Posting a news article on NeoGaf, which uses a post from NeoGaf as it's source. Mind fuck.
Inception.
Posting a news article on NeoGaf, which uses a post from NeoGaf as it's source. Mind fuck.
Probably a BlackMagic capture device of some kind. Which allows 1080p at 30fps or 720p at 60fps, but uncompressed footage.
The Elgato offers the above, but compressed captured footage to MP4 container.
Especially when these differences where the sole reason for df choosing 360 over ps3 in most head to heads last time round.Yes, interesting indeed how the first DF face-off for next-gen made the XB version look better and downplayed some differences.
That's great.
I'm just wondering how the fuck did people come to the conclusion that Digital Foundry purposely botched up the video capture to make it look like the Xbox One version is better, when the article about the comparison clearly says that the best console version is undeniably the Playstation 4's.
Then I realise we live in a world where some are convinced that there are the Illuminati controlling governments like puppet on strings.
You guys are fucking nuts.
I dont think they did it on purpose, because they still proclaimed the PS4 version as better looking and running more stable. They also admitted to the problem
Hopefully they dont fuck up the Call of Duty one, because then i am not sure most of us will give them the benefit of doubt.
How would they know until other sites showed different results?
How many people in that thread alone did not read the article fully and just shouted based on the pictures?
Are pictures easier to share and make viral rather than portions of the article?
Not to claim that they purposefully did this, but let's say that MS thoroughly enjoyed its side-effects...
Also I believe Elgato is limited to 1080p 30fps so they wouldn't have been able to do framerate measurements with it.
Anyone else have trouble sleeping last night knowing that some people on the internet thought the xbone version of the game looked better? Very upsetting.
The only think that, for me, is bad about this is not that there's a mistake on the capture. On a review event, with specific capture hardware it's bound to happen.
It's that the review event was last week, they had the time to edit it, run fps analysis, compare the differences between versions and either didn't notice that the capture was bad, or decided that it wasn't worthy of a mention on the article until they where called for it.
"excuse me while i whip this out" you should know what i am talking about.
It's next gen. You shouldn't be surprised at all.
Maybe because they saw the footage and should be able to tell something wasn't right? C'mon man...
gif destroys the image quality, but there you go. Anyone know if there's an ANPG plugin for photoshop?
Here's a comparison of how it would look like if the same settings were used for both versions:
They mentioned that some strange differences could be a capture issue in the article.
I know, but they still went ahead and posted this stuff... they should (and probably did) know better.
in my opinion they should delete everything and start over, anything based on these video is wrong.
i don't know why they did this on the first comparison between the next generation console, i don't buy the time issue they should have waited and made a proper one.
this is awful comparison, i just feel sorry for dark10x, he is one of my favorites GAF member.
How many people in that thread alone did not read the article fully and just shouted based on the pictures?
Are pictures easier to share and make viral rather than portions of the article?
Not to claim that they purposefully did this, but let's say that MS thoroughly enjoyed its side-effects...
God damn it, why do sites do this? That's not an official statement. :\
Well, to be fair, that's just my statement on the situation not an official DF statement (as in, it wasn't cleared by Rich or anything). I do work for them but I wasn't involved in this comparison. That's just my understanding of how things went down (as in, it was a special event and DF brought its own capture hardware while everyone else used elgato boxes handed out by reps).
The thing is that they did a proper analysis text wise, but I guess they knew no one would read it anyway, hence all the confusion.
They tuned both differently.Did they not use their own capturing device for both consoles? So whats wrong with the comparison? They need to tune it for the PS4 and not the X1, or are both under "tuned?" If both were tested with the same settings, I'm not sure why the outrage? I'm confused by the title of "botching."
Exactly.
Guys, look how many people actually believed in the Xbox One to be superior just from those pictures. The significance of that text is a microbe compared to sharing pictures/gifs/videos over the web because people want to watch and not read and in this case it worked very well in MS favors.
Good.
Every single person on this forum needs to know what crushed blacks are and that they are objectively bad because it results in a loss of image detail.
I think that this should be added to the OP.
dark10x specifically said he wasn't a spokesman for DF and therefore there is no admission, basically making the entire thread moot.
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=87943487&postcount=23
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=87937371&postcount=3371
They specifically stated that it was a 'Preview' comparison and not final. It's in the title.
They will be revisiting the games later once they have their own in-house consoles.
Do people just decide to hate on anything that doesn't 100% back up their preconceptions? The DF f*cked up. ONCE. And it was a totally honest mistake. Their equipment let them do Framerate analysis at the least which other guys could not.
There's no agenda here, no money changing hands, just a simple mistake. I imagine they'll be updating the article with this information at the top before long.
I think that this should be added to the OP.
dark10x specifically said he wasn't a spokesman for DF and therefore there is no admission, basically making the entire thread moot.
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=87943487&postcount=23
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=87937371&postcount=3371
Good.
Every single person on this forum needs to know what crushed blacks are and that they are objectively bad because it results in a loss of image detail.
That's... your opinion. A high contrast post-production effect could be applied to mimic the contrasty and cinematic look of film. Not saying that it's appropriate for your average FPS. But it seems like a lot of people learned the term "crushed blacks" last night and are just repeating what someone else told them.