-
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 hands-on Quantum Break (XB1)
- Thread starter Man
- Start date
tattooed_dwarf
Member
It's weird Remedy still hasn't commented anything on this.
Isn't that Jack's special ability?
It's just a social experiment to raise awareness for ...
They will unlock the second gpu, all going according to the master plan.. Sony won't know what hit'em.
Source: MisterXmedia
On topic: The game looks beautiful. Don't care about the P's.
holygeesus
Banned
There is no way this video was actually running on an Xbox One, despite the claims at the beginning of it
https://youtu.be/lbKitybMoVo
https://youtu.be/lbKitybMoVo
The game looks fantastic to me. A higher resolution is obviously preferable, but the IQ (surprisingly enough) doesn't bother me. Maybe I've been looking at the 1080P PC version? Sucks that Remedy would say it was 1080P, but I've become used to Microsoft games being promoted under false resolutions aka 1080PR.
In this case, the <30FPS stuff is what gets to me. For a 720p game in 2016, that's honestly disappointing. At 720p, I would expect 60FPS with slight dips or a rock solid 30FPS.
In this case, the <30FPS stuff is what gets to me. For a 720p game in 2016, that's honestly disappointing. At 720p, I would expect 60FPS with slight dips or a rock solid 30FPS.
Terbinator
Member
Completely forgot about that boat scene.
WordsintheWater
Member
Plenty of people, myself included, had issues with the looks of the game. I commented in the gameplay thread how lighting and shadows look very lacking, but the effects looked great. It being 720p when it was supposed to be 1080p isn't cool either. I hope that the IQ doesn't suffer too much when I play on my projector.
why?
holygeesus
Banned
Because the game running now looks nothing like that video, in terms of effects, quality and quantity wise.
can u point to any specific instances?
thelastword
Banned
The game has always been super blurry and always looked sub 900p, so I don't know why so many are surprised here. It's remedy afterall, and they do have a knack of promising great things for visuals and always under-delivering.
As far as good visuals go, I'd say this is akin to Halo5 having good visuals, blurry IQ, low resolution effects (ssr, shadows, muzzle flash, bullet trails) all bottom tier, couple that with janky animation with screen-tearing at 720p with dips below 30fps in the early chapters...clearly, there are much more hectic areas in this game which DF have not tested or were allowed to.
Let's be clear here, low rez and low asset visuals falling below 30fps at a mediocre resolution with screen-tearing is not the makeup of good visuals.
I'll give the PC version a whirl, but even though it will be better, I'm not sure it will be as good as it can be. All the limitations of UWP are going to sting a little, at least you can hope they will allow 60fps to be an option here. Still, It will be much better than this XB1 conversion in any case.The very low res reflections really stick out like a sore thumb.
I have no hope of the PC version having better ones.
540p ->1080p in most cases, most people had 1080p sets then. Just imagine how ridiculous it is that we're getting so many flagship 720p titles with tearing and sub 30fps in 2016 on better hardware with lo-fi assets and people are saying this looks good. I'm pretty sure someone said this is the best looking 720p game they've ever seen in this very thread (by the gods...smh...).....
The gall of DF to mention Naughty Dog's work next to Remedy, are we really going to compare UC4 to this technical farce that is QB on the XB1????? That second video downplaying all the technical shortcomings of this game is the stuff of legends, not too surprising.......Still, (I guess all the lo fi resolution assets in this game is kinda mitigated by all these dark scenes)......
I'm one of those people. Can you point a native 720p console game that looks better?
"Technical farce" jesus.
Yeah, as usual, completely ignore full dynamic global illumination for every light source, tons of volumetric lights being in effect every single scene and real time geometry transformation.
ND's engine would not be capable of doing stuff that is QB is doing in its current form. This alone should tell that Your whole comparison is cringe worthy at best.
Just stop posting in tech thread if You really dont get the difference between technologies in this game and others.
StrongBlackVine
Banned
And you know this how? Sounds like you have intimate knowledge of ND's engine. Do you work there?
Bits N Pieces
Member
Technical farce? lol
This place never fails to disappoint
This place never fails to disappoint
Name one game or even presentation that they showed real-time lighting solution. They prebake their lighting, which automatically makes the engine not suited to this game.
Or show me a scene that is similar to this in any other game:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=airafVg-abU&feature=youtu.be&t=225
This technology is really unique.
StrongBlackVine
Banned
You said it wasn't capable so the onus is you to back up your claim. And ND not implementing it for a presentation or actual game doesn't cut you the mustard as far as evidence is concerned. Hopefully I don't have to explain why your logic is faulty.
You made a claim you can't back up. Moving on...
I said 'in its current form'. Doesnt mean that they couldnt add it of course, but the engine that runs Uncharted 4 does not have full dynamic lighting solution.
What is hard to understand here?
Technical farce? lol
This place never fails to disappoint
Nothing less was expected from the user ;-)
VeryNicePerson
Member
I think it was definitely running on an Xbox One. There's not really much more or less than what we've seen so far. There are some obvious artistic changes, but on a technical standpoint, it's really close. You can even see the same shadow issues @1:55 that the current build has. Regarding the incredible set-piece at the end, it's hard to judge given the fact that we, if I'm not mistaken, haven't seen this scene since then. That being said, this short clip is as impressive.
On a side note, the aiming transition feels a bit more natural in that build.
Unknown One
Member
Probably make the pc version scaled back in terms of assets too maybe?
That's not necessarily a bad thing though, if if allows for a higher quality overall result. See The Order 1886. In the example you linked above from Quantum Break, the shadow quality is so low res that it totally detracts from the overall quality of the scene. Being 720p is only going to further diminish the overall result.
Well, knowing KKRT00, he's probably just praising this game to high heavens because the PC version will be able to run at resolutions higher than 1080p with higher resolution shadows and much more. Do you think he would praise the game as much if it was only on XB1?
Of course its a bad thing (in regards to this discussion), You couldnt do scene in question with prebaked solution.
I havent said that prebaked solution is shit, it has its purposes, but it limits scenes You can create with it, like for example this one or transitions devs did in Everybody's Gone Rapture.
----
I like to praise unique technologies, like this one or Dreams for example. I find Dreams much more impressive than Uncharted 4 from tech standpoint for example.
Uncharted 4 is really 'safe' in terms of tech, it does stuff we know really, really well, but doesnt break grounds anywhere. QB and Dreams are different.
Hugh Swank
Member
Apparently, talented developers are getting creative with rendering techniques these days. I think it's great that these devs are finding new ways to make great looking games with low power. Hopefully that'll transfer into ridiculously amazing looking games when more processing power is available on console.
http://nxgamer.com/previews/quantum-break-technical-preview
" Geometry is handled separately and more inline with HBAO techniques with it all calculated at 720p (as many portions of a games render are made up of various resolutions) to help reduce its cost down to less than 1.4ms on the XboxOne GPU, this is also where some got confused with the game rendering at 720p which it does not, at this point 1080p is the games target output."
http://nxgamer.com/previews/quantum-break-technical-preview
" Geometry is handled separately and more inline with HBAO techniques with it all calculated at 720p (as many portions of a games render are made up of various resolutions) to help reduce its cost down to less than 1.4ms on the XboxOne GPU, this is also where some got confused with the game rendering at 720p which it does not, at this point 1080p is the games target output."
Couldn't they just bake the lighting transition from that scene though? It just doesn't seem like a very efficient implementation as it currently stands, as the shadows look pretty bad and really detract from the scene. I'm sure on PC it will look a lot better though.
And ignoring the PC version, the XB1 supposedly runs at 720p. Now it's a matter of opinions, but a resolution that low (relatively) could potentially hamper the experience for some as well. Those GIF's also show pretty low res shadows and SSR. And correct me if I'm wrong, but the environments in Quantum Break are significantly smaller than in Uncharted 4. Doesn't the scale of the environments limit gameplay and scenes as well? The point is, different dev prioritize different things.
So the level of destruction seen in the demoes are "safe" now? That doesn't break grounds anywhere? Name me one released game that has the same level of destruction. And there are many setpieces still kept under wraps.
He did praise Ryse at a time when a PC version was unthinkable.
My opinion on Quantum Break is that it is still a very competent game on the tech side, irrespective of rendering resolution.
Remedy have mentioned a few improvements for the PC version.
http://www.pcgamer.com/hands-on-with-quantum-breaks-strange-blend-of-gunplay-and-tv-show/
This is going to be a very demanding title. 2.25x the rendering resolution on Xbox One + 2x the framerate......And higher grade effects on top of that.
Yeah this is going to be a game that will make some of us yearn for Polaris/Pascal even more.
Well, he always did have a thing for the tech in Crytek's games.
The Janitor
Member
Yeah, how dare they compare this filthy peasant Xbox game to a glorious PS4 game made by Naughty God!
Battlefield? And what do you mean by "set pieces" exactly?
Possumowner
Member
I'll be honest,even at 720 (if final version) it still looks damn nice to me.I shall grab the PC version though
I dont know about scale in QB. And Xbone is weaker so of course game will have lower resolution.
I dont argue that devs have different priorities, i'm aware of that, i even wrote that. Just read what post i was replying too.
U4 has dithered shadows and SSR will probably be lower res too like in most games on consoles except few, thats completely normal.
What level of destruction? The only thing that looked quite mind blowing was truck chase and that was precalculated physics, not real-time. Same stuff You see in QB (DMM), Ryse (GeomCache) or Mirrors Edge Catalyst (DICE's solution).
Thanks for the link. I have not seen any technical video from NXGamer before (I rarely ever enter these technical threads), but that was really well done. Good information and hopefully he is correct with his analysis.
If you mean Bad Company 2, then yeah, fair enough. But unless I'm mistaken, the level of destruction in the recent Battlefield games such as buildings collapsing are scripted. I was referring to cover being torn apart and objects being blown around the screen in Uncharted 4. Regarding "setpieces", I was obviously referring to the insane action scenes and spectacle the series is known for. But I admit, I probably exaggerated about the destruction physics.
Dropping to 720p to achieve real time global illumination is not a design choice that we can all agree is beneficial to the overall look of the game. Also, I was referring to the destructible covers in the demoes. Look, all I'm saying is, there are things Uncharted 4 does better and there are things Quantum Break does better.
If there are more scenes like one i posted, they needed dynamic GI solution. They just couldnt do the game they wanted with prebaked solution.
How those are different to many other games in the past? Its really nice that a lot of stuff breaks up, but it was done before.
I think this sentence should be modified:
"there are things Uncharted 4 does better and there are things Quantum Break does differently or are completely unique"
Ps. Just for an info, i will probably buy U4 PS4 bundle, so its not like i'm not interested in U4
thelastword
Banned
That's the whole point, that someone would say it's the best looking 720p game they've seen to justify it's shortcomings. This is not the 360, this is the XB1, fine, you are rendering at 720p, yet all your assets are low res and low detail. All the talk about Remedy favouring effects in their games are moot because all these effects are lo-fi. Shadows are janky, animation is janky, framerate is not a stable 30fps even with these compromises.
I can take any modern game on PC and put assets on ultra at 720p, (ssr, ao, shadows), all being way superior than is present here, at least the asset quality would be good and I'd get 60fps easily, but here, we have some really bad asset quality, it's 720p and this thing does not even run 30fps without dips and tearing. You really believe QB with all these lo-fi assets is the best looking 720p game you've seen. What exactly makes it look so stellar to you then? 720p is not even an option to most gamers for a while now.
The way you speak it would seem that QB is the first and only game doing G.I and Volumetric lighting, my goodness, driveclub does G.I at 1080p 30fps solid, also, volumetric lighting in games is so common now it's not even worth mentioning as a point of distinction. Perhaps instead of you getting bent out of shape on buzzwords (G.I), you should focus on it's application here or lack thereof.
You should also see how SSAO, SSR and IL complement this G.I implementation they speak of. Even with G.I and any rendering technique for that matter, there are levels of quality. You're telling me, you're so impressed with a buzzword in a game where draw distance is abysmal, shadow quality is abysmal, effects quality is abysmal, resolution quality is abysmal, framerate is not optimal at 720p? but you think because they mention that they have multiscale G.I in place that overcomes all. If all these aspects are sacrificed, do you really believe their G.I implementation is anything to talk about? By all means show me what's so impressive about it, but please remember that for all types of modern rendering techniques, quality is always at the behest of performance.
QB is not impressive on so many levels, there's no way anyone should be mentioning it as a some type of graphical achievement.
Similarly, assuming Uncharted 4 is significantly larger than Quantum Break in map size (it most likely is), ND couldn't make the game they wanted to if they had to compromise scale for fully real time GI. As for the destructible cover system, from what we've seen, most of it is fully destructible while most games have cover being indestructible. As for that statement, that's not entirely true. The Tomorrow Children is also doing fully real time GI, which is arguably more impressive than in QB, so that is not "completely unique".If there are more scenes like one i posted, they needed dynamic GI solution. They just couldnt do the game they wanted with prebaked solution.
How those are different to many other games in the past? Its really nice that a lot of stuff breaks up, but it was done before.
I think this sentence should be modified:
"there are things Uncharted 4 does better and there are things Quantum Break does differently or are completely unique"
Ps. Just for an info, i will probably buy U4 PS4 bundle, so its not like i'm not interested in U4
nelsonroyale
Member
I would say what is being done in QB has much more in common with U4, than Dreams...Dreams seems to be doing a lot more genuinely new stuff, at least in terms of the output. You obviously know more about the technical underpinnings.
Also, as awesome as QB looks (it looks damn awesome), the environments look more poly deficient than in say U4.
opinions and all, but okay.
Chobel
Member
You better not fuck this up Remedy/MS. Arbitrary framerate is a must in PC games.
i dunno why people are saying, 'this developer working on this other hardware with twice the fillrate and 50% more raw power achieved these effects, therefore remedy aren't technically skilled'. do y'all realise how dumb this argument is? find me the game on xbone pushing these effects at a higher resolution, then you have an actual like-for-like comparison that makes even a modicum of sense.
Not trying to derail what the thread is about, but i am pretty sure that the destruction is real time. There was a difference between the twitch stream of the full gameplay and the one that they released on Youtube. Different destruction in sandbags, car windows and the truck that Drake jumps off. But we have to see in the final version.
piccio_ssl
Member
What the hell at that animation/shooting right at the beginning. It looks like there literally isn't any animation for aiming, he just snaps up into shooting position instantly. Dude is crouched facing left, then immediately snaps his body 180 degrees so he's facing right and aiming. Then he's up against that pillar aim around the left side of it, but the character is still aiming with his body facing right, and he shoots straight through the pillar. That stuff doesn't look great.
i sweare the animations are what bothers me much more, sooo clunky
the resolution is disappointing, although the game looks amazing