Support NeoGAF

[e-gamer]

Apparent stealth update on DF article...

"A mixture of strong post effects (such as film grain and motion blur), plus excellent anti-aliasing work well in hiding much of the stair-stepping we'd expect of a lower resolution game. Added to this, image quality appears sharper and noticeably cleaner in more static scenes, where a pixel count suggests something closer to a 900p presentation. A temporal reconstruction anti-aliasing solution is a strong contender - a technique where information from previously rendered frames is blended with the current one."

Oh lord!

 

[Theorry]

And we are done here. I totally expect this to be 720p.


I wouldn't even bother. People have decided from one gif what this game is. It's the nature of the Internet. Fast forward 5 years and hopefully, If due, this game will be seen as a classic to many

Why? There are alot of games nowadays wich are 1080p and 30fps on the Xbox.

 

[SlasherJPC]

What's your thoughts on it or can't you say?

I can't say obviously but all the talk in here is similar to thoughts and concerns I had before playing. After playing, I can see some issues with the graphics engine, yet at the same time some of the visual effects and ideas going on in this game totally make up for it for me.

I've always been one of the overall package and entertainment folks when it comes to dealing with resolutions, animations, gameplay, effects etc. I have never minded when devs sacrifice or make things intentionally for either visual or gameplay performance. This is all personally up to the player of course.

Bottom line, the things being talked about in here either are not bothering me in the slightest (though noticeable, Im not blind) or feel intentially from a gameplay persetive.

 

[The Albatross]

I had no idea that Carcetti/Little Finger was in this.

 

[cgcg]

So it's by design he can shoot thru pillars without actually hitting it?

 

[Backfoggen]

Don't say anything bad about bloodborne on here what are you trying to do? Lol

I'm not saying anything bad about Bloodborne. From made the right choice with that game and so did Remedy. Gameplay is more important than animation transitions not looking a little janky. It's not like you'll notice it during gameplay anyways.

So it's by design he can shoot thru pillars without actually hitting it?

Yes. You hit what you aim at. It's not fun to have to slightly readjust your aim just to hit what you actually already aimed at. It happens in other 3rd person shooters.

 

[twobear]

Why? There are alot of games nowadays wich are 1080p and 30fps on the Xbox.

and there are lots that aren't, because it depends on what the particular developer is doing with their game.

insisting that only those who hit 1080p or 60fps are 'good developers' is insane.

 

[crazyprac]

So it's by design he can shoot thru pillars without actually hitting it?

You won't notice it while playing and it's for better gameplay or something something...

 

[Theorry]

and there are lots that aren't.

Read the post i responded on.

 

[SlasherJPC]

So it's by design he can shoot thru pillars without actually hitting it?

I've not experienced that in my time with the game. Though if we're looking at select gifs or videos that show this in one off examples, not sure what to say. I will try to see if I can duplicate what your talking about though.

If we're simple talking about auto aim. That can be disabled I believe.

 

[tuxfool]

You won't notice it while playing and it's for better gameplay or something something...

Given that this is exactly the excuse made for extremely prevalent clipping everywhere in FROM games I don't see why it isn't valid here.

I think clipping looks like crap, but it certainly facilitates certain aspects of the game.

 

[Shin-Ra]

Reflections aside, I think the image quality is quite good.
Its a very soft image, but it doesn't look like your usual 720p at all. Very smooth edges etc.

It may sound a little disappointing that this games runs at 720p but so far I haven't any example where this really resulted in some scenes looking bad.
My problems with the game are actually elsewhere.

What stuck out to me the most where the poor animations during gameplay. Bothers me much more than the resolution.

Your usual 720p came from an era just before temporal anti-aliasing was well refined. There's 1080p console games with good TAA too.

Remedy's implementation leaves a noticeable smear behind slower moving characters and objects.

Go watch videos, instead of using a single gif to make judgements off. It's not that difficult. The screen tearing is fixed. Yea.

There's still an adaptive Vsync with tearing in the 'final' code DF examined.

 

[twobear]

Read the post i responded on.

yes, i don't see how it affects what i said. there are lots of games that don't run at 1080p on xbone. it depends on what the engine is doing.

 

[Ninja Sharingan]

Why? There are alot of games nowadays wich are 1080p and 30fps on the Xbox.

Because then if it ends up being higher I can do a happy dance

I'm not saying anything bad about Bloodborne. From made the right choice with that game and so did Remedy. Gameplay is more important than animation transitions not looking a little janky. It's not like you'll notice it during gameplay anyways.



Yes. You hit what you aim at. It's not fun to have to slightly readjust your aim just to hit what you actually already aimed at. It happens in other 3rd person shooters.

I actually 100 percent agree with you. I am in for the gameplay and I whole heartedly trust remedy to know what they are doing when it comes to high impact high velocity gameplay

 

[SlasherJPC]

Screen tearing I've seen but it's not constant at all. Only in very variable moments.

 

[VeryNicePerson]

Apparent stealth update on DF article...

"A mixture of strong post effects (such as film grain and motion blur), plus excellent anti-aliasing work well in hiding much of the stair-stepping we'd expect of a lower resolution game. Added to this, image quality appears sharper and noticeably cleaner in more static scenes, where a pixel count suggests something closer to a 900p presentation. A temporal reconstruction anti-aliasing solution is a strong contender - a technique where information from previously rendered frames is blended with the current one."

Oh lord!

I'm pretty this sentence hasn't changed since yesterday.

 

[Ninja Sharingan]

If this ends up being 900p ...neogaf done neogaf'd again

 

[nib95]

If this ends up being 900p ...neogaf done neogaf'd again

That would be amazing though. Especially if they patched it to be a constant 900p. Right now it seems like it only reaches that resolution when things are static, so presumably the vast majority of the game, especially in combat, is still closer to 720p.

 

[Jessie.Bristol]

I'm pretty this sentence hasn't changed since yesterday.

That portion was definitely there yesterday. Read the whole article including that part, so it was definitely not edited.

 

[etta]

i sweare the animations are what bothers me much more, sooo clunky
the resolution is disappointing, although the game looks amazing

They said the animations were made that way to be the opposite of clunky...
Maybe it just looks like it, but once you are playing it feels good.

 

[thelastword]

so what you're saying is, that unless developers choose 60fps, and perhaps 1080p, on a console for which the hardware is lacklustre for targetting 1080p and 60fps, the developer isn't good?

this y'alls argument? because it's shit.

Oh really? because going into this gen you were of the opinion that first party efforts, MS published efforts would be 720p with low rez assets, sub 30fps with tearing? Well, if that's what impresses you or happens to be your standard, then this game must be the holy grail. I imagine 480p with 8xMSAA from remedy would be even more impressive right?

This game is not even 900p 30fps with decent assets which is the sweetspot for the hardware, yet, most first party games from MS were 720p last gen. It is at this point you begin to question why many people wanted an upgrade from the 360 in the first place. Even on the low end, the game is not even 720p 60fps, for the XB1 with high assets..you could at least swallow that 720p pill if it was so, but with these low-fi assets and sub 30 frame rate and tearing? This game does not even belong in any technical discussion worth having. To agree that it's top tier graphically is even more disconcerting, even for the XB1.

Plenty of people criticized the graphics before, it just that they were called fanboys whenever they did.

All anybody have to do is re-visit some older QB threads to see what many persons thought about it. Apparently, once you call out sub-par graphics in a technical thread, you're some fanboy. It's par for the course really....

its not really janky animation. Its to assist the playability of the game. I understand people not liking the look of it, but this is going to be one fast snappy assed shooter. It needs to jump to aiming position ina couple of frames. I can understand people not liking the look of it, i think it looks a bit goofy, but I can appreciate why it is happening.

A snappy based shooter does not have janky animation, how would that assist it's snappiness? For that type of resolution on the XB1, history shows that it should be 60fps with decent assets, 60 fps in that situation would help with it's snappiness. Now imagine 60fps with solid animation and I think your point would be better made.....

 

[potatohead]

you have to remember that the 'it's 50% weaker than the PS4' argument isn't straightforward, because on top of it having lower bandwidth than the PS4, it also has that lower bandwidth to a tiny amount of memory (32MB).

you only have to look at a game like forza to see the level of compromise that developers have to make to hit 1080p and 60fps with xbone; it's tons.

Thanks, I haven't tried Forza yet.

This is the impression I got from when we first learned the specs between Xbone and PS4.

Sucks it has to be this way. Not trying at all to hate on Xbone, but should we be placing the blame squarely at the hardware designers who chose that RAM design with DDR3 and ESRAM? I dunno.

Maybe they really could've just done 64 MB ESRAM, I really don't know the technical details or feasability of that, but I wonder if that could've helped, even though that is also lower bandwidth than all the GDDR5 pipes being used at the same time.

I guess I just wonder why they just didn't switch to GDDR5, that would've been the easiest I guess?

 

[Hugh Swank]

Apparent stealth update on DF article...

"A mixture of strong post effects (such as film grain and motion blur), plus excellent anti-aliasing work well in hiding much of the stair-stepping we'd expect of a lower resolution game. Added to this, image quality appears sharper and noticeably cleaner in more static scenes, where a pixel count suggests something closer to a 900p presentation. A temporal reconstruction anti-aliasing solution is a strong contender - a technique where information from previously rendered frames is blended with the current one."

Oh lord!

Yeah, DF says they've reached out to Remedy for clarification on what exactly is going on. Maybe they should have waited for a response before publishing information. Of course that approach wouldn't drive as many clicks to their website.

It'll be interesting to see Remedy's response.

 

[Shin-Ra]

Screen tearing I've seen but it's not constant at all. Only in very variable moments.

As the DF video shows, it's dependant on the rendering load of a particular scene. In the outside night environment performance seems to dip when overlooking lots of overlapping volumetric lights but not when the camera turns in the same environment to hide them.

 

[Genio88]

It's so sad how people just talk about things like resolution or bullets that some time, like it happens in every game, go through walls...This game looks amazing and i'm sure, being a Remedy game, i'm confident it's gonna be awesome, with gameplay, story and details that we rarely see in today games which are developed in rush in less than 2 years...

 

[mejin]

If this ends up being 900p ...neogaf done neogaf'd again

then opinion will move from an awesome 720p to a so-so 900p.

 

[Jessie.Bristol]

I guess I just wonder why they just didn't switch to GDDR5, that would've been the easiest I guess?

With what MS wanted to achieve with Xbox One it required 8GB of memory. At the time there were zero guarantees they could get 8GB of GDDR5 memory, so they settled with 8GB of DDR3 with 32MB of eSRAM. Sony chose GDDR5 memory and got extremely lucky with 8GB of GDDR5, otherwise the PS4 would have had 4GB of GDDR5. Sony took a risk and it paid off, MS wasn't in a position to take a risk like that because of the OS requiring at least 3GB of memory.

 

[gamz]

I can't say obviously but all the talk in here is similar to thoughts and concerns I had before playing. After playing, I can see some issues with the graphics engine, yet at the same time some of the visual effects and ideas going on in this game totally make up for it for me.

I've always been one of the overall package and entertainment folks when it comes to dealing with resolutions, animations, gameplay, effects etc. I have never minded when devs sacrifice or make things intentionally for either visual or gameplay performance. This is all personally up to the player of course.

Bottom line, the things being talked about in here either are not bothering me in the slightest (though noticeable, Im not blind) or feel intentially from a gameplay persetive.

Cool! I appreciate your thoughts.

 

[Ninja Sharingan]

Oh really? because going into this gen you were of the opinion that first party efforts, MS published efforts would be 720p with low rez assets, sub 30fps with tearing? Well, if that's what impresses you or happens to be your standard, then this game must be the holy grail. I imagine 480p with 8xMSAA from remedy would be even more impressive right?

This game is not even 900p 30fps with decent assets which is the sweetspot for the hardware, yet, most first party games from MS were 720p last gen. It is at this point you begin to question why many people wanted an upgrade from the 360 in the first place. Even on the low end, the game is not even 720p 60fps, for the XB1 with high assets..you could at least swallow that 720p pill if it was so, but with these low-fi assets and sub 30 frame rate and tearing? This game does not even belong in any technical discussion worth having. To agree that it's top tier graphically is even more disconcerting, even for the XB1.
All anybody have to do is re-visit some older QB threads to see what many persons thought about it. Apparently, once you call out sub-par graphics in a technical thread, you're some fanboy. It's par for the course really....

A snappy based shooter does not have janky animation, how would that assist it's snappiness? For that type of resolution on the XB1, history shows that it should be 60fps with decent assets, 60 fps in that situation would help with it's snappiness. Now imagine 60fps with solid animation and I think your point would be better made.....

I really hope this game is 900p just to make you look a little silly. Your comments are a tad extreme. These games don't look like Xbox 360 games

 

[potatohead]

With what MS wanted to achieve with Xbox One it required 8GB of memory. At the time there were zero guarantees they could get 8GB of GDDR5 memory, so they settled with 8GB of DDR3 with 32MB of eSRAM. Sony chose GDDR5 memory and got extremely lucky with 8GB of GDDR5, otherwise the PS4 would have had 4GB of GDDR5. Sony took a risk and it paid off, MS wasn't in a position to take a risk like that because of the OS requiring at least 3GB of memory.

That's fair, I can't say I would have known those details

It's definitely an interesting case of how it all worked out in the end for all parties.

 

[twobear]

Oh really? because going into this gen you were of the opinion that first party efforts, MS published efforts would be 720p with low rez assets, sub 30fps with tearing? Well, if that's what impresses you or happens to be your standard, then this game must be the holy grail. I imagine 480p with 8xMSAA from remedy would be even more impressive right?

This game is not even 900p 30fps with decent assets which is the sweetspot for the hardware, yet, most first party games from MS were 720p last gen. It is at this point you begin to question why many people wanted an upgrade from the 360 in the first place. Even on the low end, the game is not even 720p 60fps, for the XB1 with high assets..you could at least swallow that 720p pill if it was so, but with these low-fi assets and sub 30 frame rate and tearing? This game does not even belong in any technical discussion worth having. To agree that it's top tier graphically is even more disconcerting, even for the XB1.

i don't even know what you mean by 'low rez assets'. like, the character models? virtually every site that's covered them has discussed how good the character models are.

lets be real for a moment. you have absolutely no idea what skill level remedy have with the hardware. for all you know, the fact that they have managed to get the game as-is on xbone hardware is an impressive technical feat because you have no point of comparison to claim that they could have done better. you can look at the framerate and resolution and say it's not very impressive, but it's pure conjecture on your behalf that they could have done so. you don't actually have the faintest clue.

like, am i supposed to look at forza 6 and say, 'well here's my proof that quantum break could have been 1080p'? how is that supposed to work? that's not a coherent argument, it's just idle thought.

[edit] fwiw, if i was an xbone owner i might be a bit disappointed that this was 720p, but, you know, i'm not going to blame remedy for the fact that MS didn't build their box to be capable of 1080p with some overhead. it's like last generation when everyone rushed to blame 'lazy devs' for shit ps3 ports instead of blaming, you know, sony, for making their shit needlessly complicated. same principle.

 

[SlasherJPC]

It's so sad how people just talk about things like resolution or bullets that some time, like it happens in every game, go through walls...This game looks amazing and i'm sure, being a Remedy game, i'm confident it's gonna be awesome, with gameplay, story and details that we rarely see in today games which are developed in rush in less than 2 years...

It's a technical thread so these things should be discussed but your right in the aspect that people get so caught up in these things and forget that games were meant to be first and foremost about entertaining and challenging the player. Now everyone is a game developer and expert because the information is out there on the net. Reminds me of how some people think they know better then doctor now because the internet tells them their health issues. It's silly but it's not gonna change ever again.

 

[Ghost Slayer]

It's so sad how people just talk about things like resolution or bullets that some time, like it happens in every game, go through walls...This game looks amazing and i'm sure, being a Remedy game, i'm confident it's gonna be awesome, with gameplay, story and details that we rarely see in today games which are developed in rush in less than 2 years...

Yeah, mods should ban people who talk about tech in a DF thread

 

[thelastword]

and there are lots that aren't, because it depends on what the particular developer is doing with their game.

insisting that only those who hit 1080p or 60fps are 'good developers' is insane.

Nobody said that, however 720p with low rez assets, paltry draw distance, bad animation, questionable framerate, screen tearing..... is not a standard we should highlight as exemplary even for the weak XB1 hardware.

 

[etta]

My gripe is the simplicity of the game world. It simply lacks detail/objects/complexity. Even more apparent coming off the back of The Division which has a fabulous amount of world detail, and that's an open world game.

Ya QB is missing heaps of garbage bags and abandoned cars laying around.

 

[Snorlocs]

Nobody said that, however 720p with low rez assets, paltry draw distance, bad animation, questionable framerate, screen tearing..... is not a standard we should highlight as exemplary even for the weak XB1 hardware.

But what about all the other praise the game gets for its graphical accomplishments? Do those simply get absorbed by all the negatives? Cause that is what you are doing.

 

[c0de]

I really hope this game is 900p just to make you look a little silly.

No need for an update for this ;-) Sony goodgood, MS badbad, and with this preset mind, you are trying to argue both sides with the most elaborated crap possible, wrapped up in technical sounding words.

 

[Shin-Ra]

TAA builds up resolution over time so a nearly static image can build up clarity to greater than what's rendered in a single frame.

 

[SOR5]

Apparent stealth update on DF article...

"A mixture of strong post effects (such as film grain and motion blur), plus excellent anti-aliasing work well in hiding much of the stair-stepping we'd expect of a lower resolution game. Added to this, image quality appears sharper and noticeably cleaner in more static scenes, where a pixel count suggests something closer to a 900p presentation. A temporal reconstruction anti-aliasing solution is a strong contender - a technique where information from previously rendered frames is blended with the current one."

Oh lord!

So is the game running at 899p?

what

 

[etta]

So Bloodborne's fast animations received similar criticism prior to launch, then when it was released it was the best playing action game ever, right?

 

[Peterpan]

There's still an adaptive Vsync with tearing in the 'final' code DF examined.

It's not the final build. It's the same one the press played and that's not the final build.

 

[Kezen]

So Bloodborne's fast animations received similar criticism prior to launch, then when it was released it was the best playing action game ever, right?

What are you implying there ? Sony bias ?

 

[nib95]

So Bloodborne's fast animations received similar criticism prior to launch, then when it was released it was the best playing action game ever, right?

Just to interject, I don't think it's necessarily the animations that are poor in Quantum Break. Some of them are a little clunky, but many are excellent, especially the enemy hit reactions etc. I think the visually negative element is more in the camera work. Things seem to zoom in more than most third person shooters when you aim, and more instantaneously too, which gives that weird detached snappy back and forth from time to time, when going in and out of aim in quick succession.

 

[The Baron Count]

So Bloodborne's fast animations received similar criticism prior to launch, then when it was released it was the best playing action game ever, right?

Thankfully most of the "controversies" this gen have been a vocal minority making a mountain out of a mole hill while the rest of us play good games.

 

[DreamingCrazy]

Game looks great, a little concerned about 720p but I don't care it's remedy.

 

[etta]

What are you implying there ? Sony bias ?

I'm implying what SlasherJPC said, armchair developers on the internet throwing a hissy fit before playing the games, acting like they know jack, like those people thinking they know better than doctors because they visited WebMD.

Thankfully most of the "controversies" this gen have been a vocal minority making a mountain out of a mole hill while the rest of us play good games.

Yea, I don't know why I am even surprised anymore. This happens more and more frequently here.

 

[Gnasher]

Game looks great, can't wait to play it

 

[Alpha Phoenix]

Apparent stealth update on DF article...

"A mixture of strong post effects (such as film grain and motion blur), plus excellent anti-aliasing work well in hiding much of the stair-stepping we'd expect of a lower resolution game. Added to this, image quality appears sharper and noticeably cleaner in more static scenes, where a pixel count suggests something closer to a 900p presentation. A temporal reconstruction anti-aliasing solution is a strong contender - a technique where information from previously rendered frames is blended with the current one."

Oh lord!

Dynamic resolution then?

 

[Primethius]

What fast animations in Bloodborne? Why is Bloodborne even being brought up?

The Souls series is quite literally the opposite of what that QB gif is showing (lack of animation to prioritize responsiveness). Souls and BB have tons of start up frames which would make this comparison utterly moot.

 

[SenjutsuSage]

Your usual 720p came from an era just before temporal anti-aliasing was well refined. There's 1080p console games with good TAA too.

Remedy's implementation leaves a noticeable smear behind slower moving characters and objects.


There's still an adaptive Vsync with tearing in the 'final' code DF examined.

But how much of the experience is such a thing even present? How much is it really distracted from the overall experience? These are the things that I think a lot of people don't appreciate when they either don't own a game, or don't intend to, and I'm not making any assumptions about your intent by the way, I'm just pointing to something that is all too common. I remember back during launch how people used some isolated frame drops in Ryse to assume that the entire experience is hobbled by gameplay damaging performance dips. Did it matter to people that most of the drops occurred during the slowed down assassination kills, which were not at all affected by the frame drop in the first place? Input latency was barely, if at all, affected in those cases, and you could still be as accurate as you needed to be. I don't think people appreciate these nuances enough.