Dying Light 2 Only Hits 1080p/30FPS On Xbox Series S, No 60FPS Option

Considering that they are 1080p60 on Series X and PS5 of course it wouldn't be able to hit that on the S... That's pretty bad for a supposedly current gen game.

Gutted that even on the Series X it’s only 1080p when playing performance mode (60fps). Was hoping for at least 1440 on Microsoft’s flagship console.

That review also mentioned that there apparently is a 120 FPS mode exclusive to the Series X if you have a VRR TV.

Yea, definitely sounds like they either didn't bother much with the Series S or didn't have enough time/budget to do it. Either way sucks for the Series S owners.

@Nightcrawler71 It's the same story on Sony's flagship console. This is on the devs. Plenty of other large, open world games that can hit the big numbers.

@JudaiMasters They can't even hit 4k60 on the X or PS5. So, it's an overall sucks for every owner.

I saw this coming. They basically confirmed the game will be launching in a Cyberpunk state and will slowly be patching it in the coming months.

Xbox series x does have the edge over all other consoles with a 16% higher pixel count on the 30fps mode.
Overall I don’t think the game has been optimised that well, there is minor screen tearing when existing water in certain situations as well.
Though VRR does take care of that but it should not happen in the first place.
This game went gold in early December, so they have had time for better optimisation.

I wonder how much of this is an optimization issue and how much of it is a hardware limitation issue. Unfortunately we aren't likely to get an entirely honest answer from the developer or Microsoft either way.

Seems to be a Cyberpunk job.
Aims for the sky for PC users, and then the console version is an unoptimized mess.
A great example of why I don't pre-order games these days.

@blinx01 Games are always getting downgraded on PC because of consoles. No AAA studio truly focuses on PC these days, trust me. They all lead the development with console versions.

Considering that Techland have been able to tweak their engine to get the original Dying Light on Switch, it's mad to think they struggled to optimise it for these next gen consoles.

@Xiovanni You are definitely right. Depends on the devs if they allow the PC users to tweak the settings for their hardware and accommodate both mid-end and the highest end PCs or they'll rather go the route EA went for example with FIFA 22. The thing is, the top PCs have a lot bigger potential than we can see in most AAA games. That's why I suggested that studios don't lead the development with PC.

That's a shame and concerning. My whole thing with the Series S was that as long as it ran everything at at least 1080p60fps that's good enough for me.

Between Guardians of the Galaxy and now this i think Series S owners are gonna be stuck with a lot of 30fps games.

@LX_FENIX Definitely concerning I'm starting to regret buying mine now as devs don't seem to even give a ***** about optimising for series s.

@romando / @Xiovanni : According to Steam's last hardware survey from December of 2021 93% of Steam's users have DirectX 12 GPUs and slightly more than 50% of those users have a GeForce 10 (or equivalent) series of GPU or older. And from what I've read the Xbox Series X and PlayStation 5 are more closely comparable to GeForce 20 GPUs, so it really does seem as though PC is "holding back" game development.

@Xiovanni I think that's definitely the case i just hope more devs try a little harder on the optimisation front in future.

@Beagle I think it only runs at 60fps on series x

Development was delayed, so what the hell have they been doing all this time? joke!

Was close to pre ordering this game as I LOVED the first one. Safe to say I won't touch it until they at least get it running at 60 fps on the Series S. Unacceptable for a current gen game from a developer of this calibre.

After seeing the reviews and the myriad of issues and bugs reported, DL2 should've stayed in the oven more time

@101Force Again. It's not the PC, it's the devs.

@romando : Yeah, of course it's the developers. But no developer in their right mind is going to design a game explicitly for 2021 or newer hardware when such a large amount of the PC market is running GPUs from 2016 or older. Maybe when the silicon shortage transitions to the expected surplus in 2023 or 2024, assuming the growing copper shortage isn't too much of a problem, the lowest denominator for game specs won't be 6-year-old PC hardware.

@101Force PC games are highly scalable. Devs can tweak their games to low graphics with minimal effort to work on lower end cards thanks to engines like UE, Unity, etc. The devs also have a choice to not make them scalable and put a more modern gpu as the minimum. About the 10 series "holding back development", that is pure bull. The Series S has a gpu the equivalent of a 1060. So, according to your own words, the Series S is holding back development as well, isn't it?

On this particular case, the devs of DL2 bit more than they could chew. They can't assume that a very powerful console would just run whatever unoptimized cr@p they put with ease.

@Savage_Joe : A significant number of PC users have less powerful GPUs than the GTX 1060 according to Steam, and the GTX 1060 doesn't have ray tracing so arguably the Series S is a bit better — but isn't the belief that the Series S is "holding back the current gen" a pretty common sentiment?

I agree with you though, the vast majority of games — their textures, models, etc. — can be scaled between different resolutions and colour depths without issue. Disparity develops with relatively unique features that rely on specialized processors. And we're seeing this right now with ray tracing and DLSS 2.0, but other features / specialized instruction sets could develop around fluid dynamics, AI behavior, improved model interaction, etc. and if those features are used in gameplay elements I think we'll see a sharp divide between "next gen" and everything else, like the difference between sprite-based GPUs and 3D-capable GPUs in the mid-1990s.

And I definitely agree with you that developers — even AAA developers — can rely on raw power to make up for incredibly poor optimization. For decades the demoscene has proven that effective optomization goes a lot further than most commercial products are willing to go. .kkrieger comes to mind as a good example.

It's totally unfair and not acceptable in 2021 to go out with no 60 fps at all for whatever next gen console. I mean, after the last generation of false marketing promises, finally with this gen the minimum they can do is to always launch any games with 60 fps and scale the resolution according to the console. I will not buy any game that is not respecting consumers.

This game is quite heavy on PC as well. 30fps at 1080p makes sense on XSS, but there should have been a 720p drs mode for 60fps. Metro Exodus dropped to around 480p on XSS and people didn't seem to complain much about that. Maybe there is something about the game that is memory bandwidth intensive, that is probably the biggest problem performance issue for the XSS

I was bummed when I found out that it was only 30 fps on Series S, but then remembered that the first game hasn't gotten a frame rate upgrade yet either, so at least the experience will be on par.

@101Force That's the main point yeah. They either focus on PC to make their games scale well across all kinds of configs or just use the average and cater their game towards that. Easier and definitely cheaper to do the latter.

Not impressed. Will pass. Unacceptable performance.

I mean this game also runs on 1080p on the flagship consoles...

I find it debatable if hardware is the issue here as opposed to just , say, the way the game is optimized for or adapterd to consoles or just straight up designed.