly made. The game that looks entirely like a instagram seppia filter circa 2018 while you're outside.

Console player? Mkay. The rest of your drivel I'll not even get into While you're interested in my person, do check out my specs, on the left here. Other than that, sorry for stepping on your toes, which apparently happens when people have an opinion about a game. Might wanna reflect on that.

Where as this I like.

That's what's so jarring about Cyberpunk to me. I LOVE the setting, the world they tried to build... its all the more annoying that it falls short to me every time I play it. I'm still going to finish PL like I finished the vanilla game. And I'll probably do more sides as well. I'm giving this a full blown chance to convince me again.

 

[oxrufiioxo]

That's what's so jarring about Cyberpunk to me. I LOVE the setting, the world they tried to build... its all the more annoying that it falls short to me every time I play it. I'm still going to finish PL like I finished the vanilla game. And I'll probably do more sides as well. I'm giving this a full blown chance to convince me again.

I think expectations are major difference. I only expected CDPR to make an enjoyable first person open world game in a futuristic city with at launch decent visuals on there first crack I never fell for the marketing BS.

I didn't expect a game better than witcher 3 somthing that had 3 crack at perfecting and even it's not perfect the difference is it's still in my top ten games ever played CP is not.

Same thing with visually to some this is the best looking game ever made and on a 4090 at 4k with a lot of caveats that might be the case but to others it might be an ok looking one there really isn't anything wrong with either view visuals will always be subjective I'm sure Crysis had plenty of people complaining about the visuals in 2007.

Bottom line not every game is for everyone and this game is still pretty niche I'm honestly surprised it sold 25+ million copies I am happy CDPR continued to invest into it though.

 

[Vayra86]

I think expectations are major difference. I only expected CDPR to make an enjoyable first person open world game in a futuristic city with at launch decent visuals on there first crack I never fell for the marketing BS.

I'll be honest I never really pay much if any attention to pre-launch game hype. I just install a game that looks good to me and you're right, expectations going in... but at the same time, also expectations that are just, you know, kind of inspired by how the game presents itself when you actually play it. A lot of the systems in it just aren't fleshed out proper, that's what bothers me most. Graphically I'm fine, kind of, its not like it actively detracts from gameplay, its a little bit like how Starfield has those silly blockheads talking to you still, even if the rest of the game looks quite fine. I enjoyed myself playing it, but there's just so much untapped potential. I'm sure I'll enjoy the game to its own degree tonight, like, I'll make my story nonetheless and there's new stuff to discover.

 

[evelynharthbrooke]

Everything has different expectations for games and that's fine BGIII I find terrible and don't like the characters, gameplay, and find the story extremely cheesy.

Where as this I like.

That's life we aren't going to always like what others do or hate what others do.

Just like too many people love Taylor Swift a little too much but good for them.

Don’t know why you brought Taylor Swift into this lol. People are allowed to fangirl over artists. She writes and creates good music if you’re into the genre of music she records and an absolute buttload of people do. There’s nothing wrong with that.

Although I’m kinda surprised you don’t like Baldur’s Gate 3. it’s an amazing game from what I’ve heard and I’ve been meaning to get into it.

Cyberpunk 2077 is a super fun game though. I like it quite a bit.

 

[oxrufiioxo]

I'll be honest I never really pay much if any attention to pre-launch game hype. I just install a game that looks good to me and you're right, expectations going in... but at the same time, also expectations that are just, you know, kind of inspired by how the game presents itself when you actually play it. A lot of the systems in it just aren't fleshed out proper, that's what bothers me most. Graphically I'm fine, kind of, its not like it actively detracts from gameplay, its a little bit like how Starfield has those silly blockheads talking to you still, even if the rest of the game looks quite fine. I enjoyed myself playing it, but there's just so much untapped potential. I'm sure I'll enjoy the game to its own degree tonight, like, I'll make my story nonetheless and there's new stuff to discover.

For sure and if CDPR had a billion dollars to develop a game like Rockstar I'm sure they'd have. I thnk people forget it's still a relatively small developer compared to a lot of other studios that tackle games like this Ubisoft, Bethesda, Rockstar, even Guerrila games has Sony's backing and honestly I like this better than any of their open world games besides RDR2.

Although I personally did not like GTA5 I did really like 3/4 though.

Honestly games in general just haven't been as good over the last 3-4 years likely due to how complex development has become and why everyone is jumping to UE5.


.

​

Don’t know why you brought Taylor Swift into this lol. People are allowed to fangirl over artists. She writes and creates good music if you’re into the genre of music she records and an absolute buttload of people do. There’s nothing wrong with that.

Although I’m kinda surprised you don’t like Baldur’s Gate 3. it’s an amazing game from what I’ve heard and I’ve been meaning to get into it.

Cyberpunk 2077 is a super fun game though. I like it quite a bit.

It was more of a she's the biggest thing in the world right now and that is ok and it's also ok not to like her.

It's the same with games.

 

[Vayra86]

For sure and if CDPR had a billion dollars to develop a game like Rockstar I'm sure they'd have. I thnk people forget it's still a relatively small developer

That's a really good point actually. I never really paid much attention to that little factoid. Hm!

 

[TechHalp]

Console player? Mkay. The rest of your drivel I'll not even get into While you're interested in my person, do check out my specs, on the left here. Other than that, sorry for stepping on your toes, which apparently happens when people have an opinion about a game. Might wanna reflect on that.


That's what's so jarring about Cyberpunk to me. I LOVE the setting, the world they tried to build... its all the more annoying that it falls short to me every time I play it. I'm still going to finish PL like I finished the vanilla game. And I'll probably do more sides as well. I'm giving this a full blown chance to convince me again.

Nah, the graphical fidelity of cyberpunk vs darktide isn't an opinion. Darktide is objectively inferior. Worst anti aliasing of any game I've ever seen.

You are wrong, and your opinion is wrong. It's that simple. Nothing short of them remaking the game will change that.

 

[Nike_486DX]

Ah the bitter console player here to get revenge after 3 years, not worth reading after he used darktide as an example of good graphics. The game that looks blurry at 1.25x resolution for no reason and runs at 30 fps on most graphics cards. Oh wait, darktide's most common bug is to use your integrated CPU instead of GPU, because it's terribly made. The game that looks entirely like a instagram seppia filter circa 2018 while you're outside.

btw if anyone else noticed, that screenshot of darkside in the task manager, if you look closely you will realize it was taken on a pc with only 8gb of ram, pretty sure its got a quad core intel or something... so whats bad about utilizing 50% cpu? Actually looks really frugal compared to cyberpunk .

Nah, the graphical fidelity of cyberpunk vs darktide isn't an opinion. Darktide is objectively inferior. Worst anti aliasing of any game I've ever seen.

You are wrong, and your opinion is wrong. It's that simple. Nothing short of them remaking the game will change that.

chill dude, its not all about the graphics

 

[TechHalp]

btw if anyone else noticed, that screenshot of darkside in the task manager, if you look closely you will realize it was taken on a pc with only 8gb of ram, pretty sure its got a quad core intel or something... so whats bad about utilizing 50% cpu? Actually looks really frugal compared to cyberpunk .

chill dude, its not all about the graphics

Literally the point, its runs on the wrong gpu in many peoples games, because it's poorly made. I said that in the post but apparently I need to circle arrow and highlight it for the illiterates.

It's not all about the graphics, its about having an honest discussion where someone isn't completely bending over backwards to justify a stupid argument.

I don't care what the topic is, don't play stupid on purpose and expect to get treated like an adult.

Like you literally just did ignoring the game running on an APU even though there is a dedicated gpu. "What's so bad about it using 50% cpu?" ... and 8% gpu... hm, I wonder. You really shouldn't be giving out pc advice if you don't know.

 

[Mussels]

It's the CP2077 thread

Maybe leave BG3, Darktide and Taylor swift to their own threads?

I said that in the post but apparently I need to circle arrow and highlight it for the illiterates. people who think they're above the forum rules

Fixed that for you

 

[dyonoctis]

And beyond the graphics... the design. The city is still a strangely populated wasteland that barely makes sense (more often than not, streets are empty, and then you turn a corner and suddenly you're in a crowd?! Same with cars, desolate streets, turn camera 360 and turn the corner and we're in rush hour ) the lighting really isn't great at all (turning on RT hardly makes a difference other than boosting reflective surfaces EVEN MORE, GI is pretty terrible either way and the amount of point lights rendered is abysmal, but there are light sources everywhere!); objects in the distance are ultra low res and most surfaces are flatter than flat earthers can imagine. Pedestrian behaviour isn't much different from launch either. Police wanted stars are really the only addition I was really happy with coming from v 1.21. One thing that strikes me as it did on launch is the absence of the good ol'bump map. There is no depth to textures at all, instead you have this mirror sheen over everything adding to the sterility. CDPR can try selling me this as their visual / art direction but I'm not buying that. It looks horrible - and what's striking is that most of the nicer designed areas don't have an overload of reflective surfaces, all of a sudden.

I think I'm definitively in the uncanny valley with this game, and not because it aspires realism so closely, but rather because its so out there with how its perceived and what it really is. Check out a random scene in Darktide against one in Cyberpunk. Only in darkness are the two somewhat similar because lack of lighting hides Cyberpunk's shortcomings, but even thén. Light the place up and Cyberpunk is absolutely hideous to look at. Darktide litters every area with detail and more importantly, they've actually got distinct 'materials' - wood is wood, and not some polished plank. Concrete doesn't reflect light. Most surfaces in Cyberpunk are bare, flat, and sterile - even in the dirtiest places of the city. Every slab of asphalt and concrete reflects light as if its metal. Also, these magical surfaces never accumulate dirt and grime. Its amazingly immersion breaking.

My opinion about the graphics is a bit more nuanced: they used quixels megascans for a lot of assets and texture, so the base material is good. But without specific exemple it sounds like you expect every material to have a rough edge to it, with noticeable creases, when a lot of quixel scans are fine with subtle details. Those fine textures are accurate, but they do have the issue of looking smooth at a distance. Bump maps (cf screenshots) are used, but bump maps can only get you so far, the next level is polygonal displacement, but I cannot tell you if Red engine 4 can handle that on a massive scale without tanking the performance to hell.

There's plenty of dirt and grime on surface and objects across the city, that's the one point that I didn't understand at all.

Now, I'm not going to lie, there's a few times were i did question the choice of materials that seems overly shiny (I can't tell if that bench is made of marble or concrete) but asphalt is an odd surface. Just google " road at night" and you'll find plenty of photography of roads that looks wrong because they look dry but reflect car lights like brushed metal.

The quality of the lighting does fluctuate and got a massive impact on the "feel" of the game. sometimes I feel like I'm watching a movie, but every so often I'm reminded that it's an open world game that couldn't be fine-tuned everywhere. The Fake traffic is also still there and so disappointing when the "cars" just fade and never show up.

The city is impressive and credible on an architectural level, which makes the life simulation oddities just more glaring...but I do wonder how much it would cost to have a credible world simulated at a level that would do justice to the city design.

 

[Vayra86]

My opinion about the graphics is a bit more nuanced: they used quixels megascans for a lot of assets and texture, so the base material is good. But without specific exemple it sounds like you expect every material to have a rough edge to it, with noticeable creases, when a lot of quixel scans are fine with subtle details. Those fine textures are accurate, but they do have the issue of looking smooth at a distance. Bump maps (cf screenshots) are used, but bump maps can only get you so far, the next level is polygonal displacement, but I cannot tell you if Red engine 4 can handle that on a massive scale without tanking the performance to hell.

There's plenty of dirt and grime on surface and objects across the city, that's the one point that I didn't understand at all.

Now, I'm not going to lie, there's a few times were i did question the choice of materials that seems overly shiny (I can't tell if that bench is made of marble or concrete) but asphalt is an odd surface. Just google " road at night" and you'll find plenty of photography of roads that looks wrong because they look dry but reflect car lights like brushed metal.

The quality of the lighting does fluctuate and got a massive impact on the "feel" of the game. sometimes I feel like I'm watching a movie, but every so often I'm reminded that it's an open world game that couldn't be fine-tuned everywhere. The Fake traffic is also still there and so disappointing when the "cars" just fade and never show up.

The city is impressive and credible on an architectural level, which makes the life simulation oddities just more glaring...but I do wonder how much it would cost to have a credible world simulated at a level that would do justice to the city design.

View attachment 316528View attachment 316529View attachment 316527View attachment 316542View attachment 316541View attachment 316530View attachment 316531View attachment 316532View attachment 316537View attachment 316538View attachment 316539View attachment 316540

Youve refined what I meant to say. I did actually also find myself admiring texture detail when you do get up close and its exactly how you say it. The fidelity is high, but gets lost at a distance. 100% agree and interesting shots and considerations too. Dirt and grime exists, youre right, but it doesnt show on a lot of surfaces I would expect it. Im exploring Dogtown right now and it shows me again the night and day gap between generic open city landscapes and what happens to it when real hand crafting is applied to design something. Most of dog town is fantastic to look at, the presentation comes together again and it works.

Also. This happened

 

[Mussels]

The fidelity is high, but gets lost at a distance.

Until i went 4K I saw this a lot - DLSS quality ironically helps (blends details before it loses them)

Side by side i had three 32" displays, 4K 1440p and 1080p and you could genuinely see much further on the 4k display. Details would fade away at different distances so the 4K would have legible clear text while the 1080p barely had anything 'on-screen'
(The testing i screenshotted a while back was DRG in unreal engine - not all engines work the same)

It's what conviced me to stay 4K and get a better monitor, and CP2077 seems to be another example of games that have the amazing detail but lose it rapidly at lower resolutions, as you get distant from the objects in question

 

[oxrufiioxo]

Until i went 4K I saw this a lot - DLSS quality ironically helps (blends details before it loses them)

Side by side i had three 32" displays, 4K 1440p and 1080p and you could genuinely see much further on the 4k display. Details would fade away at different distances so the 4K would have legible clear text while the 1080p barely had anything 'on-screen'
(The testing i screenshotted a while back was DRG in unreal engine - not all engines work the same)

It's what conviced me to stay 4K and get a better monitor, and CP2077 seems to be another example of games that have the amazing detail but lose it rapidly at lower resolutions, as you get distant from the objects in question

Although everyone with a half decent card should be using Halk Hogans texture mode it helps alot

Cyberpunk 2077 HD Reworked Project

This project aims to improve the graphics by reworking game assets to better quality preserving original art style and good performance.Modification from author of The Witcher 3 HD Reworked Proj

www.nexusmods.com

Honestly he's so good CDPR used his mod for the Witcher Next gen update.

 

[Beginner Macro Device]

and CP2077 seems to be another example of games that have the amazing detail but lose it rapidly at lower resolutions, as you get distant from the objects in question

That's why I use virtual super resolution on my 1080p display. Of course it's worse than having a real 3200x1800 display (I scale to this resolution, 4K is too much for my GPU) but at least I don't lose so much detail.

 

[Mussels]

That's why I use virtual super resolution on my 1080p display. Of course it's worse than having a real 3200x1800 display (I scale to this resolution, 4K is too much for my GPU) but at least I don't lose so much detail.

I've got problems with how they work, not the visual result but a lot of side effects and bugs get triggered by them. What breaks could go from nothing to everything - Gsync can break, MPO, render times can skyrocket since it's forcing your game through dwm.exe and not fullscreen exclusive, so if it's not vulkan or DX12 you're stuck with Vsync on and 2 frame render ahead - and having your GPU maxed out at the higher resolution almost guarantees that to happen.

Going from games with 4-6ms render times to the 50ms+ i saw in CP2077 made me aware of just how badly things like that vary
If you run CP2077 at 120Hz (or within your VRR range) you might get that down to 12-25ms and think it's acceptable, but 60hz users (or PC's at 60FPS or lower) are in laggy hell

 

[Beginner Macro Device]

I've got problems with how they work, not the visual result but a lot of side effects and bugs get triggered by them. What breaks could go from nothing to everything - Gsync can break, MPO, render times can skyrocket since it's forcing your game through dwm.exe and not fullscreen exclusive, so if it's not vulkan or DX12 you're stuck with Vsync on and 2 frame render ahead - and having your GPU maxed out at the higher resolution almost guarantees that to happen.

Going from games with 4-6ms render times to the 50ms+ i saw in CP2077 made me aware of just how badly things like that vary
If you run CP2077 at 120Hz (or within your VRR range) you might get that down to 12-25ms and think it's acceptable, but 60hz users (or PC's at 60FPS or lower) are in laggy hell

In my case, 3200x1800 on a real 4K display with VSR disabled has exactly the same frametimes as 3200x1800 on a 1080p display with VSR enabled. Not a single "2 frame render ahead" scenario in the Cyberpunk.

The only issue in my case (basic 1080p75 display) is one of my mods doesn't work with vsync enabled on AMD GPUs (nVidia ones have never been tested, prolly they bug out too) so I'm making do with so-called "Enhanced Sync" which works half-decently if I put it mildly. Playing without that mod is a complete murder of immersion so I'm gonna get me a FreeSync capable VRR display and see if it makes things run as intended.

 

[Mussels]

Edit: Went to get the info to back up my claims on Vulkan and how they render the frames, and found out DXVK just implemented it as their new default - that's proof enough.

User inputs are polled when the image is sent to the screen, not when the CPU renders the frame - so in CP2077 this would be a 75-100ms reduction for the poor bastard in the example below.

Not a single "2 frame render ahead" scenario in the Cyberpunk.

How are you checking this?
Most tools show you frame times which are NOT the same thing (That's literally just FPS described in another way), Nvidias GFE has the most reliable one - I'm not sure how you can even see render times on AMD.

AMD's Anti-Lag feature is meant to lock the render ahead to 1 frame, but so was Nvidias NULL - and that breaks on DX12, so AMD's AL may as well.


Trying to google more on people testing this and finding very little, but it was bad enough i gave up on the game entirely. Theres a lot of others who found this problem as well, and very few ways around it other than ignoring it

Even in situations it shouldn't happen (like here with GPU usage to spare) it's still forcing the two frame render ahead, so the GPU is idling away. It should only be active when the GPU is maxed out and waiting, but it's not.

And an example from reddit on how Nvidia reflex can help, which is their DX12 equivalent to NULL but requires the game to support their exclusive BS to work (and CP2077 slowly trickles these things in, I have no idea if it has reflex now)

The 'average PC latency' is the total of the frames queued + display refresh time, 44.1ms is still extremely high.



0 or 1 frame ahead is going to cause stutter if a CPU is too weak for what's going on, especially at high frame rates.

DX12 is upto the game devs how they implement it, and all the ones developing for console games always choose to force 2, since they've got weak hardware - hide the stutter, who cares about input lag with a controller anyway?

DX12 and Vulkan tend to show the frametimes merged together, so if its 2 or 3 frames you just see a higher value. FPS caps will suddenly take away a big chunk of that as you get below 100% usage, and you can figure it out easily.

Vulkan has the advantage in that it polls user input later when the frame is completed by the GPU not when it's done at the CPU end.
The math always throws people off because the frame currently on screen is frame zero - when talking about a 2 frame ahead, it's 3 frames total (what's on screen, and the queued two) - Only Vsync off in fullscreen exclusive works differently, and that's dead in DX12.

This is BG3 Because I don't have CP2077 installed.

Vulkan 72FPS cap
Vulkan is like DX12 in that it measures the monitors refresh cycle as well, and that's why these values don't quite add up when doubled - 144Hz is 6.94ms
72FPS is 13.88ms

13.88+6.94 equals 20.82, funny how this maths out pretty well tehre.
(One frame + one refresh cycle)

No cap where GPU is maxed out and it's forced to use the second frame
133FPS is 7.51ms

7.51+7.51+6.94 = 22.94ms
Add in the actual delay with the display needing to wait for the next refresh cycle if it finishes while a frames on-screen, and it fits nicely again.
~21 to 27ms isn't a huge change, but the input latency is half of that - unlike DX12 On nvidia, or AMD Without anti-lag active and working.

DX11 with NULL shows why the 2 frames ahead is a bad idea on a system with a fast CPU and an overwhelmed GPU
This is forced to 1 frame ahead, it can't make a second one.

With an FPS cap it stays around the 7ms render time

Without it's using the "plus 1" frame and going to 11ms

7-11ms input latency (As the inputs are polled when the CPU generates the frame not when the GPU does, nor when it's displayed to the user) is entirely, massively different to how games like CP2077 do things in the 50-100ms range because they stuffed so much shit in there, it's running three full frames (on-screen and two queued) at all times and not letting the system cut back on them to poll inputs at a better time.

That top screenshot was at 45FPS and 100ms, and that math doesn't add up at all.
45FPS is 22.22ms, so that's a full four frames worth of delay - you're seeing and reacting to something from four frames ago in that bastards situation, if something was moving left to right and then changed right to left, you'd massively overshoot the intended target.

How do console games avoid it? auto aim. They correct your aim issues and latency problems by fixing it internally, seperate to the visual component.

 

[Beginner Macro Device]

How are you checking this?

Basically by observation. I don't see anything which could be interpreted as frametime inconsistency, be it internal (GPU side) or external (display side), everything is butter smooth and issueless. Maybe I don't quite understand the problem you're talking about though.

This issue of 3060 Ti hard chilling and my 6700 XT providing me with consistent 95+ % load and no issues whatsoever (if we speak vanilla game without the mod breaking my vsync) most probably is caused by nVidia VS AMD driver philosophy. nVidia's one has way harder overhead so nVidia GPUs work way worse on weaker CPUs than AMD GPUs do. This is also the reason why THIS happens.

At 1080p, the AMD's GPU runs faster than the nVidia's one because CPU limitation doesn't mean so much for AMD than it does for nVidia. At 4K, the difference is almost absent because CPU is no longer the limitation.

I also downloaded the Preview driver for my RX 6700 XT and played with FMF and can't say I regret it.

"Works complete wonders if internal framerate always exceeds 75. I noticed not a single artifact or glitch when this was the case.
With RT enabled, internal framerate dropped to ~40 and with FMF enabled, despite my framerate being in high 70s, image stability was anything but existent.
With not so aggressive RT enabled and internal framerate of ~55, that worked SOMEWHAT acceptable. I decided I do want that million FPS more than I do want RT so I went for 1440p High + FSR: Quality and FMF enabled. 150 to 185 FPS (internal is about 85) and butter smooth experience. Will drop the game till I purchase a high refresh rate 3440x1440 monitor," my quote from a chit-chat with some dude who was testing my performance mod as well as me.

So I dunno, I have a lot to say about Cyberbug's problems but frames and their consistency ain't an issue.

 

[fevgatos]

Until i went 4K I saw this a lot - DLSS quality ironically helps (blends details before it loses them)

Side by side i had three 32" displays, 4K 1440p and 1080p and you could genuinely see much further on the 4k display. Details would fade away at different distances so the 4K would have legible clear text while the 1080p barely had anything 'on-screen'
(The testing i screenshotted a while back was DRG in unreal engine - not all engines work the same)

It's what conviced me to stay 4K and get a better monitor, and CP2077 seems to be another example of games that have the amazing detail but lose it rapidly at lower resolutions, as you get distant from the objects in question

LODS go up with resolution yes, that's why using DLDSR + DLSS loads better LODS even though you end up rendering at like 1440p.

 

[Vayra86]

Basically by observation. I don't see anything which could be interpreted as frametime inconsistency, be it internal (GPU side) or external (display side), everything is butter smooth and issueless. Maybe I don't quite understand the problem you're talking about though.

This issue of 3060 Ti hard chilling and my 6700 XT providing me with consistent 95+ % load and no issues whatsoever (if we speak vanilla game without the mod breaking my vsync) most probably is caused by nVidia VS AMD driver philosophy. nVidia's one has way harder overhead so nVidia GPUs work way worse on weaker CPUs than AMD GPUs do. This is also the reason why THIS happens.

View attachment 316785

At 1080p, the AMD's GPU runs faster than the nVidia's one because CPU limitation doesn't mean so much for AMD than it does for nVidia. At 4K, the difference is almost absent because CPU is no longer the limitation.

I also downloaded the Preview driver for my RX 6700 XT and played with FMF and can't say I regret it.

"Works complete wonders if internal framerate always exceeds 75. I noticed not a single artifact or glitch when this was the case.
With RT enabled, internal framerate dropped to ~40 and with FMF enabled, despite my framerate being in high 70s, image stability was anything but existent.
With not so aggressive RT enabled and internal framerate of ~55, that worked SOMEWHAT acceptable. I decided I do want that million FPS more than I do want RT so I went for 1440p High + FSR: Quality and FMF enabled. 150 to 185 FPS (internal is about 85) and butter smooth experience. Will drop the game till I purchase a high refresh rate 3440x1440 monitor," my quote from a chit-chat with some dude who was testing my performance mod as well as me.

So I dunno, I have a lot to say about Cyberbug's problems but frames and their consistency ain't an issue.

The point is, frametime != input lag. Frametime is displaying the frame, not when your input gets taken along. You might perceive it as smooth, because that's exactly what it is: your input is smoothed out over 2-3 frames instead of one; or put more accurately, only your input of 1 out of 3 frames is really registered.

Lower latency gameplay is more choppy (visually!) comparatively, because the input registered is much finer grained.

 

[Beginner Macro Device]

@Mussels @Vayra86

Ah, yeah, you were talking input lag. Cyberpunk is almost the opposite of a highly action packed game so anything below 50 ms is exceptionally fine. 50 to 100 feels okay. I didn't thoroughly measure my full system latency because I didn't feel like I press buttons faster than the game reacts to it but as far as AMD overlay tol' me, fake frames add about 15 ms latency on top of what I already had. Which is negligible.

All my misses were caused either by skill issue (90+ % cases) or by bad luck with bullet spread. Driving a car (like a grandma actually because CDPR didn't make vehicles faster than that), walking, running, hacking etc requires so little actual pace you can play with some GFNow + bad internet connection 300 ms ping on top of that and still feel like it's fine.

 

[TechHalp]

Until i went 4K I saw this a lot - DLSS quality ironically helps (blends details before it loses them)

Side by side i had three 32" displays, 4K 1440p and 1080p and you could genuinely see much further on the 4k display. Details would fade away at different distances so the 4K would have legible clear text while the 1080p barely had anything 'on-screen'
(The testing i screenshotted a while back was DRG in unreal engine - not all engines work the same)

It's what conviced me to stay 4K and get a better monitor, and CP2077 seems to be another example of games that have the amazing detail but lose it rapidly at lower resolutions, as you get distant from the objects in question

I have found scRGB HDR setting made a big difference when it came to visibility of details, I know you you are talking about clarity of specific things and draw distance, but there was a 'night and day' effect when I calibrated the paper white level, brightness, and changed the HDR mode.

A lot of areas in SDR and the pq HDR were totally obscured in shadow and washed out, especially in the phantom liberty storyline since so many missions require waiting till night. I found the PQ version especially lacking in red tones under the sun (desert areas especially).

When I looked into it, the PQ version of HDR was only 10 bit, vs the 16 bit scRGB HDR.

Topic-Free Mega Thread - v 1.11.2020

Okay… Basically, the first HDR option uses a 10:10:10:2 framebuffer 10-bit red / green / blue 2-bit alpha (not important) The second HDR option (scRGB) uses a 16:16:16:16 framebuffer 16-bit red / green / blue / alpha HDR10 scRGB (16-bit) is higher quality; 16 is larger than...

discourse.differentk.fyi