By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Otter said:
Chrkeller said:

Which is odd, because i was shocked at how well it ran on PC.  Locked 120 fps, max settings.  I was expecting issues, but it was flawless.

And as for the stuff that was removed (not directed at you, just didn't want to post twice) because the game file is 100 gb, seems absurd to me.  Removing a few textures and apples from the table isn't going to account for 33% reduction in the OG file size (150 gb down to 100 gb).  Not when the game is 70+ hours with a stupid amount of content.  Things where removed because of cpu issues.  Especially the volumetric and particle effects.

This game is basically what I expected.  Rebirth is ambitious.  The S2 can run it, but clearly struggles.  Many areas hitting the low 20s, lots of pop in and lower resolution.  But to be fair, the game is high end and it does play.  

Just personal opinion from here.  

I think max settings doesn't really scale much beyond PS5. It seems the main problem with the PS5 version was the image quality which seemed to be an issue with upscalling (I imagine you used DLSS or FS2/3?). Performance wise I think it just struggled in combat when alpha effects were filling the screen (GPU). A lot of it's tech issues like pop-in/poor textures/bad animations/poor lighting are also in the PC version. It's not necessarily a bad performer

I think my expectations for Rebirth were low, but FF16 run god awful.  Christ I couldn't get my 4090 to hit 120 fps at 1440p.  So I expected Rebirth issues and was pleasantly surprised when my rig killed it with ease, even when I doubled NPCs in Kalm, 120 fps locked.  

Edit

and yes, the biggest advantage the S2 has is upscaling.  The ps5 and xbox are garbage at upscaling.  Sony and MS were shortsighted on this element.  



rtx 4090, 32 gb ram, i7-13700k

Switch 2