Encyclopedia Brown & The Mysterious Case of the PS4 and the Missing Anisotropic Filtering

Status
Not open for further replies.
You do realize the game was often running over 30fps and causing stuttering? Your narrative is not adding up. The devs were under no obligation to spend money and man hours on a released game that was in a perfectly working state. It was not a broken mess like Unity causing a huge PR shitstorm. Most everyone was happy with the graphics and performance for Dying Light.

That dialogue works both ways. You don't know that they weren't already working on that specific patch prior to launch and it just didn't make it in time for day 1.
Anyway, if you guys want to believe that there is a SDK problem or that developers are incompetent at changing the value of AF for textures and are waiting for proof of it, you guys are welcome to sit here and wait. I don't think you'll ever get an answer.
I'm moving on from this topic.
 
I think Strider was one?

edit - here's something I posted earlier in the thread:

Dying Light is running at a higher resolution (1080p vs 1540v1080) with better texture streaming and frame-rate (I've also heard it becomes a slide-show at stages on XBO) and more tearing, with XBO it looks like they dropped the resolution to hit a reasonable framerate.
So why wasn't AF dropped from XBO to boost performance would be a question worth asking IMHO.

With Saints Row both versions are 1080p PS4 version performs notably better.
So why wasn't AF added to PS4 version - would it have been worse than the XBO version - so much so that it's be unplayable - it doesn't sound like it.

With Thief PS4 is running at a higher resolution (1080p v 900p) PS4 also has AO, XBO has a worse performance.
So why not drop AF on XBO it was also noted performance wasn't great on PS4, so why add AO?

Murdered Soul Suspect is an interesting one. Both at 1080p it seems the PS4 version had plenty of headroom running at an unlocked 60fps with no AF, they had AF and locked the game to 30FPs on XBO.
It seems odd that as PS4 suffered due to the unlocked nature of the game that they didn't opt to lock it at 30fps like the XBO and add AF - parity and all that!?

Strider - 1080p, 60fps locked on both - no AF on PS4 but why, there seems little reason to think this has been done for performance issues.
 
Sniper Elite 3 has much better AF and better framerate on...PS4. :runaway:

B0rb.png


And on this one the devs even quickly acknowledged / confirmed to DF that the XB1 had reduced AF compared to PS4! How insolent of them to openly communicate about any AF issue... how dare they? :LOL:
 
Sniper Elite 3 has much better AF and better framerate on...PS4. :runaway:

B0rb.png


And on this one the devs even quickly acknowledged / confirmed to DF that the XB1 had reduced AF compared to PS4! How insolent of them to openly communicate about any AF issue... how dare they? :LOL:
This also confirms that you can expect a performance impact from adding AF. I have the game on the Xbox One, and I like the gameplay and stuff, but it is technically horrible on the X1, and I didn't even begin to look for flaws, I thought it didn't run at 60 fps and looked a bit muddy to me in the distance. Now I know why
 
This also confirms that you can expect a performance impact from adding AF. I have the game on the Xbox One, and I like the gameplay and stuff, but it is technically horrible on the X1, and I didn't even begin to look for flaws, I thought it didn't run at 60 fps and looked a bit muddy to me in the distance. Now I know why

Lol, how does that confirm anything?
 
I guess the implication is AF was reduced to get the game running better therefore it does impact performance?

I don't think anyone has ever said it's free, the question in this thread was about if the PS4 had an issue with AF and here we have more evidence that it doesn't!
 
Yeah but it's understandable that they tried to improve the performance as much as possible (as little of a performance hit as it may have been) because it looks like they went for resolution parity, and the XB1 suffered for it with considerably worse performance and constant tearing. In the PS4's examples, the PS4 versions usually run slightly better, have a higher resolution and sometimes better effects.
8xAF was added to Dying Light with no measurable performance hit, and they even improved the LOD according to NX gamer.

I agree with DrJay24, I don't think that really proves anything. As you said goonergaz, no one said AF was free. I just don't think it's the reason why the odd PS4 game has no AF when factoring in all of the evidence.
 
Last edited:
I guess the implication is AF was reduced to get the game running better therefore it does impact performance?

That is poor logic.

Reduced AF and frame rate on one system compared to a completely different system does not confirm anything except different hardware and software will perform differently. If anything it is antithetical to his idea, the one with higher AF performs better than the one with lower!
 
Texture filtering is also particularly impressive for a current-gen console game, with both PS4 and Xbox One using 16x anisotropic filtering - or something close to it.

From the Bordelands DF faceoff. PS4 version has better framerate also.
 
Last edited:
It was hinted in a newer post that devs are being reminded of the proper way to use AF functions, and a possible future update to make things easier properly use it.
 
Good news but it's a pity about past titles though. Would be up to the developer/publisher to decide if they can be bothered going back and patching it in.
 
It was hinted in a newer post that devs are being reminded of the proper way to use AF functions, and a possible future update to make things easier properly use it.
Yea I wonder if this is a symptom of everyone being used to doing it the DirectX/OpenGL way, and then finding out too last minute that's not how it's supposed to be done using GNM.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top