Well lets find out at DF faceoff
If you think Xbox One X will drop on the same instances as X1s
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Digital Foundry: Assassin creed origins Xbox one x tech first look.
- Thread starter madmackem
- Start date
Well lets find out at DF faceoff
If you think Xbox One X will drop on the same instances as X1sResident_UA
Member
Are you applying for a job in PR? That's quite a spin. LOL
Even if you are right you can't know this and you are just making up a best case scenario based on what the developer said.
I'm not claiming anything about GoW's performance, other than exactly what its technical director is saying. You are the one that is inventing scenarios to justify your incorrect assessment of the situation.Well lets find out at DF faceoff
Dural
Member
Uh, the Wipeout developers said it uses adaptive scaling and DF weren't able to detect it. Were they just trying to make their game sound worse?
Resident_UA
Member
There's more than one of you? Wipeout developers said that because at the time they didn't think it would run at native 4k. This could be a case here too, but even the developers don't know this. How would any of you know?
No, I'm saying if they say it uses adaptive scaling, it uses adaptive scaling. DF's ability to spot it doesn't change that fact.
Exactly there's games that used adaptive scaling but when analysed by DF there's no instance of a drop of res.
I'm sure they implemented to be safe but it could very well mean that 100% of the time the res doesn't drop. Especially any bottlenecks the X1s has won't be present in the Xbox One X
And that doesn't mean the game isn't native 4k. If a game is analysed to be running 4k at all times, then it's native unless there's a single piece of proof of an instance it isn't
It's not uncommon for a game to use adaptive scaling but rarely drop. There will likely be drops, but how often and how much is key. If we're talking a 5-10% drop in resolution, only in intensive situations, that's not going to be very noticeable.
I may have misread something, but how is the post you quoted implying that Rayner is lying?
Resident_UA
Member
Actually the developer confirmed that adaptive scaling was disabled in the final game (latest DF video)
Nothing as I what I said is that the game will be 4k native at all times and wouldn't drop where the X1s does due to not having the same bottlenecks to cause a drop in res
He thinks I'm saying the director is lying to make it sound worse when he's just coming to conclusions to what my actual words say. Again it's Matt.....
Spot on. This is becoming a common practice. If you want to ensure a certain framerate above all else, you put in adaptive scaling. Even if it's rarely, if ever put to use. It's hard to test all scenarios, especially for multiplayer.
ethomaz
Banned
Dev said it is disabled... it is not using it... the original game code indeed has this feature but it is disabled on Pro.
The game might very well rarely drop. I'm not disputing that.
But if it uses adaptive scaling it's using it for a reason, and that means all of MS's first party games don't run at native 4K. And GoW won't be the only one.
Which is fine, there is nothing wrong with checkerboard rendering or dynamic resolution. But let's just be honest about the situation.
Ah, well there you go.
I don't even know what "it's Matt" means.
And the idea that the X doesn't have bottleneck or won't have any performance issues is just plane wrong.
Again you are not reading what i type. It won't have the same bottlenecks X1s has. It's not going to encounter any issues with memory, bandwidth, etc it encountered. Did you read that MS did extensive engine profiling with the major game engines out there to see where the bottlenecks were and designed the chip to negate them? If not it's a good read
It doesn't have all the same bottlenecks, sure. It has some of the same bottlenecks.
I don't need to read DF's article to know what MS has done with the X, though I have anyway.
ethomaz
Banned
Let's see what will be the excuses when a good amount of first party games doesn't run at native 4k.
LukasTaves
Member
It also went from 60fps to 30 in that jump XD
The jump keeping the same framerate was from 900p to 1440p
Who cares honestly. Do you actually?
PuppetMaster
Member
Nice PS4pro specs. But what about Scorpio?
ethomaz
Banned
He cares if not the he was not saying nonsense.
CassidyIzABeast
Member
Drop the framerate to maintain that unmolested true 4k resolution or maintain 60fps at a resolution that's still well above 1080p when things get super hectic. Decisions decisions.
Vigilant Walrus
Member
It's about the frames. As a PC gamer I could give a fuck about checkerboard 4k or native 4k. This is some petty console fanboy squabble. It's like arguing about 4k vs 5k. These are diminishing returns.
Framerate is not. Framerate has always been a big a problem since we were introduced to 3D games. The reality is that high speed games that require timing and skill deserves to be played at a higher framerate for gameplay reasons.
The arguments for higher resolution for gameplay is not anywhere near as strong.
That doesn't mean that people don't have their own knee jerks about what faults annoy them about game design. For example, I'm not one to really be that bothered about clipping, but shoddy draw distances grind my gears. Still- I cannot think of action games as not being compromised by 60 FPS.
I don't think all games need to be 60 fps. There are many types of games where it becomes a visual aesthetic, but framerate dips can ruin a game. Bayonetta on PS3 was.. That struck me as something I simply couldn't enjoy because of the framerate issues. Complaining about that back then, is not like this, with Pro vs X being reduced to a e-peen pissing contest.
Beer Monkey
Member
Don't forget latency. It has ruined games like Killzone series despite framerate.
The more pixels they add to the AC series, the more obvious it is that they are simply taking a XBox 360 game and just adding bells and whistles instead of actually making a game from the ground up for current hardware. Not on a Fallout 4 level of total disregard for the customer, but pretty close.
Liabe Brave
Member
None. But part of the reason is that there's so few 900p PS4 games to start with. With only a half-dozen opportunities, you run against developer choices that prioritize other things. Paragon only mildly raises resolution, then cranks up a ton of other effects. Nier: Automata is even more suggestive: it too only raises resolution a little, but among the effects it adds is 4xMSAA. That quantity of extra sampling could very likely have been used to reach 2160c. Platinum evidently felt pristine 1080p was preferable.
Of course, we will in general see bigger improvements from Xbox One X than from PS4 Pro. But your particular comparison isn't very salient.
Yes, we are in agreement. There's a lot to the situation. You can point to the fact that it's not technically always native 4K in multiplayer and I agree that's not a big deal other than for people who want to beat their chest about native 4K. And if MSFT is claiming all 1st party games will run in native 4K, then it goes against that too, although I haven't seen where they've said that.
But poking at that, while not mentioning the other improvements like 4K textures and what essentially amounts to PC High or Ultra settings in a lot of areas isn't being honest about the situation either. There's different perspectives in all of it and it's ultimately what you choose to focus on to form your individual narrative.
Im not focusing on any particular narrative. A poster in this thread made as assertion, and it's incorrect. That's my only point.
Frankly I think focusing on 4K native resolution over other improvements is an overall bad idea, so bravo to the devs that make the decision to make use of checkerboard or dynamic res and make improvements in other areas (especially frame rate) as a result.
JeffG
Member
My Philips can play video via USB drive (not sure if you TV can do the same)
But you can get these 2 videos. One HDR the other is the nonHDR. Try them both and see what the difference is. Try different settings. May help with setup
Non HDR
http://demo-uhd3d.com/fiche.php?cat=uhd&id=143
HDR Version
http://demo-uhd3d.com/fiche.php?cat=uhd&id=144
But you can get these 2 videos. One HDR the other is the nonHDR. Try them both and see what the difference is. Try different settings. May help with setup
Non HDR
http://demo-uhd3d.com/fiche.php?cat=uhd&id=143
HDR Version
http://demo-uhd3d.com/fiche.php?cat=uhd&id=144
Vroadstar
Member
This guy is sure all 1st party are native 4k, I guess he works for MS to know this for real...
Baldwin_the_First
Member
Can we expect the ps4 pro to look reasonably the same too?
Crayon
Member
It's looking like yeah. Ubisoft seems to like to make sure these ac games run the same on both. Not every time. Just in general.
Zambayoshi
Member
Aren't people ignoring the fact that AC:O is going to be released on 27 October whereas Xbox X will be released on 7 November?
Why would Ubisoft spend a lot of time optimising for a system that will only see a relatively small percentage of its total sales of the game?
Why would Ubisoft spend a lot of time optimising for a system that will only see a relatively small percentage of its total sales of the game?
There are over 20 million xbox one owners. How is that small?
Zambayoshi
Member
Xbox One X would be optimised differently to Xbox One.
flipswitch
Member
So you're saying the last two AC titles ( Unity/Syndicate) are essentially 360 games with added bells and whistles?
Captain Zyrain
Member
Phil Spencer said on the Bombcast thing that its not mandated for first party games to be full 4K. He prefers to leave it up to the developer, first or third party.
thelastword
Banned
Essentially that's what they did when Phil made his comments about the methods the pro uses to get to 4k.....
A console plays games, not movies, the purpose of a games console is to play games at 4k...I'm playing games at 4k native, 4k checkerboarded and inbetween resolution modes that scales nicely to 4k. I'm pretty sure that's what they meant....
Hell, I can still play my 1080 blurays, but I don't know the last time I put a disc of any kind into my PS4/PRO..I use plex, amazon, hulu and Netflix...primarily plex for media needs tbh...
Can you confirm that became a reality? I know it was their intention to patch the game to 1080p, which it should always have run at tbh...but is the current PS4 product at 1080p now?
Just two days ago, Ark was going to be 4k on the XONEX, now it's going to be 1080p 60fps. This thing can't even stay stable at epic settings on an i7 and GTX1080, but somehow it will be 1080p locked 60fps on a jaguar CPU with all the physics et al...good luck with that...
More than that, to use the ARK devs as some sort of standard for anything is just plain bonkers tbh...
It's clear XBONEX will have a few native games, that much is true, but to pretend that XBONEX is such a cut above PRO that it does not need to defile it's pixels with checkerboarding is just plain asinine talk by Spencer. The point remains, which many fail to understand..is this, if XBONEX was that powerful, Ubi wouldn't have to use checkerboard rendering on that console at all, and yes this is what Phil implied in that interview....Heh, PRO is only competing with XB1S he said, yet XBONEX is running the same technicque and ballpark rez as PRO ...That statement is already biting them in the ass...
I'm also pretty sure that Dark knows about the statement being discussed here, the one made by phil as, everyone else has, but here he is pretending that people are simply saying all XBONEX games should be native. Heh, everybody and their grandma who is into tech knew that all XBONEX games would not be native, and would be using the same techniques Phil denounced in that famous interview....It's just laughable that just a day after Phil made that statement, we have tech proving that's the case. I'll also say right here, and you can QUOTE me and cash that cheque as well "All first party games on XBONEX won't be native 4k"...In as much as MS suggests that all of them will be.....So yes, It's not anybody lashing out at MS as opposed to MS PR muddying the waters...
Dynamic Rez was taken out of the PRO version of Wipeout, it never drops rez or frames....
SenjutsuSage
Banned
High PC settings
Yes sir, yes sir. This seems to be getting overlooked.
And the "if Xbox one x was so powerful they wouldn't need to checkerboard at all" argument that I see people making is complete rubbish. It allows devs to achieve more or less a similar outcome without expending as many hardware resources and they get to maintain better performance.
Even if it could do it natively without checkerboarding, what would be the point of doing so if the game is simply Xbox one equivalent? We have high PC settings, and I've played this game more than any other at E3, and it looks like what I would expect of a high end PC. I'm not digital foundry, but it's difficult to see what's possibly missing visually.
thelastword
Banned
How do they know, did they compare with a pc version...That's the question you want to ask....Also console settings, what does that even mean.
SenjutsuSage
Banned
I spoke with a dev who was maintaining the dev kits for AC at Microsoft fanfest event Monday night 8:30 to midnight, and he made it clear the Xbox one X version is running the high PC settings, missing nothing, and this is just an alpha version. Microsoft is still making improvements to the kit.
And console settings means what df commonly associates with console, not high end PC settings.
Since you've changed your avatar I only just realised you name is SenjutsuSage
I thought it was SenjutsuSausage
SenjutsuSage
Banned
thelastword
Banned
The truth is console settings does not default to below high in many games. Look at games like the Division, Primal, Mad Max, Mirrors Edge and quite a few other third party games, console settings are quite high up there as far as settings go. There's really no hardcoded metric called console settings tbh..
As for these current mid gen refreshes. I do think they can run any AC game on high and even ultra settings, so it's really not something out of the ordinary tbh.
LukasTaves
Member
Fair enough, modify the question to: Is there any game that doesn't have plenty of performance headroom on a Ps4 already made the jump to 4k on Pro?
Either way it was also only a part of my point. I said a jump of this magnitude hasn't happened yet on Pro on its own, let alone increasing the settings from the xbone build, and on top of that likely increasing the framerate as well (game was essentially locked on the demos, and the past AC were anything but smooth on any console even dating back to 360).
They could talk to developers, and also, from previous games they know what settings consoles usually use and which Pc High usually are.
For example in the Anthem video DF talks about how the geometry LOD, lighting quality and other stuff are the same PC High settings on previous games on the engine, but other settings like motion blur, screen space reflections, and texture streaming are scaled down a notch compared to the high settings.
NullPointer
Member
lol, especially when used to describe a Sony console.
thelastword
Banned
No doubt you're speculating, but it would be nice if they mentioned how they arrived at such a conclusion. In any case engines do improve and advance over time. So the only way to see how things compare is if you have the PC version side by side doing the comparison. I think it was too early to make a call on settings tbh, especially seeing how jarring the ground detail is...It's a nice looking title no doubt, but it's still too far away to say.
Well, what people buy consoles for anyway.....I guess they're pretty much about the games. Though MS have been all about the TV functionality, UHD bluray of late