Digital Foundry Article Technical Discussion [2024]

[pjbliverpool]

And all this thanks to the high-end multi-thousand dollar PC graphics cards used by 1% of the market! And for the developers who can't exercise self-control and take these high-end GPUs as their target platform... Bravo!

What if the games were developed in such a way that they run at 1440p plus FSR (this combo gives 4K image quality) and 60 FPS?! Then, to THIS console development, they would add the extras on the PC that the more expensive hardware provides, e.g. full raytracing or stable 120FPS, etc.

Instead, 90% of gamers can play in crappy 720p-1080p image quality. Bravo!

And don't let anyone tell me that you can't make beautiful and spectacular games in high resolution with graphics optimized for console hardware! Because it can.

TBF if you take the target as 30fps which has always been the console target frame rate for these kind of high end AAA graphical showcases, then the consoles are more or less hitting the image quality you're asking for above.

It's only because console gamers have come to expect 60fps options this generation thanks to the lengthy cross gen period that we're seeing such low target resolutions in that mode.

It's always been a case of "want a good experience at 30fps? Get a console... want the same or better experience at 60fps? Get a high end PC". This gen you at least get access to some kind of 60fps experience, you just need to accept the compromises that will inevitably come with it on a fixed platform.

 

[trinibwoy]

TBF if you take the target as 30fps which has always been the console target frame rate for these kind of high end AAA graphical showcases, then the consoles are more or less hitting the image quality you're asking for above.

Yeah Space Marine 2 looks really good on the consoles and doesn’t give up anything really compared to the PC version. Anyone willing to play at 30fps should have a great experience. The biggest issue is crappy upscaling but that should be fixed next generation.

 

[DavidGraham]

The Cryengine has gotten a major update.

 

[davis.anthony]

Sure, but the expectation here is that you can beat or perform equivalently to hardware VRS.

According to the COD developers they did beat the hardware implementation.

Especially in terms of IQ and flexibility.

What COD did was way back before the next generation of consoles were released.

They have used the same method since, and I'm fairly sure Gorilla use the MSAA hardware for their software VRS implementation they used in the PS4 version of Forbidden West.

We’ve not had a proper comparison point on the level of plumbing hardware VRS can have in systems as the consoles have matured

Even the Coalition in their presentation noted that software will always have advantages over a hardware implementation.

 

[QPlayer]

TBF if you take the target as 30fps which has always been the console target frame rate for these kind of high end AAA graphical showcases, then the consoles are more or less hitting the image quality you're asking for above.

It's only because console gamers have come to expect 60fps options this generation thanks to the lengthy cross gen period that we're seeing such low target resolutions in that mode.

It's always been a case of "want a good experience at 30fps? Get a console... want the same or better experience at 60fps? Get a high end PC". This gen you at least get access to some kind of 60fps experience, you just need to accept the compromises that will inevitably come with it on a fixed platform.

However, I played games at 60 FPS that looked pretty good. For example with a SW Battlefront2 at 1800p on a 6TFlops (!!) console and today on a much more advanced 12TFlops console Forza Motorsport 4K/60FPS and 1440p plus FSR 4K image quality 60FPS (in many places) Starfield. And I really enjoy the graphics of these games.

Another interesting thing is that in the generation when 720-1080p was the accepted resolution, our average TV was 32-40 inches. I'm playing on a 65 inch TV today and it's about average. It is unacceptable that due to the technically exaggerated graphics, if you want 60 FPS with an average multiplatform game, you have to play at such a low resolution... This is nonsense, and I am not even willing to lower the good graphics/ good resolution/60FPS experience. Fortunately, there are games like this for these consoles, and I play those games.

 

[iroboto]

According to the COD developers they did beat the hardware implementation.

Especially in terms of IQ and flexibility.



They have used the same method since, and I'm fairly sure Gorilla use the MSAA hardware for their software VRS implementation they used in the PS4 version of Forbidden West.



Even the Coalition in their presentation noted that software will always have advantages over a hardware implementation.

The major assumption here is that every developer and engine operates the same or has the same resources or setup. Which frankly isn’t accurate.

Secondly, I went through the slide deck, they only indicated the potential that it could outperform hardware VRS, but only that it was more flexible and could provide better IQ. And once again, we are talking about the studios who are the most well funded studios in the world here versus others who may not have the budget or time for this.

 

[raytracingfan]

And all this thanks to the high-end multi-thousand dollar PC graphics cards used by 1% of the market! And for the developers who can't exercise self-control and take these high-end GPUs as their target platform... Bravo!

How about 1440p plus FSR (this combination provides 4K image quality) and 60 FPS on console standard? Then, on the PC, the extras provided by the more expensive hardware would also be included for this console development, e.g. full ray tracing or stable 120FPS etc.

Instead, 90% of gamers can play in crappy 720p-1080p image quality. Bravo!

And don't let anyone tell me that you can't make beautiful and spectacular games in high resolution with graphics optimized for console hardware! Because it can.

The way I see it, consoles are still the target platform, and the target frame rate is 30 FPS, just like the previous two generations of consoles. Some games add Performance Mode due to consumer demand, but there's no way to double the frame rate from the original target without serious compromises. Space Marine 2 is a game that I feel is entitled to target 30 FPS on console. Having that many enemies on screen at once is a genuinely "next-gen" feature. It would have been impossible on last-gen consoles, and it pushes current-gen consoles to the limit.

 

[davis.anthony]

The major assumption here is that every developer and engine operates the same or has the same resources or setup. Which frankly isn’t accurate.

Secondly, I went through the slide deck, they only indicated the potential that it could outperform hardware VRS, but only that it was more flexible and could provide better IQ. And once again, we are talking about the studios who are the most well funded studios in the world here versus others who may not have the budget or time for this.

I'm just surprised we've not seen it used more due to how it can peed up ray tracing.

 

[snc]

. Having that many enemies on screen at once is a genuinely "next-gen" feature. It would have been impossible on last-gen consoles, and it pushes current-gen consoles to the limit.

days gone pushed quite big hordes on ps4 jaguar

 

[davis.anthony]

Having that many enemies on screen at once is a genuinely "next-gen" feature. It would have been impossible on last-gen consoles, and it pushes current-gen consoles to the limit.

Bruh, PS2 was pushing that 20 years ago in games like Dynasty Warriors.

So it's not really a 'next gen' feature.

It's more a 'rediscovered' feature.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Having that many enemies on screen at once is a genuinely "next-gen" feature. It would have been impossible on last-gen consoles, and it pushes current-gen consoles to the limit.

In what way? Seeing as we're talking CPU. Swarm mechanics are low demand. Physics can just using bounding spheres. It starts to get demanding processing the animation of thousands of skinned models, but that's a GPU thing nowadays.

 

[digitalwanderer]

Having that many enemies on screen at once is a genuinely "next-gen" feature. It would have been impossible on last-gen consoles, and it pushes current-gen consoles to the limit.

It's not next-gen so much as using a game engine designed for large numbers of enemies. Saber used the swarm engine in Space Marines 2 which was the same they used in World War Z. If I recall correctly it can render up to 400 enemies onscreen at once.

 

[XboxKING]

The warhammer game being discussed is a typical Ubisoft game in the way it performs.

I would only use Ubisoft titles to measure platform power when arguing in bad faith to be honest

 

[iroboto]

I'm just surprised we've not seen it used more due to how it can peed up ray tracing.

??

I’m not sure how much it can speed up Ray tracing. We don’t know what is causing the bottlenecks here. VRS only resolves compute bound issues.

 

[XboxKING]

??

Who said anything about it speeding up Ray tracing. We don’t know what is causing the bottlenecks here. VRS only resolves compute bound issues.

I believe he meant “peeing” up ray tracing which I think means to lower its quality or visual appeal

 

[davis.anthony]

I'm not sure how much it can speed up Ray tracing.

By reducing the amount of rays you have to shoot out at pixels.

 

[raytracingfan]

Every visible enemy is shootable, some of the ranged weapons are non-hitscan, and hitboxes are more accurate than an AABB or bounding sphere. So either every enemy has a proper hitbox at all times or there is some mechanism for calculating hitboxes as needed.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

By reducing the amount of rays you have to shoot out at pixels.

That's not something I'd associate with VRS.

You also don't shoot rays at pixels, but shoot rays to/from geometry to determine what's around, and integrate that into a surface value to rasterise into a pixel value.

Every visible enemy is shootable, some of the ranged weapons are non-hitscan, and hitboxes are more accurate than an AABB or bounding sphere.

How can you tell?! It's just wall to wall bugs AFAICS.

So either every enemy has a proper hitbox at all times or there is some mechanism for calculating hitboxes as needed.

I'd expect a rough approximation at distance and more accurate hit geometry up close. It's the principle of LOD applied to physics.

 

[iroboto]

By reducing the amount of rays you have to shoot out at pixels.

I don’t think you need VRS to do that in particular, as RT bottlenecks are mainly around accessing the BVH and or updating it. Once intersected you can reuse rasterized values to the VRS area.

But I am following your train of thought.

 

[davis.anthony]

That's not something I'd associate with VRS.

There's a few articles about it on good old Google.

VRS is one of those performance enhancing features that's gained no traction which is crazy.

You also don't shoot rays at pixels, but shoot rays to/from geometry to determine what's around, and integrate that into a surface value to rasterise into a pixel value.

But you still shot out 'n' number of rays per pixel, using the shading rates of VRS allows that to be reduced on some surfaces.