PC at least with third party software (eg RTSS) or graphic card control panel if not in-game settings. Not on consoles. Won't be coming due to tearing and being worse - as they mentioned on the stream just earlier.
-
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: Project CARS Performance Analysis (PS4/XB1)
- Thread starter bombshell
- Start date
PC at least with third party software (eg RTSS) or graphic card control panel if not in-game settings. Not on consoles. Won't be coming due to tearing and being worse - as they mentioned on the stream just earlier.
Pjsprojects
Member
Outrun
Member
I thought that a game like Forza Horizon 2 would be impossible on the X1. (I know, 30FPS etc...)
I will wait until I see what T10 show at E3 to get an idea of what they push out.
Lol, so you don't notice the blur happening in the XB1 version then? Okaaay.
These consoles are so underpowered it's getting irritating. At least I have enough sense to build a PC. Honestly I'll be surprised if this gen lasts 5 years due to the consoles already being juiced for every drop of power, before they turn 2 years old. This is absolutely inexcusable, especially because as a console gamer I used to have the peace of mind that acceptable performance was guaranteed. Evidently that's a thing of the past.
Summer Haze
Banned
Ok, gotcha. And yeah, I initially thought I would be able to simply turn down the numbers of cars on-track and turn off some of the post process effects to help the performance, and I can, and it does help a lot, just not enough for me unfortunately. And like I said in one of my earlier posts, it's not so much the framerate drops that I can't deal with, it's the tearing. I can't stand that shit. Definitely one of those 'once you see it you can't un-see it' things that I wish I never started noticing in the first place, lol.
Ok,
I hope this explanation gives the community here some further clarity on why isolated image analysis isn't always the full picture........ (badum!)
So you have a lovely image there... Then you decide to copy the previous frame over this one, create massive ghosting, writing over every detail on your beautiful render.
You reduce the motion velocity shader to the point that far away objects does not receive appropriate motion blur at all, like the image I've shown, and expect me to guess that you are blurring the image using the same method, using the same number of samples?:
You also admit to have reduced the motion blur so much that there's actually no sensible linear blur on the logo behind, other than pebbles on the road when going 150 km/h when the camera is 20cm above the ground, and I am wrong to think that there's some weird stuff preventing proper motion blur, while you say they both have the same motion blur? I think you have made a bad design decision there. The end result being, the so called blur on PS4 is mainly caused by the ghosting and no objects on far background show a proper motion blur (trees, cones being sharp and all).. And with that, even the smallest movement create ghosting, things that you normally wouldn't expect to have blurred as much is blurred because of it.
Also early during our conversation that began in another thread, you said the ghosting was because of the motion blur:
This is another thing that threw me off, and I couldn't believe the two had the "same motion blur implementation". It turns out they are running the same code, but with so different settings that the PS4 blur is visible only on road pebbles. (of course, after you blend, that's obscured too.)
Vinsanity.
Member
I'd love to somehow see a 60fps video of that build without the temporal AA applied...just curious how it looks in motion.
JayhawkerStL
Banned
Consoles are only underpowered if you are more concerned with counting pixels and calculating FPS than evaluating gameplay.
There are so many fun games to play, even on the XB1, that it is silly to call them underpowered. But yeah, PC's should always provide a better experience if you are willing to play the upgrade game.
One of the prime reasons that I made a conscious decision to move away from mostly PC gaming was that I found myself constantly fiddling with settings, upgrading parts, and downloading drivers in an effort to find that perfect balance of performance and image quality. Worse, I found myself distracted as I played games because I was always evaluating the performance, wondering if I could smooth out a hitch or get away with turning on a setting.
Until this gen, console gaming has been mostly free from the PC-centric obsession. I still get the benefit of playing games and enjoying them for what they are, but the constant focus on performance and image quality over gameplay has ruined so much of the discussion around games.
Bad decisions? Or something peculiar with the PS4 architecture?
visiblemode
Member
Screen tearing?
For me this is, by far, the worst problem.
Especially in a racing game, yuck.
For me this is, by far, the worst problem.
Especially in a racing game, yuck.
Elvin Atombender
Member
Maybe I missed something while reading this initial analysis by DF but are both the PS4 and Xbox One versions 1080p now? I didn't see the resolutions mentioned.
Highly physics driven Sim Racer at 60 FPS >>>>>>>>>>>>> highly physics driven Sim racer at 30 FPS, IN TERMS OF GAMEPLAY.
I know this game mostly sticks to 60 FPS, but that's my point. Things liek frame rate can and do affect gameplay.
Ok,
Here is a capture from PS4 I just made without the temporal AA step applied. (Ignore the yellow text from the development build)
You can clearly see our standard PC/XB1 motion-blur shader visible - it's exactly the same runtime code, shader code with same number of motion samples and the same full HDR texture resolution!
The road has that "lovely" motion-blur speed look that you get with this method using multiple samples.
Now you might note that the armco's and some of the scenery are less blurred than some of the images posted around here. This is because the motion *velocity* shader parameter is reduced on PS4 - the temporal AA post process (through persistence of vision) also adds to the impression of motion blur - so if we kept the motion velocity scale the same as XB1/PC there would then be to much MB.
If we implemented an option for allowing the temporal AA effect to have sort some of slider as has been mentioned then the traditional Motion Blur velocity scale would be change inversely to the scale of the temporal AA effect. The motion velocity scale could be also be on a seperate slider on all platforms - since it's the exact same code.
I hope this explanation gives the community here some further clarity on why isolated image analysis isn't always the full picture........ (badum!)
I SERIOUSLY wish more Dev teams were this involved...
Now, that being said..If I could make a suggestion, I would 100% make sure that in the next game patch you include the two sliders you mention in this post...
Slider #1: the Temporal AA slider that inversely ramps up the velocity scale of traditional motion blur (I'd be interested to play with this and see if I could find a happy medium between the two I like)
and
Slider #2: traditional motion blur
I also think it MIGHT be worth considering having the temporal method turned off by default, or maybe even just reduced (50%?) By default to appease some of this feedback...
Now I have two questions...
1. To SMS...once and for all is the AF solution on the two consoles identical?
2. To Digital Foundry, are you willing to admit you were (again) wrong about calling out the "ghosting" or "banding" as you've called it as object based motion blue gone awry?
So you have a lovely image there... Then you decide to copy the previous frame over this one, create massive ghosting, writing over every detail on your beautiful render.
You reduce the motion velocity shader to the point that far away objects does not receive appropriate motion blur at all, like the image I've shown, and expect me to guess that you are blurring the image using the same method, using the same number of samples?:
You also admit to have reduced the motion blur so much that there's actually no sensible linear blur on the logo behind, other than pebbles on the road when going 150 km/h when the camera is 20cm above the ground, and I am wrong to think that there's some weird stuff preventing proper motion blur, while you say they both have the same motion blur? I think you have made a bad design decision there. The end result being, the so called blur on PS4 is mainly caused by the ghosting and no objects on far background show a proper motion blur (trees, cones being sharp and all)..
He clearly states that the only reason the "velocity" value on the motion blur is less, is because with the temporal AA it would create what they feel is too much blur..and that a slider would effect each setting inversely bringing the PS4 version in line with the other two...
1080p vs 900p
Seriously? Did you not read the SMS guy's post?
Ok,
Here is a capture from PS4 I just made without the temporal AA step applied. (Ignore the yellow text from the development build)
You can clearly see our standard PC/XB1 motion-blur shader visible - it's exactly the same runtime code, shader code with same number of motion samples and the same full HDR texture resolution!
The road has that "lovely" motion-blur speed look that you get with this method using multiple samples.
Now you might note that the armco's and some of the scenery are less blurred than some of the images posted around here. This is because the motion *velocity* shader parameter is reduced on PS4 - the temporal AA post process (through persistence of vision) also adds to the impression of motion blur - so if we kept the motion velocity scale the same as XB1/PC there would then be to much MB.
If we implemented an option for allowing the temporal AA effect to have sort some of slider as has been mentioned then the traditional Motion Blur velocity scale would be change inversely to the scale of the temporal AA effect. The motion velocity scale could be also be on a seperate slider on all platforms - since it's the exact same code.
I hope this explanation gives the community here some further clarity on why isolated image analysis isn't always the full picture........ (badum!)
This is interesting, but still weird.
Interesting because I had wondered whether the PS4 was doing this ghosting/temporal AA instead of motion blur to save time to make up for the increased resolution etc. but it appears it is doing it on top of the motion blur that is present on XB1.
It is also possible that it isn't as noticable when you play it. But if so, it is an amazing example of a game that doesn't screenshot well. Every shot that Hesido has posted (and others that DF posted) look pretty damn terrible - yet comments from those that have played it seem to think it looks ok.
I'd be up for an option where that extra layer gets turned off, and you turn up the original motion blur to match PC/Xb1. That might also give a small uptick in framerate.
I did, and I'm still at a loss as to why the PS4 is the single platform with this double image feature, and to why this system was selected over a different method, I'm sure the SMS team didn't just pick this method for shit's and giggles.
Just a waste of a beautiful looking game to have it looking that bad in static shots.
Well, it looks OK to many (not me obviously), but obviously not as good as it actually is prior to the temporal AA. (Btw, adding temporal AA to a racing game is a strange design decision.) And since they added this, they changed toned down the "proper" motion blur and just have a look at the "Total" ads behind in the image I've posted. On Xbox One, the proper blur should add a sense of speed still shots and in motion. On PS4, it just mangles the image. If we could compare on a lossless video, in motion, the XBox One should have a more pleasing effect.
The mentioned effect doesn't only effect still shots. The lack of proper motion blur is always there (e.g.see the Total ads, see the cones and trees in background never receiving enough blur), the double image is always there. But in motion, some of this is mitigated as blended frames overlap and our brains cleans the image. But technically, the game never produces a clean image.
DF chose not to mention it in this article, but the PS4 version is 1080p and the Xbox One version is 900p.
Perhaps they'll state that when they write the full face-off article.
At a guess because it provides a bit better image quality at a small cost. PC don't need it as it can scale image quality settings and XB1 it's out of the question.
If you've followed his (SMS) posts about the issue, he has said that while he is responsible for the DX11 versions (PC and Xbone), others did the PS4 version...
We scream and yell all the time about one version holding back others, or not taking full advantage of one platform and so on...
Well this seems like a situation where the guys that did the PS4 version threw in an additional AA method over top of the normal stuff...
SMS also mentioned that when he saw the PS4 version he felt it had a slightly softer, more realistic looking IQ that covered up the jaggies and pixel crawl better because of this temporal AA method...
Now apparently a side effect is this double image stuff...
If SMS says that it can all be remidied through a slider that turns down the temporal AA and ramps up the normal image blur than, as long as he isn't lying, this all becomes water under the bridge...
JayhawkerStL
Banned
Then get a PC and stop expecting your console to do the the heavy lifting it is not designed to do. The reviews have been pretty unanimous that the game is fun to play and looks great on consoles.
Hendrick's
If only my penis was as big as my GamerScore!
Is the bar that low?
I'm genuinely having a hard time comprehending this post.
So you aren't obsessed with performance but you moved to PC just so you could have more control over the fidelity of the graphical experience?
What I'm saying is these consoles are absolutely underpowered. They are budget gaming machines. Accept it. Now, what I've made my peace with is the face that I'm not going to go the entire gen on a budget machine, my free time means too much to me. I'll upgrade to a PC and actually enjoy gaming a whole lot more, not get pissed off when a console starts to chug because it has a weak gpu/cpu combo. It pisses me off thinking what they did to these machines, but to get these price points in 2013 I guess they had to. People like me won't suffer years through it though.
I've noticed the same weird reflections happening on the sun visor during Gamersyde's stream tonight.
Yes I can see some motion blur on that, and I dislike it there too (there is no reason at all to add any motion blur to a 60fps racer), but it's not anything like as bad as the double vision / ghosting effect the PS4 is exhibiting. Not even in the same ballpark, perhaps not on the same planet.
I look forward to the addition of a 'Motion Blur on/off' button (0-10 works too). It seems like such a weird thing not to already have given the shopping list of other options which have less of an overall impact on the visuals anyway.
Heck, if they manage a locked 30fps in all scenarios (obviously with major graphics downgrades), it might be the best version to go for.
Still, it seems like Mario Kart is going to be the only racing game for me this gen.
That's a helpful way to organize it, outside of the original article's context. Appreciated.
Thank you. I think it represents the game's performance much better, but people probably already made up their minds about the game solely focusing on the stress-test performance.
TheSlySoul
Member
Project 40 FPS am I right?
Honestly video looks fine to me.
thelastword
Banned
Funny that less people are talking about this point, so many persons, even certain pc gamers (like DF); have suggested that there were scenarios where the XB1 versions of games have better framerates due to the cpu, but not only has this been quashed by patches with recent games like ACU and GTAV amongst others, the PS4 version have the better framerates in the majority of faceoffs whilst displaying at a much higher resolution with better effects. In the case of GTA5, the PS4 version runs better in every gameplay scenario.
Now, what the dev said about the XBOX CPU being deficient to run all that A.I (without the seventh core) is very interesting information because many were of the opinion that the XBOX cpu had more performance than the PS4. This of course is not the first time we are hearing this from a dev, the witcher's dev did say that they could extract more from the PS4 cpu as well. So it's good to hear this confirmed yet again, perhaps now it should really make DF stop this (PS4 is cpu bound spiel in contrast to the XB1).
Al in all, I think this bodes well for the PS4 when they actually release the seventh core to devs just like the XB1 or when devs start to use the PS4's GPGPU feature. Individually or combined for greater milestones for better A.I etc..in it's games.
As for Project Cars, one thing I appreciated from seeing the VVV footage last week was the IQ on the PS4 footage. SMS, do not remove the TAA solution you guys have on the PS4 version, the shimmering and jaggies on the XB1 version is an eyesore in comparison, it is the first thing I noticed in the vs footage. The ghosting people are talking about are absolutely non-existent in motion, do not worsen the IQ to appease screenshot takers, a game in motion takes priority every single time.
The biggest blemish I see in this release is the screen tearing, it just tells me that perhaps you guys should have done less cars on the grid (maybe 24) with all the rain effects and spray. I would suggest that if you offer a 30fps cap, do not remove the unlocked option. Some people like to ask for a 30fps cap but fail to realize that some persons would prefer to play at the higher framerate (even with screen tearing). I am one of those, even then, please do something about the screen tearing, it looks like the worse offender so far (this generation).
Shin-Ra
Junior Member
Gamersyde posted some HQ Xbone videos and the aliasing is pretty brutal.
http://www.gamersyde.com/news_project_cars_on_xbox_one-16512_en.html
This GIF has neither been up or downscaled from the Cockpit video, it's just a 960x540 crop.
http://www.gamersyde.com/news_project_cars_on_xbox_one-16512_en.html
This GIF has neither been up or downscaled from the Cockpit video, it's just a 960x540 crop.
Gamersyde posted some HQ Xbone videos and the aliasing is pretty brutal.
http://www.gamersyde.com/news_project_cars_on_xbox_one-16512_en.html
This GIF has neither been up or downscaled from the Cockpit video, it's just a 960x540 crop.
Yeah the PS4 has less aliasing in motion thanks to the extra temporal AA pass.
The downside is the ghosting, which I'm hoping they can reduce in a patch.
Well, the patch that has been discussed by SMS has not been removal, but instead a slider that works inversely with the motion blur...
Now, I'm not sure if that means it would be an on/off thing...where you get a choice between No TAA/ramped up MB or TAA/reduced MB...or if you can try to find a happy medium that works for your personal tastes...
I'm very supportive of SMS adding this slider, and I think they should do it as soon as they can...
The ghosting is part of the TAA process...seems like SMS is considering adding a slider to allow you to tweak it
NullPointer
Member
So are there any settings or options that will guarantee a solid 60fps (ie. no noticeable drops) with zero tearing throughout the career events?
Will be playing on PS4 *if* I pick this up, but the framerate woes and tearing in the rain are staying my hand.
Will be playing on PS4 *if* I pick this up, but the framerate woes and tearing in the rain are staying my hand.
Probably not...if the weather gets brutal in your career, you're probably gonna see some slight dips...but from what I'm reading, you'll play the vast majority of your career at 60fps
on the previous article. The hands on link within the link in the OP.
pixelation
Member
Agreed, screen tearing was created by Beelzebub himself.
JayhawkerStL
Banned
I'm sure that both of these things would be options if they patched them in; plenty of console games have already had framerate locking options, and pCARS seems to pride itself on providing options for the player.
Though I don't understand how you can claim that the ghosting is "absolutely non-existent in motion", especially in a racing game where objects can often travel many pixels across the screen between two frames. When it gets to be this bad (credit to Covfan for the video), to the point where it is headache-inducing in many shots, it should be made aware of so that the developers can address it by giving people options, rather than denying that it exists.
Zombegoast
Member
Yeah I'm sticking with the PC version
There is still Fast Racing Neo which is the closet we get for a new Fzero.
Heck, if they manage a locked 30fps in all scenarios (obviously with major graphics downgrades), it might be the best version to go for.
Still, it seems like Mario Kart is going to be the only racing game for me this gen.
There is still Fast Racing Neo which is the closet we get for a new Fzero.
thelastword
Banned
It seems what they have now is what they consider the best solution for IQ purposes, if they allow me to tweak it that's fine, but normally I don't like tampering in such settings too much. I barely played in the tweakable settings in GT5, I just went for the option that gave me the sharpest picture with the best IQ. Which was 1080p with the sharp filter.
I understand that some may want to see the motion blur effect more dominant and that's ok, but I'll take the better IQ over more pronounced MB. If they offer an even higher quality AA method at the expense of NO MB, I'd take that too. From what I'm reading, I don't think that cranking the MB effect all the way up will induce a performance penalty in any case, so maybe we will have both.
Many games tend to lock their games instead of allowing an unlocked option, whilst some persons clamor for the former I'd like for an unlocked option to be just as common or allowed as an option. I'd like to play games like Dragon Age, Driveclub, Dying light, Alien Isolation, ACU unlocked.
As for your video, it looks like a replay to me, so perhaps certain effects are added then or too pronounced. I do understand where you're coming from, but looking at realtime gameplay footage (non-replays), what I saw in that video was not apparent there.
BONKERS
Member
Oh hey look another game that entirely proves my point on how current temporalAA is complete and utter garbage. The only thing it ever works remotely well with is to reduce the flickering of low precision buffers.
You should just give people the option to disable it. Ghosting and frame blending are never an acceptable solution to Anti-Alias an image with IMO. And the more variable the framerate is, the worse it looks. The lower the framerate, the worse it gets. And based on all the footage i've seen it doesn't even do all that great of a job. Decent for a console game at best minus the artifacts.
Not like SMS can be blamed if the consoles are woefully underpowered. Real HQ AA is costly.
(Advertising it as 60FPS however is something I have a problem with. Because it's not a 60FPS game. Mario Kart 8 is a 60FPS game.)
Sony and MSFT really are insane if they think this hardware will be acceptable for so long. Especially when so many developers struggle to even hit native resolution at 60FPS all the while Sony is pushing 4k TVs.
You should just give people the option to disable it. Ghosting and frame blending are never an acceptable solution to Anti-Alias an image with IMO. And the more variable the framerate is, the worse it looks. The lower the framerate, the worse it gets. And based on all the footage i've seen it doesn't even do all that great of a job. Decent for a console game at best minus the artifacts.
Not like SMS can be blamed if the consoles are woefully underpowered. Real HQ AA is costly.
(Advertising it as 60FPS however is something I have a problem with. Because it's not a 60FPS game. Mario Kart 8 is a 60FPS game.)
Sony and MSFT really are insane if they think this hardware will be acceptable for so long. Especially when so many developers struggle to even hit native resolution at 60FPS all the while Sony is pushing 4k TVs.
And this is EXACTLY the kind of thing we don't want in games. Impression of motion blur vs actual motion blur are different things, but beside the point that display persistence is a real problem. A low persistence display at 60FPS produces next to no motion blur. Why would you want to add more persistence?