Rise of the Tomb Raider

Domingo

Fully [H]
Joined
Jul 30, 2004
Messages
21,591
I'm hoping pascal will be a different story.

Ditto. The 980GTX was pitched (at least by the community) as the last 1080p card you'll need. While an obvious exaggeration, the idea was that subsequent cards would be for 4K and VR setups.
I'm pretty lucky that AA doesn't mean much to me, so I *do* typically pull 60fps in everything as long as I'm willing to keep that at a low multiplier.
 

KickAssCop

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Mar 19, 2003
Messages
7,334
Game is absolutely fantastic even the second time round. On PC, the game looks absolutely gorgeous. I am loving replaying this game on PC. Normally, I never do that for games that I have finished so soon.
 

StryderxX

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jun 22, 2006
Messages
1,625
Game is absolutely fantastic even the second time round. On PC, the game looks absolutely gorgeous. I am loving replaying this game on PC. Normally, I never do that for games that I have finished so soon.

I also played this on the Xbox One and I'm noticing that the increased FPS (30fps to 60fps) has done wonders for this game. The controls are so much better now. I actually look forward to the fighting scenes which I dreaded on the console version.
 

Domingo

Fully [H]
Joined
Jul 30, 2004
Messages
21,591
I was surprised to learn that the Xbox One version of the game was only 30fps. In the commercial (much like GTA5), they show the game running at 60fps. Thanks interpolation!
 

Dion

2[H]4U
Joined
Oct 2, 2004
Messages
3,807
I think developers are starting to get lazy again...graphically these games are good but they're no Crysis 3/Battlefront, both of which run better than some of these new releases.

Or some developers just have better art teams.
 

polonyc2

Fully [H]
Joined
Oct 25, 2004
Messages
23,124
I think developers are starting to get lazy again...graphically these games are good but they're no Crysis 3/Battlefront, both of which run better than some of these new releases.

how far apart did those games come out?...those type of reference graphics showcases aren't the norm...I'm not expecting every AAA game to be #1 on the all time graphics list...Tomb Raider has always been weird because of that stupid grain filter, same with the Arkham games and the Assassin's Creed games...I blame FXAA as Arkham Origins shipped with MSAA and looked much more crisp and detailed...any game with FXAA looks flat to me
 

Armenius

Extremely [H]
Joined
Jan 28, 2014
Messages
35,287
I was surprised to learn that the Xbox One version of the game was only 30fps. In the commercial (much like GTA5), they show the game running at 60fps. Thanks interpolation!
It actually runs at a "cinematic" 24 FPS most of the time on the XBONE :rolleyes:. Sometimes it will get up to 26-28 FPS... I honestly don't know how I was ever able to play this game that way now that I'm experiencing it at a glorious 70-80 FPS on my PC.
 

Domingo

Fully [H]
Joined
Jul 30, 2004
Messages
21,591
30fps (and less) are why I barely ever touch my consoles. I just won't deal with it. I conceded that Bloodborne was worth it, but otherwise I've just been stuck with remasters and the rare 60fps console game.
Everything just feels "slow."
 

atom

Gawd
Joined
May 3, 2005
Messages
851
This game is running great on my 8350/280x. Right now I have most settings at "Very High". Enhanced Hair is on, because it was terrible with it off and I found it made little performance impact. Currently using FXAA but I haven't experimented with the others yet. I think a lot of people are having issues because they are using the supersampling which is making their GPU render at double the resolution. Sorry for you SLI users but once again you seem to be screwed over. The problems seem to be a lot smaller on this game than a lot of other launches I have dove into lately, I have a little more faith in PC gaming again.

FPS: High 40's, very smooth, and Steam In Home Streaming is having no trouble with this
 

sblantipodi

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 29, 2010
Messages
3,678
Will crystal dynamics ever fix this broken game?
I don't want to use reshade to have antialias. I paid 50€, I don't need external tweaking.
 

harmattan

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 11, 2008
Messages
5,110
For the most part, game runs like butter in most in-game areas on my 295x2 rig with everything set to Very High. However, there are some instances (mostly during cut scenes, but sometimes when in-game) the FPS goes down to 3-4. I'm going to back the Textures down to High and turn off Gameworks hair to see if it helps. It could be a rendering issue with Gameworks features, Vram wall, or RAM limitation which I saw mentioned somewhere (I'm only running with 8GB).
 

MelonSplitter

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Aug 6, 2006
Messages
1,057
30fps (and less) are why I barely ever touch my consoles. I just won't deal with it. I conceded that Bloodborne was worth it, but otherwise I've just been stuck with remasters and the rare 60fps console game.
Everything just feels "slow."

I agree with you 100%. But there are 30 FPS fanboys who always say there is no difference between 30 or 60 fps.:rolleyes:. I can never understand their mentality.
 

sblantipodi

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 29, 2010
Messages
3,678
I agree with you 100%. But there are 30 FPS fanboys who always say there is no difference between 30 or 60 fps.:rolleyes:. I can never understand their mentality.

For me 30FPS is a no go but I agree with the fact that 30FPS on console are way better than 30FPS on PC.

30FPS on console are generally stable, games tends to have 30FPS all over the game.

The things that kill visuals on PC when running 30FPS is that PC runs at 25, 34, 31, 38, 29 fps.
The framerate jump continuosly and that is the worst thing.
 

Comixbooks

Fully [H]
Joined
Jun 7, 2008
Messages
19,599
Going to wait for a good 14.99 price on this one or lower no reason for me in hell to pay full price.
 

Domingo

Fully [H]
Joined
Jul 30, 2004
Messages
21,591
For me 30FPS is a no go but I agree with the fact that 30FPS on console are way better than 30FPS on PC.

30FPS on console are generally stable, games tends to have 30FPS all over the game.

The things that kill visuals on PC when running 30FPS is that PC runs at 25, 34, 31, 38, 29 fps.
The framerate jump continuosly and that is the worst thing.

Definitely in the past that was true. Now, it isn't always like that. They lock the FPS at 30, but there are dips on the consoles, too. 30 does still look better on consoles (no clue why, but it's true), but I think it's getting worse, too.
 

MelonSplitter

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Aug 6, 2006
Messages
1,057
For me 30FPS is a no go but I agree with the fact that 30FPS on console are way better than 30FPS on PC.

30FPS on console are generally stable, games tends to have 30FPS all over the game.

The things that kill visuals on PC when running 30FPS is that PC runs at 25, 34, 31, 38, 29 fps.
The framerate jump continuosly and that is the worst thing.

I'm playing Just Cause 3 on the PS4. I gotta say that it looks beautiful on my Samsung 55 inch using Dynamic as my picture mode but the 30 fps is dizzying.
 

Armenius

Extremely [H]
Joined
Jan 28, 2014
Messages
35,287
Will crystal dynamics ever fix this broken game?
I don't want to use reshade to have antialias. I paid 50€, I don't need external tweaking.
SMAA is included and looks great with this game. The FXAA implementation actually doesn't look half-bad, either. What kind of AA are you looking for? MSAA can always be forced in your graphic card's control panel.

For the most part, game runs like butter in most in-game areas on my 295x2 rig with everything set to Very High. However, there are some instances (mostly during cut scenes, but sometimes when in-game) the FPS goes down to 3-4. I'm going to back the Textures down to High and turn off Gameworks hair to see if it helps. It could be a rendering issue with Gameworks features, Vram wall, or RAM limitation which I saw mentioned somewhere (I'm only running with 8GB).
It's most likely the VRAM wall. Very High textures is using 7GB on my Titan X without stutter. Remember that the 295X2 is a dual-GPU card, so you only have a 4GB effective framebuffer. Backing the textures down to High will probably help.
 

MavericK

Zero Cool
Joined
Sep 2, 2004
Messages
31,590
Or some developers just have better art teams.

Performance optimization doesn't really have much to do with art teams I would think.

how far apart did those games come out?...those type of reference graphics showcases aren't the norm...I'm not expecting every AAA game to be #1 on the all time graphics list...

True, but like you said, Crysis 3 came out almost 3 years ago and yet we still have less than a handful of games that even approach that level of graphics. It does require a demanding machine even today but it's possible to get 60+ FPS stable in it with moderate hardware, whereas some of these games coming out today are struggling with 30-40 FPS on top-end stuff, and not even looking as good to boot.

Developers need to push forward not only in graphical fidelity but in performance optimization as well. It's clearly possible...we've seen it a number of times. Problem is most AAA developers/publishers these days push stuff out half-baked and so we get what we are seeing - games with sub-par graphics and performance issues.
 

Ryan7968

Limp Gawd
Joined
Sep 2, 2004
Messages
310
The SLI profile changes from that DSOGaming link did not do much for me. I did not notice an increase in SLI performance and it seemed to make some graphical anomalies at certain points in the game. I switched it back to Nvidia defaults.

I want to max all settings in this game, however at 1080P if I set the textures to Very High I am over 4GB and my 980's don't like that at all. Now I have all settings turned up but textures at High, FXAA since it is just so much smoother than the other options.

I wish it wasn't so demanding to crank up the AA in a lot of games, and I wish it was more feasible to run super high resolutions in every game. When I bought my first 980 I had to make a new monitor purchase as well, and I chose 1080p. If I want to have my current computer last a few years without an upgrade then I think that was a smart resolution choice, and games like this new Tomb Raider certainly hammer home that point. Maybe I should have gone 1440p, but I am definitely scared of 4k and what it will do to my wallet.
 

Tup3x

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jun 8, 2011
Messages
1,941
SMAA is included and looks great with this game. The FXAA implementation actually doesn't look half-bad, either. What kind of AA are you looking for? MSAA can always be forced in your graphic card's control panel.

It's most likely the VRAM wall. Very High textures is using 7GB on my Titan X without stutter. Remember that the 295X2 is a dual-GPU card, so you only have a 4GB effective framebuffer. Backing the textures down to High will probably help.
The built in FXAA and SMAA both suck in this. Driver FXAA is superior. You can try to force MSAA but don't expect it to work (it will not).
 
Last edited:

eloj

2[H]4U
Joined
Dec 31, 2000
Messages
3,612
AMD put out 16.1.1 with "Performance/Quality improvements and an AMD Crossfire™ profile is available for Rise of the Tomb Raider™"
 

polonyc2

Fully [H]
Joined
Oct 25, 2004
Messages
23,124
I agree with you 100%. But there are 30 FPS fanboys who always say there is no difference between 30 or 60 fps.:rolleyes:. I can never understand their mentality.

there's a difference between 30 fps and 60 fps...but too many people think 60 fps is the only way and that's wrong...it's a placebo for most people...most people would not be able to tell the difference between 60 and 50 or 60 and 48...those people use Afterburner or some other software to judge instead of using their eyes...
 

harmattan

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 11, 2008
Messages
5,110
It's most likely the VRAM wall. Very High textures is using 7GB on my Titan X without stutter. Remember that the 295X2 is a dual-GPU card, so you only have a 4GB effective framebuffer. Backing the textures down to High will probably help.

Yea, that's definitely what it "feels" like. I guess after 25 years of PC gaming I sound like my father when he can "feel" when a timing belt is ready to go :)

I'm hoping the new AMD driver has some crossfire improvements.
 

Colonel Sanders

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Sep 26, 2001
Messages
5,409
there's a difference between 30 fps and 60 fps...but too many people think 60 fps is the only way and that's wrong...it's a placebo for most people...most people would not be able to tell the difference between 60 and 50 or 60 and 48...those people use Afterburner or some other software to judge instead of using their eyes...

Nonsense. I can tell the difference between frame rates up to about 90-100, above that it's hard to tell. But I clearly see the drops from 60 to 50 for example.
 

Domingo

Fully [H]
Joined
Jul 30, 2004
Messages
21,591
I can tell right away if something drops below 60. It could be because I'm gaming on a television, but it's pretty unmistakable. Even the difference between 55 and 60 is more or less obvious. It isn't always the end of the world (I can live with it in a few instances), but it's tough to miss.

Thanks to a snowstorm, I've had a little time to play the game today. The commentary about upping the difficulty is spot on. I'm gaming on a pad and am on the difficulty above the default. The enemies are pretty horrible shots, don't seem to aim if you're in any way obscured, and the game is also forgiving. As long as your shots are "pretty close" it counts them.
 

addictedto60fps

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
1,329
Even drops to 60 fps are jarring and noticeable to me. When you're gaming at 70+ fps and it drops to 60, it's extremely noticeable and jarring for me.
 

polonyc2

Fully [H]
Joined
Oct 25, 2004
Messages
23,124
anyone play the Baba Yaga DLC?...I hear it fits into the middle of the main campaign so I'm thinking about buying it before starting up the main game
 

atom

Gawd
Joined
May 3, 2005
Messages
851
anyone play the Baba Yaga DLC?...I hear it fits into the middle of the main campaign so I'm thinking about buying it before starting up the main game

I was wondering this myself. I read its only about 2 hours long though and I don't know if I need to throw 10 bucks at my new game yet anyways.
 

polonyc2

Fully [H]
Joined
Oct 25, 2004
Messages
23,124
I was wondering this myself. I read its only about 2 hours long though and I don't know if I need to throw 10 bucks at my new game yet anyways.

reviews online seem to give it around a 7 or 8 saying it's decent but short...I think I'll wait and just play the base game
 

Domingo

Fully [H]
Joined
Jul 30, 2004
Messages
21,591
I'm not seeing any "stutter" in the traditional sense, but fire/smoke effects seem to randomly make looking around choppy. It doesn't seem to affect FPS counters, and it's no Assassin's Creed 3, but it isn't 100% smooth like the rest of the game.
Minor gripe, but I wonder if that effect is what people are having issues with.
I'm digging the game so far. After taking a lot of early cues from Uncharted, it has settled into the groove set by the last game. It's more of the same, but that isn't a bad thing at all. I had a blast with that one, too.
 

Q-BZ

Fully [H]
Joined
Sep 28, 2007
Messages
19,567
anyone play the Baba Yaga DLC?...I hear it fits into the middle of the main campaign so I'm thinking about buying it before starting up the main game

Not bad. Boss fight was kind of annoying.
 
Joined
Aug 16, 2012
Messages
769
I just finished the main story line at ~70% so I'll go back for what I missed.

In general I think was a pretty good game. It looks gorgeous, the gameplay is fun, and the story is serviceable but could have benefited from a real writer.

I have questions about the story and other general comments that I'll put in spoiler tags. Be warned this is end game stuff.

Story Questions:
1. I remember some recordings (or something) about someone that was like a closet serial killer and started enjoying killing the natives but then moved on to soldiers (I think) and Konstantin found out about him and embraced him? I was expecting to run across this person at some point but I don't remember doing so. Did I completely miss it or was it forgettable?

2. What's with the straight arrow story? There weren't any twists or surprises? It feels like I missed act 2 of a 3 act play.

3. No closure with Ana in the end. I don't even think Lara mentioned her, just her father?
 

Lemonade727

Weaksauce
Joined
Jun 27, 2013
Messages
110
I'm not seeing any "stutter" in the traditional sense, but fire/smoke effects seem to randomly make looking around choppy. It doesn't seem to affect FPS counters, and it's no Assassin's Creed 3, but it isn't 100% smooth like the rest of the game.
Minor gripe, but I wonder if that effect is what people are having issues with.
I'm digging the game so far. After taking a lot of early cues from Uncharted, it has settled into the groove set by the last game. It's more of the same, but that isn't a bad thing at all. I had a blast with that one, too.

I just saw some stutter when I was hitting the VRAM limit with my old 4GB card before I scooped up the 980Ti, but outside of that I haven't noticed any either. Framerate has definitely changed with a quickness though in certain areas, but it wasn't stutter.
 

polonyc2

Fully [H]
Joined
Oct 25, 2004
Messages
23,124
started up the game again last night after The Division beta sucked up all my time last weekend...anyhow after initially settling on SSAA 2X, Textures on High and everything else maxed out at 1920 x 1200 I decided to try out the injectable SMAA from ReShade and I love it...looks phenomenal...the crappy grain effect seems to have diminished as well...textures look more crisp and detailed for the most part and the game as a whole looks so much better...and performance is pretty much a steady 50-60+ fps everywhere (I have Adaptive VSync enabled so no going above 60 for me)

PureHair is very impressive on Lara...the way it moves along her shoulders and has real volume to it...well done...the water effects on Lara's clothing and skin is also very realistic...



 

samops03

Gawd
Joined
Oct 18, 2007
Messages
809
Should i play the game with my GTX770 2GB, or wait to get a new card? Playing at 1080P
 

Absalom

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Oct 3, 2007
Messages
1,076
I have questions about the story and other general comments that I'll put in spoiler tags. Be warned this is end game stuff.

Story Questions:
1. I remember some recordings (or something) about someone that was like a closet serial killer and started enjoying killing the natives but then moved on to soldiers (I think) and Konstantin found out about him and embraced him? I was expecting to run across this person at some point but I don't remember doing so. Did I completely miss it or was it forgettable?

You didn't miss anything. It was an attempt of the writers to provide some backstory on Konstatin and his order. I thought it was one of the more colorful attempts.

2. What's with the straight arrow story? There weren't any twists or surprises? It feels like I missed act 2 of a 3 act play.

The ending felt extremely rushed to me. This game was more focused on quality than quantity (although it does offer a bit more than its predecessor). The illusion is that the game is an open world type. The reality is that the game is just a linear 3rd person cover-shooter with side-missions that can be done out of sequence.

3. No closure with Ana in the end. I don't even think Lara mentioned her, just her father?

Oh there was definitely closure with Ana. Stick around after the credits.

Artistically, the game was a masterpiece. The writing could have been better, but all-in-all, I enjoyed ROTR from start to end. I really liked that I could play the game at my own pace. It felt like an improvement over its predecessor in every way.

The bow in this game really takes center stage. It's your swiss army knife. I wish there were more melee options. The bottle stab-to-the face is both brutal & hilarious.
 

polonyc2

Fully [H]
Joined
Oct 25, 2004
Messages
23,124
what is this, screenshots for ants?

can't tell if you're serious or not but I posted them as thumbnails...meaning you need to click on each pic to enlarge them...posting them as full size png or jpeg screenies would clog up the page
 
Top