I don't personally think they are making a poor decision, prioritizing resolution instead of fidelity isn't something most gamers will appreciate. That deficit in shader cores and memory performance is bound to create some hurdles, but I feel that for the majority of gamers, parity in visuals and framerate would be preferable compared to sacrificing that for a higher resolution. Im not sure why some people think poorly of the developers when the X1 build isn't on par with the PS4 build, its well documented that the PS4 has a better GPU and easier to use memory system. The chasm in resources is poking its head up in game development. Im sure with enough time and man power, they could probably get these X1 builds to run pretty well in 1080p, but its hard to dedicate that much manpower to a single build of a multiplat game, when with no extra expense the X1 will run the game at the same settings, with a lower resolution being the only compromise. I think 720p with some quality AA is still considered pretty good to the majority of console gamers, PC gamers is a whole different ball game.
Konami Fox Engine and its Games.
- Thread starter Shortbread
- Start date
The picture is legit... probably pulled from the Konami site now, after some backlash from the XB1 community.
PES 2015 Resolution Superior on PS4
- yearly sports game meaning incredibly short dev time
- first version for PS4/One
- with relatively new engine (only other game out on same engine running @ 720p on the One)
- not a high caliber game like Destiny (no attention from Ms)
- Japanese Dev (probably not as entrenched in "resolution-wars" as western devs)
I think they underestimated the shit they would get for 720p, Fifa being 1080p on both probably doesn't help either.
- first version for PS4/One
- with relatively new engine (only other game out on same engine running @ 720p on the One)
- not a high caliber game like Destiny (no attention from Ms)
- Japanese Dev (probably not as entrenched in "resolution-wars" as western devs)
I think they underestimated the shit they would get for 720p, Fifa being 1080p on both probably doesn't help either.
It's the unfortunate politics of the situation. PS4 owners demand no parity, and in this case no parity was given.
I don't really understand how parity improves the experience for anyone. With parity, X1 gamers aren't getting a better game than they would have otherwise. For the developers, I can understand why they might choose to hit the middle ground. If they want to target the X1, then moving that content to the PS4 should be pretty easy, thus making development more efficient. Just because they may choose to make X1 the target spec, doesn't mean X1 gamers are getting superior versions than if the PS4 was the target spec.
It honestly seems to me as if Konami have absorbed the lessons of the PS3/360 era (go deferred and go hard) and planned their engine around that. Given that deferred engines dominated the landscape towards the end of the last gen I can't help but wonder why MS thought that 32MB ESRAM would be enough or were they banking on the 'PS2 effect' where being the dominant platform in the marketplace means everyone dances to your tune or fails?
To my understanding Fox and other deferred engines require more bytes per pixel which may be why they struggle to fit a 1080p render target into 32MB ESRAM, is this accurate or am I way off target? Recalling the PS360 era a great deal of devs sacrificed alpha resolution to fit into the fixed 256MB VRAM the PS3 offered, are similar lower Bpp strategies possible for FOX or is there a floor to this kind of thing? Reading Sebbi's posts in the past it seems as if there are a lot of different pixel formats (float versus INT, etc) that can help with this stuff des it seem likely that these or similar tricks could be applied here?
Rambly post I know but I find this kind of stuff fascinating so I'd like to take a moment to express my thanks to those who have shared their knowledge so generously over the years they've been here as I've had a whale of a time (barely) understanding the amazing volume of detailed yet entirely readable tech posts over the past year or so (those archives, I will conquer them one day!).
To my understanding Fox and other deferred engines require more bytes per pixel which may be why they struggle to fit a 1080p render target into 32MB ESRAM, is this accurate or am I way off target? Recalling the PS360 era a great deal of devs sacrificed alpha resolution to fit into the fixed 256MB VRAM the PS3 offered, are similar lower Bpp strategies possible for FOX or is there a floor to this kind of thing? Reading Sebbi's posts in the past it seems as if there are a lot of different pixel formats (float versus INT, etc) that can help with this stuff des it seem likely that these or similar tricks could be applied here?
Rambly post I know but I find this kind of stuff fascinating so I'd like to take a moment to express my thanks to those who have shared their knowledge so generously over the years they've been here as I've had a whale of a time (barely) understanding the amazing volume of detailed yet entirely readable tech posts over the past year or so (those archives, I will conquer them one day!).
You mistake me. No parity was given has nothing to do with the spec of both machines. Just no parity. I was just trying to shine a light on what many feel is a touchy subject.
Loud owners have demanded no parity, their claim is that PS4 >>>> X1 therefore therefore parity should never be reached, therefore lazy devs if parity is reached. But it ignores the obvious which that all developers set a target for their games, and the target is often not about pushing the graphics envelope to the next dimension. In this case there is no parity so much so that PS3 and Xbox One are running fairly close settings.
The PS4 was prioritized and X1 was an afterthought. If hypothetically MS were to send in engineers and managed to resolve the resolution issue and parity occurs the argument will once again take a shift into 'well you weren't pushing the PS4 hard enough'. But the target for PS4 was set in stone, they were prepared to release X1 with 720p. The argument that X1 holds back PS4 is once again, false, though many will accuse it of being true.
Thus the stupid console wars continue. It's a moving target that will never be satisfied.
This discussion has been beaten to death, we have full discussions here as to why parity exists, and yes it certainly helps developers if parity does exist, otherwise you'll be chasing a moving target that never stops moving on the whim of owners who demand their hardware be treated better for no better reason but to reinforce their purchasing decision.
The complain I got in this thread are lazy developers because XB1 was not optimized to run MGS5 at 1080p
You have no idea what you are talking about (unless you actually have sources within Kojima productions). FOX engine is multi platform and seem to have been in development since MGS4 was released.
Well that's the funny thing right, because Destiny devs were being slammed for being lazy because they weren't utilizing the full capability of the PS4. In a VERY similar fashion Destiny was running 900p with less effects until retail. They were likely ready to release like this as well.
No matter what the devs are lazy, they can't catch a break. You set a target, you try to reach it, you're lazy if you let parity happen you're lazy if you don't.
My feeling is that if 2 consumer groups pay the exact same amount for the same game, you'd only expect them to be reasonably close to each other. What you paid for the console should not be associated with any game.
You just try your best, it's your own work right? Why sign the dotted line on work you aren't proud of, unless you just ran out of time. It's a bit of a shame, it's not that the devs were lazy, I just hope that they didn't cave into consumer pressure about there being 'non' parity - they didn't want the backlash, and went that route and they're still getting backlash just differently.
Fair I was projecting; seeing PS3 and Xbox One take on the same resolution is a little stretch for me, but for the sake of proper discussion, I'll take my remark back. Do note that other full blown deferred renderers are 900p. ie Fable Legends running UE4 (UE4 which likely was also not made with esram in mind when they were developing it). Ryse @ 900p... I'm sure we can put up a decent list of games running 900p with deferred rendering on X1.
So while I get that the engine is likely not designed well with X1 architecture in mind, there is proof that the esram can at least fit 900p frame buffers.
Last edited by a moderator:
Less lazy devs and more Kojima favoring one particular platform. The same thing happen with Metal Gear (before Solid was added) as the MSX2 was Kojima preferred platform for the first two games.
Kojima doesn't seem to be in favor of multiplat support. Aren't Rising and GZ the first and only times a Metal Gear game has been released simultaneously on multiple consoles?
Kojima doesn't seem to be in favor of multiplat support. Aren't Rising and GZ the first and only times a Metal Gear game has been released simultaneously on multiple consoles?
steveOrino
Regular
Its not lazy devs trust me.
When my friend worked at EA years back he had very very harsh words for the PS3. I am not saying X1 is anything like the early development hell of the PS3 but when one platform has specific shortcomings it adds extra work against already tight time schedules just to get the game code working at playable framerates.
In general I hate the lazy developer bogeyman arguments because of the ignorance behind them. There simply isn't enough time and money to make sure everyone is going to be happy.
When my friend worked at EA years back he had very very harsh words for the PS3. I am not saying X1 is anything like the early development hell of the PS3 but when one platform has specific shortcomings it adds extra work against already tight time schedules just to get the game code working at playable framerates.
In general I hate the lazy developer bogeyman arguments because of the ignorance behind them. There simply isn't enough time and money to make sure everyone is going to be happy.
Last edited by a moderator:
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-tech-analysis-mgs5-fox-engine
From Eurogamer Fox Engine takes a different approach to lighting than the traditional deferred renderer.
As for me benig called out earlier by Tuna by not knowing if X1 took a backseat during development, I'll just bring in this quote from Eurogamer: I just wouldn't be surprised if this engine was entirely tuned for Sony architecture.
Let me know if you find Xbox One in that sentence.
How could there be Xbox One in that sentence when XBOne hadn't been announced yet?
The MSX versions of Metal Gear 1&2 where the only ones Kojima worked on.
I think the point you were trying to make is that Kojima productions do not give a shit about the XBOne version.
In the real world however, Kojipro could not talk about the XBOne version since the XBOne hadn't been announced.