PS4 and Xbox One resolution / frame rate discussion

[XorpiZ]

Yet another 1080p Xbox One game, are the developers using the updated DX12 yet when coding their games?

 

DX12 isn't released yet (not the final version at least). The devs are probably just learning to work with the eSRAM buffer.

[Hedon]

Yet another 1080p Xbox One game, are the developers using the updated DX12 yet when coding their games?

Negative.

[123456789A]

Yet another 1080p Xbox One game, are the developers using the updated DX12 yet when coding their games?

 

No, but maybe when that starts happening, there won't be much of a point to this thread anymore.

[dipsylalapo Supervisor]

No, but maybe when that starts happening, there won't be much of a point to this thread anymore.

 

Topic title will be changed to - Which version of game x has more blades of grass on screen....

[Jarrichvdv]

DX12 isn't released yet (not the final version at least). The devs are probably just learning to work with the eSRAM buffer.

Dev kits have been in the hands of developers for several years now. And it starts to show. Fallout 4 probably wouldn't have been 1080p if it were a console launch title for the Xbox One.

The improvements and optimisations achieved by developers is really starting to show on the Xbox One side, and we all benefit because of it.

[123456789A]

Topic title will be changed to - Which version of game x has more blades of grass on screen....

 

While both the PlayStation 4 and Xbox One displayed the scene at a solid 60 fps at 1080p, we noticed a variation in our grass analysis. The Xbox One version uses a trick to render thicker Kentucky grass blades while the PlayStation 4 displays many more smaller blades of Fescue grass. Analysis showed PlayStation 4 rendering 86,741 blades per frame on average while the Xbox averaged only 62,405. However, we favored the appearance of the lawn on the Xbox One due to the texture of the grass and the fact that the lawn had been properly edged.

 

Source: Digital Foundry

[soniqstylz]

While both the PlayStation 4 and Xbox One displayed the scene at a solid 60 fps at 1080p, we noticed a variation in our grass analysis. The Xbox One version uses a trick to render thicker Kentucky grass blades while the PlayStation 4 displays many more smaller blades of Fescue grass. Analysis showed PlayStation 4 rendering 86,741 blades per frame on average while the Xbox averaged only 62,405. However, we favored the appearance of the lawn on the Xbox One due to the texture of the grass and the fact that the lawn had been properly edged.

 

Source: Digital Foundry

 

 

"LAZY DEVS!  MS PAID THEM!"

[vcfan]

Payday 2

 

However, in rendering terms at least, Overkill has delivered. Both console versions deliver a native 1080p framebuffer

 

Texture resolution is reasonably high across all platforms, but the lack of anisotropic filtering lets the PS4 game down (trilinear filtering is used instead), resulting in a clear loss of fine details across flat surfaces a few feet away from the camera. By comparison, both Xbox One and PC operate with 16x AF enabled, allowing for more detail to present further into the scene and at oblique angles.

 

While the lack of a potential 60fps experience is a little disappointing for an online-centric action title, frame-rates is generally solid across both platforms with the game solidly sustaining the desired 30fps in more action-packed scenes.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2015-payday2-crimewave-edition-face-off

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

"LAZY DEVS!  MS PAID THEM!"

 

More like "I DON'T CARE ABOUT GRAPHICAL DIFFERENCES!*"

 

*posts in this topic

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

Arkham Knight

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2015-batman-arkham-knight-on-ps4-is-a-technical-tour-de-force

Proper face off between the three platforms

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2015-batman-arkham-knight-face-off

[SnoopZ]

Batman looks great on both consoles.

[George P Global Moderator]

It does, when you're actually playing the game I doubt you'll notice the minor differences, i'd be too busy kicking butt as the batman than trying to find what looks off. 

 

With owning the last 3 batman games on the 360 I'm leaning towards getting AK on the Xbox One, specially with how broke the PC version is, though I'm in no rush atm to get the game in general, might be best to just wait for the GOTY edition for all the DLC, that season pass price is not to my liking.

[Hedon]

Uncharted 4 single player now confirmed to be only 30fps:

 

http://www.gamespot.com/articles/uncharted-4-single-player-is-1080p30fps-photo-mode/1100-6428583/

[Skiver Veteran]

 

 

"If we wanted to hit a locked 60fps, there's a lot of optimizations in the environments that would have to happen," Newman explained. "This would make each level take longer to make. The same amount of geometry would take longer to make because it would have to be so heavily optimized. And so that could end up having story repercussions. 'We want to have this scene, but we don't have the time to make the environment.' It's a feature, like any other, and you have to consider it against everything else."

It's understandable, but it's a shame Devs are given such strict deadlines that they have to compromise things to get the product out. However given a choice, I think story > 60fps is probably the better choice when it comes to a game like this.

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

It's understandable, but it's a shame Devs are given such strict deadlines that they have to compromise things to get the product out. However given a choice, I think story > 60fps is probably the better choice when it comes to a game like this.

Bit of a wishy washy answer but nowhere near as bad as its for cinematic reasons. The real reason is clearly the graphical fidelity cannot be done at a locked 60. It is NDs first ps4 game but when you look at the graphics I doubt you can say I'm sure dev x could have done it at 60. If ND can't no one else on the PS4 can. I'm sure we will see what sacrifices have to be made in MP to hit 60 at 1080.

UC1 through to TLoU were the hardware showcases for the PS3 all at 720/30. Each one looked better than the last, but each time they opted to push fidelity over keeping the graphics similar and aiming for 720/60.

[George P Global Moderator]

It's understandable, but it's a shame Devs are given such strict deadlines that they have to compromise things to get the product out. However given a choice, I think story > 60fps is probably the better choice when it comes to a game like this.

 

It's also a testament to how underpowered the consoles are, when they're trying to make this big name title exclusive look as good as they can, and seeing how it's already been pushed back before, something's got to give, in this case it's the framerate. 

 

Optimizing the levels, in this case, my guess, would probably mean cutting down on detail, and some size, so that less has to be drawn (using creative tricks of the trade) so that you can push out the scene at a faster framerate.

[dipsylalapo Supervisor]

It's understandable, but it's a shame Devs are given such strict deadlines that they have to compromise things to get the product out. However given a choice, I think story > 60fps is probably the better choice when it comes to a game like this.

 

Massive shame, but like you said understandable. If they think that it's possible with optimization it seems like it's just a case of getting used to hardware and tools so for the next game we'll probably see them hit that magical mark. 

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

Massive shame, but like you said understandable. If they think that it's possible with optimization it seems like it's just a case of getting used to hardware and tools so for the next game we'll probably see them hit that magical mark.

I just replied before you but I don't think so. I bet TLoU 2 is 1080/30, but in return is a better looking game than UC4. I'd bet on their MP only portions going for 60. Doubt they'll ever do an unlocked framerate as screen tearing is horrible.

[+Asmodai MVC]

Bit of a wishy washy answer but nowhere near as bad as its for cinematic reasons. The real reason is clearly the graphical fidelity cannot be done at a locked 60. It is NDs first ps4 game but when you look at the graphics I doubt you can say I'm sure dev x could have done it at 60. If ND can't no one else on the PS4 can. I'm sure we will see what sacrifices have to be made in MP to hit 60 at 1080.

UC1 through to TLoU were the hardware showcases for the PS3 all at 720/30. Each one looked better than the last, but each time they opted to push fidelity over keeping the graphics similar and aiming for 720/60.

 

Naughty Dog is the home of the Sony ICE team who has the most in depth knowledge of the hardware and low level APIs.

Their games are indeed intended to showcase what the hardware can do and it's really a shame that they can't hit 60fps.

I totally agree that if ND can't do it no one else can (right now) but the APIs will evolve over the consoles life and better techniques will be developed.

Just as there is a big difference in Uncharted 1 and The Last of Us on the PS3 I expect later games for the PS4 will improve as well.

[Skiver Veteran]

I just replied before you but I don't think so. I bet TLoU 2 is 1080/30, but in return is a better looking game than UC4. I'd bet on their MP only portions going for 60. Doubt they'll ever do an unlocked framerate as screen tearing is horrible.

 

I have to admit, I'm struggling to understand what part your disagreeing with

[dipsylalapo Supervisor]

I have to admit, I'm struggling to understand what part your disagreeing with

 

AB was disgreeing with me when I said that future games of a similar calibre (Uncharted 5 and TLOU 2) will hit 1080/60. He thinks that developers will prefer to hit 1080/30 and continue to increase the visual fidelity. Using TLOU 2 as an example

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

I have to admit, I'm struggling to understand what part your disagreeing with

That I don't think it'll be quite as simple as they'll get it done with their next game. The hardware this gen is easier to work with than CELL, so I don't think the margins for improvement will be as great as some of the shoddy 1st attempts at PS3 games, versus late life cycle. ND will continue to improve but a locked 60 at 1080 will not be easy for them if they continue prioritizing making the best looking game.

MGS5 is a good example of a great looking game at 60, but up close its not going to go into the level of detail ND do. That's the compromise of hardware.

 

The standards that are best to try and reach are obviously a native resolution so there is no upscaling, and then either 60 locked, or 30 locked. Those are your two native framerates so to speak, where as 1080p is a pretty static goal, 720p TV's hardly exist. When you introduce unlocked framerates you really need to be running at 30 or 60 90% of the time with small dips rarely (- 10~15%). If you've got a 60 unlocked going into the 40's or high 30's, it can become quite jarring or introduce really ugly screen tearing. Maybe if TLoU 2 can be 60 unlocked, but in the category I mentioned, we'll see it. ND pride themselves on high quality work though, so unless its a dip here or there of a few FPS I doubt you'll see them accept it - Just move down to locked 30 and up the visual fidelity at 30.

 

 

AB was disgreeing with me when I said that future games of a similar calibre (Uncharted 5 and TLOU 2) will hit 1080/60. He thinks that developers will prefer to hit 1080/30 and continue to increase the visual fidelity. Using TLOU 2 as an example 

 

 

Not all devs, mainly ND. They're the poster boys for everyone waiting to see what the next best looking game is going to look like on the PS. Others like Kojima have understandably and preferably gone with what can we do at 1080/60 and stuck to that.

[Skiver Veteran]

That I don't think it'll be quite as simple as they'll get it done with their next game. The hardware this gen is easier to work with than CELL, so I don't think the margins for improvement will be as great as some of the shoddy 1st attempts at PS3 games, versus late life cycle. ND will continue to improve but a locked 60 at 1080 will not be easy for them if they continue prioritizing making the best looking game.

MGS5 is a good example of a great looking game at 60, but up close its not going to go into the level of detail ND do. That's the compromise of hardware.

 

The standards that are best to try and reach are obviously a native resolution so there is no upscaling, and then either 60 locked, or 30 locked. When you introduce unlocked framerates you really need to be running at 30 or 60 90% of the time with small dips rarely (- 10~15%). If you've got a 60 unlocked going into the 40's or high 30's, it can become quite jarring or introduce really ugly screen tearing. Maybe if TLoU 2 can be 60 unlocked, but in the category I mentioned, we'll see it. ND pride themselves on high quality work though, so unless its a dip here or there of a few FPS I doubt you'll see them accept it - Just move down to locked 30 and up the visual fidelity at 30.

 

I didn't (can't speak for dipsy, but I don't think he did either) say otherwise

My point is that ND are saying that with the time available, they can't make the game as detailed as you mention AND get to a solid 60 FPS with the time they have. My point is that this is a horrible case that the publisher wants a product out regardless of whether it could be "better".

I'm not in anyway suggesting that the game will be in anyway lesser because of this, just more that the developers aren't allowed to truly reach their limits because of a simple thing as time.

 

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

I didn't (can't speak for dipsy, but I don't think he did either) say otherwise

My point is that ND are saying that with the time available, they can't make the game as detailed as you mention AND get to a solid 60 FPS with the time they have. My point is that this is a horrible case that the publisher wants a product out regardless of whether it could be "better".

I'm not in anyway suggesting that the game will be in anyway lesser because of this, just more that the developers aren't allowed to truly reach their limits because of a simple thing as time.

 

 

I know, but I don't buy that answer as much as it comes across on face value. TLoU came out in 2013, and we've already had a UC4 delay. Sony don't push or pressure ND, or else you'd have seen UC4 rushed out for this year to avoid the internet saying Sony has no games for 2015. I just do not think it's easy for them to make a game in the vein of UC/TLoU at 60FPS, and time alone simply won't make that a reality. The PS4 has it's limits. As I pointed out above, even on the PS3 they didn't opt to expand to 720/60, they kept 720/30 the whole way through and just made the games prettier.

[theyarecomingforyou]

I know, but I don't buy that answer as much as it comes across on face value. TLoU came out in 2013, and we've already had a UC4 delay. Sony don't push or pressure ND, or else you'd have seen UC4 rushed out for this year to avoid the internet saying Sony has no games for 2015. I just do not think it's easy for them to make a game in the vein of UC/TLoU at 60FPS, and time alone simply won't make that a reality. The PS4 has it's limits. As I pointed out above, even on the PS3 they didn't opt to expand to 720/60, they kept 720/30 the whole way through and just made the games prettier.

Exactly. We don't know what 'optimisations' would be required for UC4 to hit 60fps but I imagine they'd be substantial and would have a noticeable impact on visual fidelity. One cannot simply double the framerate. If they could hit 60fps they would, as that's important for PR these days. Look at the issues that The Witcher 3 had just hitting 30fps on both consoles.