-
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
It actually looks pretty good in Siege, just some shimmering in motion. I thought it looked similar here as well.
LordOcidax
Member
I remember when MK8 720p60 was demolished here in GAF for 1 fps drop.... QB is 720p30 with drops and is ok to some people.... This is why i love GAF. 
Gtagentleman
Member
Microsoft really wants to push Windows Store right now.
I remember when MK8 720p60 was demolished here in GAF for 1 fps drop.... QB is 720p30 with drops and is ok to some people.... This is why i love GAF.
Well for once QB is not a fighting game...
Also a lot of people are complaining and shitting on it already, not sure what posts you pick.
edit: okay mario kart... thanks dark10x down there
Why not keep the pre order on Xbox and get the free PC version . At least that way you have a choice which to play
If you are buying digitally you get both regardless.
Let's be clear about this...the issue with Mario Kart 8 is ridiculous. It's more of a bug than an actual performance problem. There is a constant stutter visible at all times while playing the game. It's very annoying once you see it. People were upset because no one could have ever guessed that Nintendo could release a game with such an issue.I remember when MK8 720p60 was demolished here in GAF for 1 fps drop.... QB is 720p30 with drops and is ok to some people.... This is why i love GAF.
Image quality wise, they really couldn't be more different. MK8 is raw 1280x720 with no AA or smoothing of any kind. There is loads of temporal artefacts and shimmering everywhere.
Netherscourge
Banned
So is it NATIVE 1080p or UPSCALED 720p?
I remember when MK8 720p60 was demolished here in GAF for 1 fps drop.... QB is 720p30 with drops and is ok to some people.... This is why i love GAF.
So you are saying that we should all raise our forks because remedy fool everyone making a gorgeous game even at 720p?
LordOcidax
Member
Nop i am just saying that i love to read unbiased opinions here on GAF. The MK8 case was just an example... nothing more.
Seems like a similar situation to Alan Wake which was sub-720p when 720p was the norm.
Remedy thinks that more effects are worth a drop in resolution.
Problem is that 720p is indeed really low res for the size of current TVs, image will look too soft if not blurred and that's not good although after a while playing it you'll get kinda used to it.
Still I don't see how resolution can be the deciding factor in buying a game if you're interested in the concept and gameplay the title offers.
If you're that concerned you should be playing on PC and not on Xbox One which is not a powerful hardware anyway.
Remedy thinks that more effects are worth a drop in resolution.
Problem is that 720p is indeed really low res for the size of current TVs, image will look too soft if not blurred and that's not good although after a while playing it you'll get kinda used to it.
Still I don't see how resolution can be the deciding factor in buying a game if you're interested in the concept and gameplay the title offers.
If you're that concerned you should be playing on PC and not on Xbox One which is not a powerful hardware anyway.
None of these.
it's a new technique: "temporal reconstruction from four previous 720p 4xMSAA frames"
Pretty far from a native 1080p resolution.
ethomaz
Banned
The game engine create only 720p native images but it uses 4 old temporal frames to generate an artificial 1080p image.
Remember Killzone MP? Something like that.
At the end it is native 720p.
Well, this is still not sure? Why then do the temporal frames?
ethomaz
Banned
But why do it then?
Eh. It's not doing all that great in our stores, though it's picked up some since there's been more coverage. The white system seems to be getting more preorders for the color though.
I've been complaining about this is threads for awhile, MS is letting this title fly too low under the radar for a lot of folks. Has the media push started yet? Commercials and big banner ads, that sort of thing?
I don't watch tv, and I don't own an xb1, but I think the game has promise so I've tried to make sure and keep people aware of it in my home store.
ethomaz
Banned
Because in most cases it is better than only upscale the image.
Best case you get a image better than 1080p upscalled... worst case you get a vertical or horizontal line like a issue breaking the flow of the graphics because the old frames didn't fits with the actual.
Well there are cons and pros... the native image being rendered continues to be 720p... it is a choice/option over upscale when you can't reach a native optimal resolution.
Karak
Member
I was looking for actual data thanks.
PanicFreak
Member
I think that Microsoft is banking on strong reviews to carry the product. I would be surprised if it got a ton of pre-release marketing.
It's single player only right? With early marketing touching on there being interlinked TV segments (I.e. Lots of big cutscenes). And most SP games people assume are short with limited replay value?
That's a tough sell in the market right now.
I play mostly SP but I'm clearly in the minority for big console titles. Even something that's got a heavy SP focus like Unchated at least has cushion of solid MP and a franchise reputation of being top tier SP adventure hence worth a purchase.
As a new and unknown IP QB needs lots of media focusing on gameplay/powers, great reviews and strong WoM or it'll be another Alan Wake with modest sales for AAA title that ends up being heavily bundled to push units. IMHO.
StrongBlackVine
Banned
That is not what I said or implied. I said it reasonable to question why it is running at 720p. That question has been answered for me. What is up for debate now is whether those effects were worth the sacrifice in resolution.
I personally would rather have decreased effects and higher resolution, but maybe those effects are deemed critical to the experience for this game.
Well it's another way to call 720p. From what I remember isn't more or less what Guerrilla did on ps4 for 60 fps? Could be more sophisticated and better but we are talking of native 720p at the end.
Because it's surely better than simple upscale. But it's not a miraculous tech.
Steverulez
Member
Well Remedy know their vision for the game. If they deem them necessary to reach that then I think the answer is obvious. I want a Remedy game which is what this is, I'd rather they just do that then change what they want to do to hit a resolution number at the expense of how they want to present their game. It looks great to me, only two weeks left to wait
The Baron Count
Member
This obsession with resolution is absurd. If it was 2007 and I took Crysis maxed out and ran it at 720p or even lower, it still would have fucking obliterated every single game from that entire generation easily. Same with Metro or Battlefield.
Resolution is an incredibly important aspect of a game's visual makeup and I certainly understand people not liking a game to be stretched on their TV, but acting like it nullifies every single other thing a game does is bullshit. Every game that has gone sub 1080p this gen could have been 1080p if they were willing to sacrifice in other areas. Reducing your resolution is a relatively simple way to get some resources back so as to keep your core graphical target, albeit with reduced clarity.
People also continue to bring up Alan Wake while completely ignoring the fact that the main reason it was sub HD last gen was so they could have 4XMSAA, which was something that almost no graphically impressive title ever did during that generation. These are stylistic decisions and Remedy has a very clear idea of how they want to use system resources. They are making cinematic games and having the resources to push the effects as hard as they are doing here was obviously a priority to them to sell the experience.
Would people have preferred something like Killzone 2 cutting it's particle budget in half and dropping all it's post processing so it could run at 1080p? Even that probably wouldn't have done it, lighting was the single biggest performance hog for them and also the most striking thing about the game. Would it have been worth it to make huge cutbacks to it's lighting system and sacrifice the entire visual target of the game so they could run the game at a higher resolution?
Target resolutions and the standards we set for them are arbitrary. The 360 and PS3 were plenty capable of running games at 1080p, it just wasn't a worthwhile endeavor for most devs due to how much had to be sacrificed to get there. Leading up to launch there were countless PS3 fans who thought that they were going to get all their games at 1080p due to Sony's cuckoo PR and they very well could have if they wanted games that looked like crap.
Yet again I'm not saying resolution isn't important and it IS unfortunate to have a game not meet the native resolution of your screen, but it is not the ONLY thing that matters like some here seem to think. That kind of attitude is just another one of those things that leads me to believe that the people that feel that way have very little understanding of what goes into making a good looking game.
Resolution is an incredibly important aspect of a game's visual makeup and I certainly understand people not liking a game to be stretched on their TV, but acting like it nullifies every single other thing a game does is bullshit. Every game that has gone sub 1080p this gen could have been 1080p if they were willing to sacrifice in other areas. Reducing your resolution is a relatively simple way to get some resources back so as to keep your core graphical target, albeit with reduced clarity.
People also continue to bring up Alan Wake while completely ignoring the fact that the main reason it was sub HD last gen was so they could have 4XMSAA, which was something that almost no graphically impressive title ever did during that generation. These are stylistic decisions and Remedy has a very clear idea of how they want to use system resources. They are making cinematic games and having the resources to push the effects as hard as they are doing here was obviously a priority to them to sell the experience.
Would people have preferred something like Killzone 2 cutting it's particle budget in half and dropping all it's post processing so it could run at 1080p? Even that probably wouldn't have done it, lighting was the single biggest performance hog for them and also the most striking thing about the game. Would it have been worth it to make huge cutbacks to it's lighting system and sacrifice the entire visual target of the game so they could run the game at a higher resolution?
Target resolutions and the standards we set for them are arbitrary. The 360 and PS3 were plenty capable of running games at 1080p, it just wasn't a worthwhile endeavor for most devs due to how much had to be sacrificed to get there. Leading up to launch there were countless PS3 fans who thought that they were going to get all their games at 1080p due to Sony's cuckoo PR and they very well could have if they wanted games that looked like crap.
Yet again I'm not saying resolution isn't important and it IS unfortunate to have a game not meet the native resolution of your screen, but it is not the ONLY thing that matters like some here seem to think. That kind of attitude is just another one of those things that leads me to believe that the people that feel that way have very little understanding of what goes into making a good looking game.
Alpha Phoenix
Member
I canceled my preorder and it frankly has nothing to do with this. My backlog is already too much as it is. I will get around to playing the game sometime this summer, but I don't see any point in purchasing it now given my backlog.
In Service
Member
I'm an XBO fan and I'm on the fence about this. Without MP I think I can safely wait and pick it up at a discount later this month once my time with The Divison comes to a close.
Alpha Phoenix
Member
If you have Amazon Prime, you are eligible to buy it at 20% off for up to two weeks post-release. I think that's a good price, but I still can't justify getting the game at launch.
dr_rus
Member
There's nothing wrong with this sort of optimization really. There are some visual anomalies which point to a game not actually being rendered at a true 1080p but otherwise it's a nice way to have 4 times less shading for what is essentially the same quality of geometry.
But if you're asking how in a meaning of why then that's pretty simple to answer: because modern gen consoles are weak all around.
LukasTaves
Member
That shot seems pretty honest actually, the dithered shadows for instance, and the actual games looks very close to that if not better:Yeah, I think people will come to appreciate how the frame is composed beyond the resolution when the full DF analysis comes out. I at least hope they do. If anything, maybe the PC version will convice them of it as there is nothing to concern whine about there so far (graphically at least, win10 store is a whole other box!).
Real life has sadly gotten in the way of everything as of late. And I mean everything
I too think the hyperbole is unwarranted. Though It seems honestly like the xb1 release is not where they targetted their rendering feature budget necessarily, I doubt they were originally thinking "Yeah, let's make the game run at a resolution that people think is last gen (after the whole controversy surround Alan Wake's resolution on xb360) on a console that has been controversial for its performance". Rather, I think they were just trying to make a pretty game, with pretty assets, and pretty effects which they then tempered to still look good on xb1. The early videos and screenshots of the engine in action show how it was obviously targetting some sort of higher-end PC given the resolution and the difference in clarity. I really do not buy the whole thing Phil Spencer said a while back about this game not being originally designed with PC's in mind or whatever. I mean, just look at this screen below... what game has any IQ like this on xb1?
I made an argument once about FFXV (that is the new FF game, right?), that their choices for AA and AF were destroying all their art and effects work. Unlike that though, the draw back from resolution here seem to only affect one area so far with great magnitude, and that is image clarity and high frequency detail. Thankfully, they at least have something to combat the huge stair stepping that 1280X720 really would have. Thankfully the post processing is so abundant. I may not prefer it necessarily, but they are at least trying to mitigate inteligently. They manage to maintain a wide suite of effects in play and did not cut out one of those. That is a great thing. I mean, it is just an xb1, something has to give and it has usually been the resolution. I think xb1 gamers have come to accept that, just as it was acceptable that something like Ass Creed, Battlefront or Rainbow Six were sub-1920X1080 on all platforms. You can see where and why that is so.
The LOD being really close to the camera frustrum or the general lack of high AF is not that surprising honestly as that has been a common things for almost every console game this gen.
----
Interestingly, the news that this game is targetting a lower resolution on xb1 puts the system requirements into perspective, especially the huge gulf between minimum and ultra:
I mean, that really looks like a PC that will be targetting xb1 performance and image quality.
While this:
Will make the game look pretty darn pretty.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-6SlU6wP5Yc&feature=youtu.be
well on the Xbox home screen and games store there has been a constant QB ad for the past month or so( whether highlighting the buy it on Xbox get Windows 10 version, or other game coverage for it etc). So I'd think that anybody that owns an Xbox would've seen it plenty. I see twitch ads for it etc, but I don't really watch tv anymore so I can't say much for commercials
ethomaz
Banned
I'm sure Remedy did try others options including a boost in resolution...
They just couldn't archive optimal performance with better resolutions and the best choice was Temporal Reprojection.
Steverulez
Member
Im sure they did look into various things as you would expect, but it doesn't seem like they were willing to compromise on their vision on the effects etc to do that, which I'm quite happy with.
Head.spawn
Junior Member
I remember when MK8 720p60 was demolished here in GAF for 1 fps drop.... QB is 720p30 with drops and is ok to some people.... This is why i love GAF.
And both games look comparable, I don't know why DF didn't point this out themselves, pretty obvious comparison in hindsight.
Shin-Ra
Junior Member
Virtually all of Microsoft's first party titles have been like $20 off within the first month.
DOWN
Banned
I've had an Xbox One for a year and a half, I love Ryse visually, and I think Quantum Break looks graphically underwhelming during gameplay outside of its time effects. The game just isn't that graphically competitive and the resolution doesn't help.
You're on NeoGAF, remember?
BinaryBear07
Member
This doesn't hurt my choice to buy the game day one. I think the resolution argument is overrated anyway.
Unclever snark.
Uncharted was brought up because of this quote from the Digital Foundry article we're discussing:
Bits N Pieces
Member
Shit! Sorry! Didn't realise you were a developer with insight into Remedy's roadmap for Quantum Break and what they were prioritising for there game.
You talk about wanting a higher resolution above post effects yet you told me the other day that you have no intention of buying the game on any platform.
So do you have an issue with how Remedy are developing Quantum Break or just how developers choose to make games in general?
ethomaz
Banned
That maybe can help a little.
http://www.redgamingtech.com/killzo...tion-temporal-reprojection-shadow-fall-1080p/
It is not upscalled at all.
The render is creating 30 frames per second in 720p but for each frame created it needs to fill the space left to reach a 1080p image... the render store 4 old 720p frames to fit with the new one and create the 1080p screen.
In most cases the old frames will fit the new one just fine but in some cases it will not fit and generate artifacts on the screen.
Killzone used a better tech because they just need to fit the old frames vertically... QB needs to fit the old frames vertically and horizontally.
Think like a big image made by 5 small parts... the center is the actual 720p render and the sides are a closed fit of previous 4 720p frames (it is way more complex... I tried to put in a simple way).
Ninja Sharingan
Banned
So it's 720p but ideally looks much better?