Dying Light PC Technical Review

[seanR3D]

Developer Techland strikes out on its own with a spiritual successor to Dead Island they like to call Dying Light. Read our PC review to find out how it fares in terms of PC features and performance.

Dying Light PC Technical Review @ Rage3D.com

[KAC]

Just a few suggestions on articles. Take them for what they are.

Would be great if you can test differences in visuals using different settings. Like identifying differences using different viewing distances.

Also some performance benchmarks will go a long way in making these articles popular. As they are currently written, I wasn't sure what was the objective of the article. Would be great if you can clarify.

[seanR3D]

Originally Posted by KAC

Just a few suggestions on articles. Take them for what they are.

Would be great if you can test differences in visuals using different settings. Like identifying differences using different viewing distances.

Also some performance benchmarks will go a long way in making these articles popular. As they are currently written, I wasn't sure what was the objective of the article. Would be great if you can clarify.

I appreciate the feedback.

Those are the kinds of things I save for tweak guides. Which I haven't done in awhile...kinda holding out for the new site design (which is taking...longer than I'd like). That said, I would like to include info/graphs on RAM/CPU usage, maybe a single basic benchmark, and a screenshot gallery. Again, kinda holding out for new design on this.

The point of these articles is to tell you if it's a good port or not. I realize not everyone cares about that information. Just means it's not for you.

If it turns out tweak guides are a lot more popular regardless of what I put in these reviews and regardless of the new design (and I could see that being the case), I'll just dump them and only do tweak guides.

[KAC]

I see. I am still not clear on what is the criteria of "good port or not"? Is it frame rates? Is it graphics options in the menu? Is it graphics compared to consoles (like textures etc.)?

Seems a bit arbitrary to claim if the game is a good port or not without a clearly defined method of assessment/judgement that is structured around key themes for a good port vs. bad port.

Either way, I do believe that a technical review should include some benching of performance, some idea about IQ differences when enabling different features of the game and overall commentary on key measures such as ram usage, GPU usage, inside vs. outside frame rates (if applicable).

Tweak guides for me are around telling us which options to enable or command lines to use to fix either performance or IQ in a game. Something that is in contrast to what I deem a technical review. But then again, this is just my perception and understanding of when I read the term not anything based off of general industry norms/standards so what do I know.

Appreciate you taking the time to post stuff and also responding to comments here.

[seanR3D]

Good frame rate/low frame time latency, respectable amount of graphics options / necessary graphics options (bloom if there is bloom, FOV, etc), graphics improvements vs console / good graphics quality unto itself, and controls and interface that feel at home on mouse and keyboard.

You're right, we should have a page that details the criteria, and link to that in all reviews. I'll put it on the list.

I could highlight the graphics options that make major differences, so as to 'sell' them as features, in the same vein as good controls and such. But then I feel obligated to show the rest, and by then we're basically a tweak guide without benchmarks (or just one). You see? I'm open to ideas on how to balance this.

Tweak guides for me say, 'this is how to balance graphics and performance, and here's what you gain/lose by tinkering with any given option' (and then various other advanced tweaks that do any manner of things).

The name is something I'm open to changing, if you have any ideas on something that might speak more clearly to the goals I've expressed.

[KAC]

I feel given the time investment required, if you pick 5 options that demonstrate the iq differences by using those options per game then already it becomes extremely helpful to understand what will work or not work.

For example if you told me that vram usage shoots up when using the one option in dying light it would be extremely helpful. Right now I am still trying to figure out which option is causing vram to shoot up since I have tried reducing draw distance without luck. Just one example.

Naming is semantics. I like the technical review since it is unique but to drive more readership tweak guide would be a better term. Also will show up on Google ad sense faster in terms of relevance and hits.

[seanR3D]

I think we'll just switch to tweak guides (like this), maybe screenshot galleries (showing off games at ultra settings), and performance articles (like this but with graphs like in this article in addition to the frame time stuff). How does that sound to you? Any other types of articles you'd like to see?

[KAC]

Originally Posted by seanR3D

I think we'll just switch to tweak guides (like this), maybe screenshot galleries (showing off games at ultra settings), and performance articles (like this but with graphs like in this article in addition to the frame time stuff). How does that sound to you? Any other types of articles you'd like to see?

That would be very cool

[acroig]

Originally Posted by KAC

That would be very cool

Seconded. Thanks, Sean.

[seanR3D]

Thanks guys.