Dishonored 2: Performance Analysis

[abundantcores]

Definitely just you and a few others with selective memories.

Also, while you're ignoring it, look at AMD's Deus Ex sponsored title. It's a real shit fest on fps.

Yup, but then here is one that is not sponsored by AMD or Nvidia.

Pretty even....

 

[rtwjunkie]

Looks like another one of those Nvidia sponsored games thats so broken its unplayable.

Broken how. Explain please, because I've not seen any indications the game is "broken."

 

[abundantcores]

Broken how. Explain please, because I've not seen any indications the game is "broken."

Every game sponsored by Nvidia with review slides that looked like that, with a huge discrepancy between Nvidia and AMD' has also not played nice with my Nvidia GPU, granted not always "Unplayable" but certainly never a nice fluid smooth experience, enough to tarnish the experience of the game, and sometimes yes' out right unplayable in parts.

For me now when i see slides like that i think 'very badly optimised broken game that AMD have not yet had a chance to have a look at because of sponsorship commitments by the publisher.

In other words' runs bad on Nvidia, worse on AMD.

I'm not wasting anymore money on games like that.

 

[rtwjunkie]

I guess I'm missing the "runs bad on NVIDIA" part. I'm not sure how we even got to THAT premise. Which makes it impossible for me to follow the trail beyond that.

 

[64K]

Yup, but then here is one that is not sponsored by AMD or Nvidia.

Pretty even....

Never heard of that site Pure PC but those benches made me curious and I checked a couple of other sites and they show the 1080 as a good bit faster than the Fury X in Titanfall 2. About 25% faster.

 

[0x4452]

Never heard of that site Pure PC but those benches made me curious and I checked a couple of other sites and they show the 1080 as a good bit faster than the Fury X in Titanfall 2. About 25% faster.

Yep, Pure PC numbers indeed look strange. Here is another source:

(appologies for the giant picture, don't see a comment tag how to make it smaller)

 

[abundantcores]

More reputable because you like the results more?

You don't know about Pure PC because they are not an American reviewer.

I think both are probably right, the thing about benchmarking a game is different hardware respond to different aspects of a game differently, so while one part of a game, or type of IQ settings may favour one vendor while another part or different settings may favour the other vendor.

Why do you think Nvidia send out 'review guyed-lines' dictating how exactly reviewers should review hardware.

One thing you can be certain of is that with a lot of these mainstream reviewers the performance you see is the best possible scenario from Nvidia.

 

[renz496]

More reputable because you like the results more?

You don't know about Pure PC because they are not an American reviewer.

I think both are probably right, the thing about benchmarking a game is different hardware respond to different aspects of a game differently, so while one part of a game, or type of IQ settings may favour one vendor while another part or different settings may favour the other vendor.

Why do you think Nvidia send out 'review guyed-lines' dictating how exactly reviewers should review hardware.

One thing you can be certain of is that with a lot of these mainstream reviewers the performance you see is the best possible scenario from Nvidia.

both AMD and nvidia give reviewer guide to reviewer.

http://videocardz.com/56728/amd-radeon-r9-fury-x-reviewers-guide

honestly i don't buy most reviewer only look at nvidia guide and purposely try to make nvidia card look good all the time like you think it is.

 

[sweet]

Definitely just you and a few others with selective memories.

Also, while you're ignoring it, look at AMD's Deus Ex sponsored title. It's a real shit fest on fps.

While I agree that Deus Ex has bad fps, at least its image quality is the best at this moment. And the performance of the Dx12 patch is definitely better with playable fps

 

[Charcharo]

Perhaps this time people would learn that Ultra settings are made for future proofing a game and generally look barely better than High... whilst performing much worse.

No? Muh Ultra 60 fps PCMR? *Sigh*

Apart from that sardonic comment, the game runs on modified id Tech 5. It will have some issues, this is not the DOOM engine.

 

[Fluffmeister]

Games like Wolfenstein: The New Order ran better on NV hardware too, but then NV actually make an effort with OpenGL. No controversy required.

 

[ShurikN]

A random comment on Eurogamer topic for the bad performance on probably all hardware:

I figured out what the issue is, and for once it was by listening to that oft-awful Nvidia Experience app.

Turns out that the default anti-aliasing the game uses (TXAA) even on Low detail presets is THE ULTIMATE PERFORMANCE HOG, and possibly just broken in general. Turn it down to FXAA High and you'll have a nice smooth game even with everything else up high.

My GTX 1060 runs Doom 4 at Ultra, 1080p, 60fps unbroken. Same with Titanfall 2. Dishonored was hitting 15-20fps in places until I turned off TXAA. Still not solid 60 in busier scenes, but definitely most indoors areas now.

Funny thing is that the TXAA performance drops were almost completely independent of any other setting. Drop it down to Low at 1600 x 900, and it still crawled so long as TXAA is on. So yeah, change that ONE SETTING and you'll be good. Hopefully they'll either fix it or patch in a better alternative somewhere between FXAA and TXAA.

Maybe worth looking into

 

[rtwjunkie]

A random comment on Eurogamer topic for the bad performance on probably all hardware:



Maybe worth looking into

This is very interesting, because TXAA is the setting recommended in DE:MD to IMPROVE performance because of its SMALL performance hit on the system. And it actually works!

So it's very strange that TXAA would be cited by them as a culprit in Dishonored 2.

 

[Captain_Tom]

Another garbage programmed game from Bethesda.


I wish someone would force these guys to high someone better than high school coders.

Yup, but then here is one that is not sponsored by AMD or Nvidia.

Pretty even....

I really don't know how someone can justify getting a 1080 when it is trading blows with a Fury in most of the latest games.


P.S. I know, I know here comes someone to point out a garbage-programmed game like Dishonored 2 is why.

 

[rtwjunkie]

Another garbage programmed game from Bethesda

Scratching my head at this statement. I've been playing it perfectly fine for the last 3 hours.

*Its only a Bethesda PUBLISHED game. The studio is Arkane, just like the last one, and they have done a superb job.

I've completed 14.4 hours now. I even posted a review on Steam trolling the complainers, because it still runs great.

 

[nguyen]

Dishonored 2: Dishonoring Dishonored

 

[Prima.Vera]

This is very interesting, because TXAA is the setting recommended in DE:MD to IMPROVE performance because of its SMALL performance hit on the system. And it actually works!

So it's very strange that TXAA would be cited by them as a culprit in Dishonored 2.

Guys, just disable those garbages called TXAA or FXAA. Use SweetFX to inject the quality SMAA instead of those junks.

 

[rtwjunkie]

I ended up finishing the game at 29 hours, low chaos. It continued to play great, meaning zero performance problems.

Really close to being as good as the original, and thus a "must play" from me.

 

[Captain_Tom]

I ended up finishing the game at 29 hours, low chaos. It continued to play great, meaning zero performance problems.

Really close to being as good as the original, and thus a "must play" from me.

In what ways was it better or worse?


From my perspective - Dishonored 1 was cool and definitely a "Good Game". But nothing spectacular about its combat or gameplay. Atmosphere was cool, but held back by the garbage graphics (And i usually wouldnt care as much about that).

 

[rtwjunkie]

In what ways was it better or worse?


From my perspective - Dishonored 1 was cool and definitely a "Good Game". But nothing spectacular about its combat or gameplay. Atmosphere was cool, but held back by the garbage graphics (And i usually wouldnt care as much about that).

That's hard to say, since it's opinion based. I thought gameplay, pacing, atmosphere and level design were great in the first. I even like the art style. It was intentional for the graphics to look like that.

In 2, the art style is the same, but things are more crisp in the graphics department, which for me takes away some of that setting and atmosphere. It gets made up for by level design being even grander, and more ambitious. I guess, even though Dishonored 2 was longer, I felt I had less to do. Then again, I didn't truly appreciate the first one for its greatness as a masterpiece until halfway through my 2nd playthrough, and confirmed on my third. I may revise my assessment of this current one after I play again, this time as Emily. I know there is ALOT I did not explore outside of the mission areas.

Not sure I really answered your question. It's more a "gut feeling" that it's almost, but just not quite as good.

EDIT: 2 of the levels, The Clockwork Mansion and The Conservatory are among the best things I have played in a game. I really enjoyed each of them, for entirely different reasons.

 

[Captain_Tom]

That's hard to say, since it's opinion based. I thought gameplay, pacing, atmosphere and level design were great in the first. I even like the art style. It was intentional for the graphics to look like that.

In 2, the art style is the same, but things are more crisp in the graphics department, which for me takes away some of that setting and atmosphere. It gets made up for by level design being even grander, and more ambitious. I guess, even though Dishonored 2 was longer, I felt I had less to do. Then again, I didn't truly appreciate the first one for its greatness as a masterpiece until halfway through my 2nd playthrough, and confirmed on my third. I may revise my assessment of this current one after I play again, this time as Emily. I know there is ALOT I did not explore outside of the mission areas.

Not sure I really answered your question. It's more a "gut feeling" that it's almost, but just not quite as good.

EDIT: 2 of the levels, The Clockwork Mansion and The Conservatory are among the best things I have played in a game. I really enjoyed each of them, for entirely different reasons.

Hmmm ok. I will for sure pick it up eventually.


P.S. I like the visual style Dishonored used, but it had crazy low-res textures and terrible polygons. Borderlands 2 for example looked great with its art style (Especially with ini tweaks).

 

[Steevo]

Yep, Pure PC numbers indeed look strange. Here is another source:

(appologies for the giant picture, don't see a comment tag how to make it smaller)

Looks like the difference in AF and AA style used is the primary driving factor.

Image quality suffers for the performance boost Nvidia gains with TSAA http://images.nvidia.com/geforce-co...teractive-comparison-001-2x-msaa-vs-tsaa.html look at the building under the "52" and at the plants on the right, and a lot of other objects, details are removed. Perhaps its time to do image quality checks again?

 

[Captain_Tom]

Every game sponsored by Nvidia with review slides that looked like that, with a huge discrepancy between Nvidia and AMD' has also not played nice with my Nvidia GPU, granted not always "Unplayable" but certainly never a nice fluid smooth experience, enough to tarnish the experience of the game, and sometimes yes' out right unplayable in parts.

For me now when i see slides like that i think 'very badly optimised broken game that AMD have not yet had a chance to have a look at because of sponsorship commitments by the publisher.

In other words' runs bad on Nvidia, worse on AMD.

I'm not wasting anymore money on games like that.

Yup it really confuses me how publishers like Ubisoft can continue to say things like "PC gaming market is niche" when really it only applies to their games. Look how well Battlefield, Borderlands, Skyrim, Metro, and so many more games do on PC. They do well because they play well. These rediculous Gameswork nerfs are hurting their sales, and they continue to depend on Nvidia for programming because they are unwilling to pay for their own programmers to do the work. It's a vicious, self-destructive cycle.