This is how I interpret it at least. Otherwise I believe they would have mentioned something.
The best they can do I suppose is to allow SSAA in-game.
-
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.
Quantum Break PC and Xbox One Patch in the Works
- Thread starter SumptuousLemur
- Start date
This is how I interpret it at least. Otherwise I believe they would have mentioned something.
The best they can do I suppose is to allow SSAA in-game.
Frozone
Member
I actually did DSR in the Nvidia drivers and took up the res by 1.5% and then ran the game at 4k, also forced anisotropic filtering 16X in the drivers -- increased the IQ significantly actually.
Frozone
Member
Yea, I know the frame times are off. That doesn't mean the game is unplayable though. In fact, all of my fights have been playable and response time between joystick input and rendering have been pretty good.
I have not been talking about how performance optimization is or isn't on Remedy, or about if Nvidia is suggesting installing older drivers. Have they even ever done that? Even with utterly broken Division release drivers they didn't warn people after issues were found or suggest keep using old drivers, they just kept silent and released fix as beta drivers few days later.
I did rant about shit that NV has been shoveling as certed drivers and mentioned how I think it's cool that Remedy actually suggests using driver version that is quite widely atm considered to be best choice for NV users. Should Remedy be concerned about games general performance and maybe look into working together with NV & AMD? Sure, but not the point I was arguing.
I definitely tried it last night on my rig, and it felt really off (i7 3770k, Titan X, 16GB RAM). This was after playing it for 20ish hours on the XBO, it definitely felt like a rushed port. I hope they can fix it- the framerate was jumpy, the MSAA definitely made it feel sluggish, I had to turn up the mouse sensitivity to the highest to feel like I was more precise with where to shoot- it feels off.
I hope they can fix it - their Max Payne games got me into PC gaming :/
I hope they can fix it - their Max Payne games got me into PC gaming :/
dr_rus
Member
Well, consider that DX11 drivers are 6.5 years old and were already mature 5 or so years ago.
D3D12 devs weren't really doing this type of work in their renderers previously - on a couple of fixed console platforms yes, probably, but not on PC where you have like 50 different GPU configurations at any given time which may easily explode into >500 variations if you add different RAM sizes, PCIE bandwidths and such stuff. Thus their typical present approach to PC as just another "console" doesn't really work and do produce a lot of unpredictable results even on configurations which are considered mainstream at the moment. They have to build that part of the DX11 driver in their applications and it has to be as good at handling the different PC h/w as DX11 drivers are. So it will take some years before D3D12 renderers will reach DX11 drivers here.
What's important though is that theoretically the dev should be able to build a better resource management system as he knows better what is actually needed by the application in what moment - DX11 drivers are just "guessing" this so they are fundamentally flawed here and can be beaten. But this will take a lot of time and effort on part of the development community.
Seeing such half-assed ports like QB is just plain sad as this is exactly the point where both Remedy and MS would've probably done much better if they'd just used DX11 for the PC version. D3D12 does require A LOT of effort from the developer. If all they wanted was a quick'n'dirty port from XBO then they should've used DX11 or at least given us the option to choose the API path.
That's completely offtopic though and that's something rather arguable as I personally have no issues with latest NV drivers - no more than usual anyway - and consider the R364 branch the best choice on my system as it does have several new features (Vulkan support for example).
What Remedy should do though is make sure that their renderer works fine with the latest driver branch from NV, not suggest some older version because of reasons. Other games seem to work fine on R364, RotTR DX12 got a boost on them but yeah, we'll suggest going back two months because some newer driver had installation problems on system with 2+ displays.
To me this just shows that they haven't really tested the release version of the game on NV h/w since 362.00 drivers were released back in February. That's how I read this recommendation of theirs.
How long are we talking about for DX12 games to be as stable and well performing (in all situations) as DX11 ?
dr_rus
Member
Who knows? I'd say a couple of years probably - but then we may just brute force through the issues with Pascal/Polaris this year to stop really noticing them.
Frozone
Member
It seems like most people on this thread assumes this game is not doing anything special graphics-wise than any other game and thus the "reconstruction" technique was a dumb decision. They already mentioned that it saved them a significant amount of render time. I suspect turning that feature OFF and allowing true resolution framebuffers will slow performance on PCs even more. The game isn't using the same ole same ole tricks that people are accustomed to seeing in typical games. It is indeed doing a hellava lot more with regards to lighting and collision detection (which in my book is a big deal).
Oh, there's absolutely no way it would have ran on the Xbox One...heck...even the PS4 without it.
Everything in this game is lit/reflects/bounces light and reflections all over the place.
Even small metal items reflect the environment, the player, and NPCs accurately. I noticed that while taking ridiculously close looks at every little thing in the game.
what GPU do you have? what is the framerate like?
So why not just give people the ability to choose that. At some point there will be better cards that could handle the game at a full res without the technique.
Issues people have been running into with latest NV drivers are quite a bit more severe than multi-monitor setups having issues with running Setup.exe. Infinite BSOD loops and bricked GPU's level of severe issues. Knowing that these drivers come with possibility of funsies like that I would be more taken back if Remedy promoted and suggested using them. "Use latest NV driver! It may put your PC into infinite BSOD loop, lock your GPU to idle clocks or even brick your GPU, but if they work as intended for YOU then YOU get +5 frames in our latest game!" :b
After reading and seeing these issues some people have ran into with latest NV drivers, 364.xx, I read Remedy's driver recommendation for NV user very differently than you. For me it was them putting user experience before promoting some game optimized release driver. You not having issues doesn't mean there isn't people having issues I mentioned above, and some issues that I didn't mention. There is always that one person who has issue free experience with X while others are tripping over all kinds of fun.
Maybe discussing driver suggestion done by Remedy isn't that offtopic after all when looking at how people are taking it, and assuming worst reasons for their suggestion? Like laziness to make game work with newer ones. I just assume--- more innocent? reasons.
flaxknuckles
Member
Naw bruh. Remedy and Microsoft know what's best for PC games. *sobs*
Hawk269
Member
I received my W10 code yesterday and played through Act 1 on the PC and it played pretty good. I am playing with everything on Max and at 4k with a Titan X OC to 1450 and I7-3930k OC to 4.8. With framerate locked at 30fps and AA turned off (not needed to much at 4k) it runs pretty smooth. I do get some stutters here and there, but by and large it runs good and the image is really clean. I played and beat it already on Xbox One and the blurriness is gone when at 4k which with they way the renderer works is reducing it some something below 4k, but for me the final image looks sharp, detailed and very clean.
Turning on AA gives me a lot more stutters and is not as smooth. There is some differences IQ wise with AA on, but not much when using the 4k option. Overall, it is not too bad. Hopefully with the fixes it will improve, because I would love to do 4k/60fps for the game. But right now pretty happy with how it looks and performs coming from the Xbox One version (which is pretty good in itself) but you can really tell the difference with blurriness. When I reduce the resolution to 2560x1440 it reintroduces some of the blurriness that is slightly cleaner than the Xbox One version, the only way to make it look really clean in my testing has been at 4k.
Aside from all the tech issues and beating the game last night, it is such a fantastic game. Replaying Act 1 and making a different choice dramatically changed the game and the TV show that played after Act 1. For those that beat it, you really need to do a second play through to see it all and enjoy the game even more. Just a fantastic and one of the best games I have played in a very long time.
Turning on AA gives me a lot more stutters and is not as smooth. There is some differences IQ wise with AA on, but not much when using the 4k option. Overall, it is not too bad. Hopefully with the fixes it will improve, because I would love to do 4k/60fps for the game. But right now pretty happy with how it looks and performs coming from the Xbox One version (which is pretty good in itself) but you can really tell the difference with blurriness. When I reduce the resolution to 2560x1440 it reintroduces some of the blurriness that is slightly cleaner than the Xbox One version, the only way to make it look really clean in my testing has been at 4k.
Aside from all the tech issues and beating the game last night, it is such a fantastic game. Replaying Act 1 and making a different choice dramatically changed the game and the TV show that played after Act 1. For those that beat it, you really need to do a second play through to see it all and enjoy the game even more. Just a fantastic and one of the best games I have played in a very long time.
I think most people understand it would take a significant amount of power to force it to run adequately at native resolutions. The point, though, is when trying to downsample with resolutions up to 8K, nothing above 4K shows up, meaning the game will never run at anything higher than 1440p regardless of how powerful hardware gets in the future. It's pointless to lock it down forever like they have.
They haven't done that once since the game launched, why would they start now?
The person handling their PR has been a nightmare. Papadopoulos was much better.
Wowfunhappy
Member
People with technical knowledgeis it plausible to believe that it might be difficult for Remedy to turn off the "reconstruction technique" for the PC version? I remember Durante saying in a recent PCGamer article that it's virtually always easy for developers to allow for arbitrary rendering resolutionsbut of course, Quantum Break technically does allow this, in a certain sense of the word.
Hawk269
Member
I don't want to come across as a Remedy fan boy, but have people considered that since the game was designed from the ground up that all these rendering reconstruction techniques were all made due to their vision of the game on the Xbox One platform? Knowing that the system is not a power house and wanting all these amazing effects, time warps/bullet time effects and all the other crazy things the game does and with GI lighting system, it was necessary for them to do it this way on the Xbox One.
I would think if from day 1 MS requested a PC version in addition that things might have been different, but on the surface to me it just seems like that game was really optimized and tailored for the Xbox One and a late port would require an engine overhaul that is not easy to be done. I beat the game on the Xbox One and it is an amazing looking/playing game, one of the best I have played.
I am just saying that perhaps instead of calling Remedy lazy or whatever, that there might be other reasons for how the game renders and a late PC port did not help matters. Granted, even with the late port there are things like a quit button or that frame pacing issue that is abundantly clear was a fuck up, but some of these other things is most likely down to how the game was made from the ground up. Then you have the Window UMP on top of that causing it's own issues as well. In short, the PC version should of been delayed to fix some of these things, but ultimately the way the game renders is something that won't change due to the way the game was designed.
Just my thoughts. It is a shame that the experience is not optimal for those on PC only and hopefully the fixes are enough for some of you to enjoy this fantastic game.
I would think if from day 1 MS requested a PC version in addition that things might have been different, but on the surface to me it just seems like that game was really optimized and tailored for the Xbox One and a late port would require an engine overhaul that is not easy to be done. I beat the game on the Xbox One and it is an amazing looking/playing game, one of the best I have played.
I am just saying that perhaps instead of calling Remedy lazy or whatever, that there might be other reasons for how the game renders and a late PC port did not help matters. Granted, even with the late port there are things like a quit button or that frame pacing issue that is abundantly clear was a fuck up, but some of these other things is most likely down to how the game was made from the ground up. Then you have the Window UMP on top of that causing it's own issues as well. In short, the PC version should of been delayed to fix some of these things, but ultimately the way the game renders is something that won't change due to the way the game was designed.
Just my thoughts. It is a shame that the experience is not optimal for those on PC only and hopefully the fixes are enough for some of you to enjoy this fantastic game.
Pathfinder
Member
Agreed on all counts, and that's basically what Remedy is saying. How the engine renders on PC is exactly how the engine renders on Xbox One. And for them to make the PC version render at the resolution you set it to would require more time and budget than they had allotted to them for the project.
The frame pacing issue is definitely on Remedy, but the majority of the other problems can probably be placed squarely on Microsoft for forcing Remedy to basically rush a PC port so they can introduce it at the same time as the Xbox One version. And, as a result, the PC port is going to suffer financially and make Microsoft, and Remedy by association, look bad.
It's a damn shame. This game, and Remedy, deserve better.
The lowest of bars for a $1000 GPU.
LordRaptor
Member
I know very little about GPU programming, but I find it counter intuitive that any manipulation of a frame buffer would ever be less 'expensive' than just displaying a raw frame.
It might be less work to render a heavily processed and upscaled-to-1080p 720p image than a native 1080p image, but like for like a 720p raw image should be less expensive than a 720p image after post-processing. I mean, this is just common sense, right?
Bearing in mind there are probably PC gamers whose gaming rigs are better than the rigs used to actually develop the game itself, to say that not allowing users to display an unprocessed image in favour of IQ is disappointing is an understatement
dr_rus
Member
No. It shouldn't be hard technically. What can be hard though is retaining the game's overall art direction after this as a lot of stuff in it may be premade to look like it should with the reconstruction tech - the video episodes being one example. This is the only valid reason I can think of for Remedy to even consider leaving the tech in PC version.
What's NV have to do with Remedy's recommendations? NV is recommending 364.72 for the game if you've missed that.
All this sounds bad of course but consider this:
A. I see these points brought up in driver threads for EVERY new driver NV is releasing, including the now-legendary-stable 362.00 (check their forums, there's 10+ pages of such issues reported for this version and more than twice that for the previous one which wasn't fixed in any way with 362.00 release). BSODs, bricked h/w, something not working, not downclocking, not upclocking - the usual chorus of voices. They by themselves don't prove that these are driver issues unless NV can reproduce them - in which case it's usually reflected in issues / fixes for the driver notes.
B. R364 had one driver with confirmed installation issue, and it's not the driver which is recommended for QB by NV, it's a couple of versions prior to this. The rest of issues may be real, may be not - but it's not a reason for Remedy to avoid the NV's own recommendation unless there's like zero communication happening between the two on the matter. So them recommending some old driver which has no optimizations for 50% of AAA titles released this year is very odd and points to their own issues with optimizing the game for NV's h/w more than anything else. That doesn't mean that NV drivers don't have issues - but this is completely irrelevant here as all R364 drivers but one are working fine on a vast majority of systems. Ignoring them because there are forum posts on how they supposedly brick something seems rather strange for a game developer.
Frozone
Member
Yea, I agree. But then again, you'll have people still complaining of not being able to run the game at reasonable framerates with all the details on (especially if there is a significant difference between Low, Medium, High, etc..)
exmachina64
Banned
I hope they will be able to improve performance to a more acceptable point.
One of the biggest problems (probably) isn't going to be fixed.
One of the biggest problems (probably) isn't going to be fixed.
capitalCORN
Member
So instead of rendering to native res, they'll continue to use their convoluted method still...
Wowfunhappy
Member
Other people have said this in more words, but what bothers me most is the idea that Remedy thought it would be okay to release the port in this state.
1) Remedy has made many PC games in the past. They clearly know what makes for a good PC version.
2) The port was done in-house; not farmed out to some external studio.
3) The port launched with obvious, glaring bugs with regards to frame-pacing
The whole quit button thing I can overlook for reasons I said above. I suppose I can even overlook the whole reconstruction thing if it might have substantially impacted the art style Remedy was trying to achieve. But Remedy must have known this launch was going to really upset a lot of people, and they went ahead with it anyway.
Perhaps Microsoft forced their hand, but Remedy ought to have some say in the matter--it's their reputation on the line! No one is going to be as confident in the quality of their PC ports going forward. And PC is perhaps the one platform where most of the player-base really does pay attention to these types of things.
This PR response of "we're sorry, we didn't know" just makes it all that much more grating. I'm sure the developers didn't write it, but still...
And yet... hey guys, Quantum Break just finished downloading! So I guess I'm part of the problem.
1) Remedy has made many PC games in the past. They clearly know what makes for a good PC version.
2) The port was done in-house; not farmed out to some external studio.
3) The port launched with obvious, glaring bugs with regards to frame-pacing
The whole quit button thing I can overlook for reasons I said above. I suppose I can even overlook the whole reconstruction thing if it might have substantially impacted the art style Remedy was trying to achieve. But Remedy must have known this launch was going to really upset a lot of people, and they went ahead with it anyway.
Perhaps Microsoft forced their hand, but Remedy ought to have some say in the matter--it's their reputation on the line! No one is going to be as confident in the quality of their PC ports going forward. And PC is perhaps the one platform where most of the player-base really does pay attention to these types of things.
This PR response of "we're sorry, we didn't know" just makes it all that much more grating. I'm sure the developers didn't write it, but still...
And yet... hey guys, Quantum Break just finished downloading! So I guess I'm part of the problem.
Why does that matter? How could PR get any worse than it already is?
yup, Hell, I paired an older 290 with a 390x and got a 75% FPS increase in games and a massive point increase in 3d mark firestrike.
Crossfire/ SLI is great , it just needs very good drivers and a lot of work from developers. Ideally you end up with great drivers being made thanks to some teamwork between game devs and ati/nvidia engineers.
Dreams-Visions
Member
It's still hard to fathom that they thought NOT adding an Exit button made any fuckin sense.
Yeah, that's pretty much what I read, too.
This really must have been a last minute decision to port it.
Dinky Dino
Member
Pretty much. Game is so entrenched in being built around the Xbox one hardware, they just simply don't want to do the work.
Dinky Dino
Member
Get the feeling it might be for image quality parity with the Xbox one.
This whole thing screams parity along with film grain
But the "we're adding a quit button by popular demand" had me laughing. Like a quit button is a luxury
Either way I can deal with a lot of issues but non native res means I never buy it. I got tired of none native blurry resolution on my last gen console.
I do think this port was rushed and both Remedy and Microsoft have to take the blame on that. Still, the most egregious problems (frame pacing and vsync) will seemingly be fixed in time. Although I do wonder how many UWP games will get patched retrospectively once the UWP vsync features are implemented.
Concerning DX12 mGPU, I think it's fair to say that it's pretty early days still for developers on that front. I do think it's an improvement to have the responsibility for game features lay with developers. I believe we need to get developers to be more familiar with mGPU, as it's going to become /more/ important in the future than it has been. GPU progress is going to begin to slow down as we approach silicon's useful limits and multiple GPUs could become more viable as that begins to take hold.
Concerning DX12 mGPU, I think it's fair to say that it's pretty early days still for developers on that front. I do think it's an improvement to have the responsibility for game features lay with developers. I believe we need to get developers to be more familiar with mGPU, as it's going to become /more/ important in the future than it has been. GPU progress is going to begin to slow down as we approach silicon's useful limits and multiple GPUs could become more viable as that begins to take hold.
BigTnaples
Todd Howard's Secret GAF Account
Glad a patch is in the works.
Weird they don't allow us to just run at native res though.
Weird they don't allow us to just run at native res though.
UWP will be fixed in may. The total of released UWP games until that is not very high.
Alx
Member
Eh, for me it screams "we weren't going to code a completely new rendering method for a quick PC port", which actually makes a lot of sense. A few weeks ago we didn't even know if there would be a PC version of the game, now everybody acts as if PC has been the target platform from the beginning.
Exactly. I remember the PC port of Alan Wake and everyone wanted to have a disable HUD option, but they said it would be too much work as it's to deepöy implemented or something like that. They made it an option in AWAN then, since that targeted both platforms from the getgo.
And the rendering thing in QB is a much heavier task to tackle I guess.
No, everyone is disappointed because they expect more from Remedy given their history with the platform, and the effort they went to in making sure Alan Wake was the best port possible.
You can turn the HUD off in the PC version of Alan Wake. You can even adjust the FOV.
They had a bit more time for Alan Wake.
John Wick
Member
So don't buy one! It's simple. No one is forcing you to. On PC it's all about the choice, if you have the dollars then buy the second card. It's for a small bracket of gamers who want the best they can get.!
They patched that in? Maybe I am misremembering it and mixing it up with the 360 version.
Mea culpa!
Pegasus Actual
Member
The lack of subtitles thing really bugged me, but the patch is a bit too late now, got my 1000G, and I'm out. GG remedy.
exmachina64
Banned
You've hit the nail on the head: a small bracket of gamers. Proper SLI implementation requires developers to decide it's worth the effort.