Digital Foundry's full face-off for The Evil Within

"The Evil Within is a good game, possibly even a great one, but what's clear after a few days' testing is that it suffers from technical issues which prevent it reaching its full potential. Despite being built using id Tech 5, an engine conceived to deliver 60fps on all formats, the game has genuine issues even hitting 30fps - and that's factoring in the mammoth 'cinematic' borders that vacuum up almost 30 per cent of the screen real estate."

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
moegooner881496d ago (Edited 1496d ago )

" Does The Evil Within manage to rise above its performance issues and live up to its potential? Well, yes, it's a solid and interesting game. Of the two console builds, PS4 gets the nod - the higher resolution is welcome and the game simulation is more closely linked to the renderer, meaning less stutter than the Xbox One version. However, while improved over the Microsoft console, the PS4 game still feels highly under-optimised. Indeed, as things stand, with the possible exception of Thief, The Evil Within probably has more performance issues than any other title we've tested on the new wave of consoles - and that's a real shame, as there's a remarkably good game here let down by its surrounding technology."

Pretty much what I expected, will pick up the game when it's cheaper. Game could have used more development time, at least for the current gen versions.

darthv721496d ago

this part from the article really stands out to me...

"That being the case, those looking for something closer to the best possible experience should really opt for the PC version, provided you have the requisite hardware to at least match and exceed PS4 performance - a modern Core i3 processor matched with something like a Radeon R9 270 or a GeForce GTX 660 should get you to 1080p30 with a consistent performance level."

An i3 is a dual core CPU and yet both the XB1 and PS4 have an 8 core CPU. So why is it that these games are not being developed with the 8 cores in mind (let alone 4 of the 8 cores)?

How long until we truly see a game that is optimized to take advantage of the multicore designs of the current platforms?

Darkwatchman1496d ago

And to add even more insult to injury, the game is running on IdTech5 which is engine that's supposed to optimized for 60fps on consoles and yet they can't even do that. Rage on last gen did a pretty good job of meeting its 60fps target. It could dip, but never went lower than I believe the mid 40's

vishmarx1496d ago (Edited 1496d ago )

i want a sequel that isnt on a bloody fps engine , especially not on one that isnt great at fps's either.

the game itself is a masterpiece but theres no denying that using idech 5 was a terrible choice , whether it was bethesda'a or tango's i do not know. though i doubt mikami ever had a say in this and happily agreed to make a 3rd person survival horror that will be insanely heavy on real time lighting and shadows on an engine meant to run first person shooters at 60fps .(fyi wolfenstien tno used bake lighting and it still dint manage to run at 1080p at all times whilst looking like a ps3 game on ps4 and a ps2 game on ps3)

EXVirtual1496d ago

That's a good question.
My first thought is that the 8 cores are not utilized for the following reasons.
A- It's a cross gen game so devs can be a bit more lax.
B- It's barely the first year.
Most of the time, I would think it would be A.
Some devs know what they're doing though. Konami for example.

NukaCola1496d ago

honestly asking.. Is this a crossgen issue?

Ult iMate1495d ago


Evil Within is a cross-gen game. So this game cannot take full advantage of current-gen architecture because it was developed with PS3 and X360 in mind. I think it's not quite right to say that Core i3/R9 270 is a match for PS4 capabilities.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 1495d ago
starchild1496d ago (Edited 1496d ago )

The game does run pretty well on PC, although it seems too demanding relative to how it looks.

Still, just being able to get a steady 30fps with good anti-aliasing and higher resolutions is a huge improvement. And the game isn't at all CPU bound, so 60fps is definitely possible with the right graphics card.

It seems that a lot of Japanese devs aren't too good at modern game development, particularly the technical aspects. It's too bad that it isn't better optimized.

jc121495d ago

this is one of the few times i can actually see a difference between the two versions: the PS4 version is noticeably sharper and crisp.

Walker1496d ago

These articles gonna be pointless :/ PS4 is way more powerfull than xbone and better performance for PS4's version of multipatform titles is obvious !

Corpser1496d ago

You spelled PC wrong

"That being the case, those looking for something closer to the best possible experience should really opt for the PC version"

Ezz20131496d ago

but he's talking about consoles

he didn't say any thing about PC

DoctorJones1495d ago (Edited 1495d ago )

Yeah, it's best played on pc.

EDIT:Before the 'Not everyone has a pc capable of playing it, mnngh!!' brigade comes crawling along, I mean a gaming pc capable of playing it. Which is in the hands of a LOT of people.

Mine for example. If you or someone else doesn't have one, well that sucks, best get one that can play it, they don't cost much.

breakpad1496d ago (Edited 1496d ago )

PS4 surpasses even maxPC spec in some scenes (water and effects) is the best overall version

Protoss1495d ago (Edited 1495d ago )

That was a good joke. Do you read that to yourself before you sleep just to try and make it feel legit?

Haru1495d ago

Yeah I just checked the screens and you're right, some scenes really do look better on PS4 than on PC.

kingduqc1495d ago (Edited 1495d ago )

To be fair, the ps4 is far from being the better version. 4k downsampling, native 1440p advance aa, actually smooth fps, no black bars and the list goes on for the pc version. It's also cheaper.

Ghost_Nappa1496d ago

Let's not kid ourselves, the borders are there so the 360/ps3 version run better.

BattleTorn1496d ago (Edited 1496d ago )

Then why'd the PS4/X1 have them?

starchild1496d ago

To help them run better too. Fewer pixels to render makes it easier to run.

Mr Tretton1495d ago

Yes there black bars on the PC version, though can remove them with console command

Haru1495d ago

Removing the black bars make the game look bad and blurry, read the article and check the screens

DoctorJones1495d ago (Edited 1495d ago )

No it doesn't Haru, check the screens -

Get a clue mate, you're not fooling anyone.

Yokan1496d ago

Such a beast of a game! Love it!

People have always asked for a survival horror game, well here it is! And for some reason it is getting low scores, this game is nothing short of a 9. Awesome game.

The Pheen-X1496d ago

This is what every survival horror fan wants in a game, yet I hear not a lot of people are buying it! So stupid, this is the AAA horror everyone has been waiting for!

1nsomniac1496d ago (Edited 1496d ago )

Lol no it's not. At all. Have you even played the game or are you just spreading rubbish. The game is not AAA at all. By any stretch of the imagination no matter how deluded you are in fact im sure it would be happy to be considered to be a C/D rated game!

GetSomeLoGiK1496d ago

Honestly, if you buy games based off reviews, you're retarded. Everyone has different taste. If I like the way the game looks and plays, I'm gonna get it. Also The Evil Within has gotten mostly good scores, only a few gave it a bad score.

spacedelete1496d ago

why does this game have borders ? its more "cinematic" when i can see the whole screen. borders are very lazy design.

DigitalRaptor1495d ago (Edited 1495d ago )

I don't mind a different approach and I don't mind black borders, but The Last of Us was one of the most intense, amazing and incredibly cinematic games I've played in the past decade.

You don't need borders and I don't think having them makes it more cinematic, but I don't think it makes the dev lazy either.

Show all comments (45)
The story is too old to be commented.