Current Generation Games Analysis Technical Discussion [2020-2021] [XBSX|S, PS5, PC]
- Thread starter Shortbread
- Start date
- Status
There’s so many use cases VRS can be used like for Gears when zoomed up on Kaits face they didn’t need to render around her and behind her so VRS allowed more detail on her face. I can devs use it for moments DoF is used and anything in the DoF vrs will be used allowing more detail in what being looked at and better performance. Great times ahead with all the tech being made in conjunction with each other
Not to mention the ability to render specific areas of the screen that need it at a higher than baseline resolution.
I don't understand why we keep going through this, its just one or two posters who pretend vrs is bad, invent vrs as a reason for why screenshots of unrelated games look bad, etc. Even so since I can't resist taking part...
On the 120fps mode for doom, per DF:
Some other things we know about VRS are that tier 1 VRS really isn't that great (and has hardware support hacks on older hardware), and that according to some devs (and common sense) it's less necessary on a deferred renderer, where you have a lot more control over what screen pixels you do which calculations on.
That said, clustered forward renderers are amazing for all of the stuff this forum usually cares about -- super high res (limited bandwidth concerns compared to deferred), high polygon counts, and super high framerates (just look at doom E which has some of the highest polygon counts, most lighting effects, etc, of any AAA game, and runs at 300+ fps on a normal PC setup). We already know some major devs that prefer them (id, infinity ward, avalanche), and I expect we'll see more as the generation continues.
Also, we've seen at least one major deferred title (gears 5, a ms first party title) use vrs tier 2 to great effect. Maybe that was a totally unnecessary tech demo, maybe its cheaper labor wise, maybe it actually out performs... but who cares, we at least have proof that its a valid tool in the toolbox even for deferred renderers.
This is a good hardware feature. That was honestly obvious before any games came out using it, because it's a technique people already have been using for years that has a hardware specific implementation now -- those are almost always popular. But even if it sees relatively little use, plenty of other niche features (like tessellation, certain posters here's favorite hardware accelerated feature since an amazing looking ps5 launch title came out) see enough use to be worth the silicon.
Edit: One more thing. I don't really think Gavin Stevens counts as any kind of an expert. I actually have a little personal history with him (nothing negative) but even without that I think its pretty clear he's not particularly experienced. He's a hobbyist gamedev who has been working on one game for like 10 years. His opinion is as valid as anybody who has gotten the code up and running (aka, more valid than any of us), but I don't think people without shipped titles or AAA work should be presented as if they're super knowledgeable.
On the 120fps mode for doom, per DF:
That should be enough to feel pretty confident vrs is doing its job of raising performance headroom without looking terrible. Even if you can zoom into screenshots and find lower res, if its pushing a pixel count between 1584p and 1800p, but the low res pixels are all areas devs intentionally chose as needing less resolution, it's a big win.
Some other things we know about VRS are that tier 1 VRS really isn't that great (and has hardware support hacks on older hardware), and that according to some devs (and common sense) it's less necessary on a deferred renderer, where you have a lot more control over what screen pixels you do which calculations on.
That said, clustered forward renderers are amazing for all of the stuff this forum usually cares about -- super high res (limited bandwidth concerns compared to deferred), high polygon counts, and super high framerates (just look at doom E which has some of the highest polygon counts, most lighting effects, etc, of any AAA game, and runs at 300+ fps on a normal PC setup). We already know some major devs that prefer them (id, infinity ward, avalanche), and I expect we'll see more as the generation continues.
Also, we've seen at least one major deferred title (gears 5, a ms first party title) use vrs tier 2 to great effect. Maybe that was a totally unnecessary tech demo, maybe its cheaper labor wise, maybe it actually out performs... but who cares, we at least have proof that its a valid tool in the toolbox even for deferred renderers.
This is a good hardware feature. That was honestly obvious before any games came out using it, because it's a technique people already have been using for years that has a hardware specific implementation now -- those are almost always popular. But even if it sees relatively little use, plenty of other niche features (like tessellation, certain posters here's favorite hardware accelerated feature since an amazing looking ps5 launch title came out) see enough use to be worth the silicon.
Edit: One more thing. I don't really think Gavin Stevens counts as any kind of an expert. I actually have a little personal history with him (nothing negative) but even without that I think its pretty clear he's not particularly experienced. He's a hobbyist gamedev who has been working on one game for like 10 years. His opinion is as valid as anybody who has gotten the code up and running (aka, more valid than any of us), but I don't think people without shipped titles or AAA work should be presented as if they're super knowledgeable.
Last edited:
D
Deleted member 13524
Guest
Sony has a bunch of patents on foveated rendering and the rumors on its usage for PSVR 2 using it keep piling up:
Sony even dedicated a substantial amount of die area on the PS5 SoC to get a second video output next to the USB-C controllers, just to be able to use a VR headset without a separate box:
(top right)
It would be nonsensical if they didn't have a plan for some form of foveated rendering, which is much more important for VR than TV/monitor output.
Silent_Buddha
Legend
That's one way to look at it, however with VRS:
- Dumbly just apply VRS to any dark area of the screen. Not a good implementation.
- Carefully apply it to areas where it won't be noticeable without a screenshot.
- Use the extra performance for extra resolution, or...
- Use the extra performance to increase quality in a different and more importantly far more visible area of the scene, or...
- Use the extra performance to iron out potential drops in performance.
Basically if you only play games to look at zoomed in screenshots of the game, then you're likely never going to be satisfied with VRS.
OTOH, if a screenshot warrior needs to resort to using a zoomed in screenshot to be able to point out how "bad" VRS is, then it's highly unlikely that the vast majority of gamers will ever notice it while playing the game ... even if they stopped moving and just stared at the screen to admire the visuals. Well, I guess some people could put their face inches away from the screen to simulate zooming into a screenshot.
Just like any rendering tool, there will be developers who use it well and developers who don't. Nothing we can do about developers who don't use it well.
Regards,
SB
Wonder when we'll see more BC Enhancements outside of FPSBoost, like RezBoost.
I wonder if it will be possible to inject amd fsr to FPS boost titles.
It's been well over a year that DF saw it, MS has stopped talking about it also.
It's just a shame that they haven't said it's been scrapped, bug that means is going to take a lot longer to come out now, or just around the corner.
For a devision like xbox which are pretty open and talkative it just makes not knowing all the more worse.
D
Deleted member 86764
Guest
Some pretty funky resolution numbers knocking about this video. I wonder if the Xbox One X and PS4 Pro are using some upscaling technology
In order:
Xbox One X = 3008x1692
Xbox Series X = 2880x1620
PS5 = 2880x1620
PS4 Pro = 2560x1440
Xbox Series S = 1920x1080
PS4 = 1600x900
Xbox One S = 1280x720
Last gen machines pumping out higher resolutions, presumably at lower settings.
In order:
Xbox One X = 3008x1692
Xbox Series X = 2880x1620
PS5 = 2880x1620
PS4 Pro = 2560x1440
Xbox Series S = 1920x1080
PS4 = 1600x900
Xbox One S = 1280x720
Last gen machines pumping out higher resolutions, presumably at lower settings.
Why are people trying to say the tech is not without its downsides and is a perfect solution? VRS is not DLSS, it's not even a reconstruction tech. It's a clear trade-off system. it's sharpness against framerate. We can easily see it in both 60hz modes in this game (not even using zoomed images, just by comparing 2 identical scenes running in both machines). This is how we compare perceptible resolution, in still screenshots, obviously in motion with motion blur the difference won't be noticeable, like a difference of resolution.A lot of Variable Rate Shitposting from every sides on B3D since many months now sadly.
With ones triggering the others with negatives comments about eveything.
Makes it less enjoyable to read.
We have being talking about positives and negatives of all tech since years ago. FXAA, TAA, CBR and DLSS, all of them have downsides (much less for DLSS obviously). But now suddently with VRS even big outlets are almost completely ignoring the downsides of this tech, why?
How on earth are not nearly all consoles hitting 4k @ 60fps displaying that, look at the shadows etc
just googled PES2022 apparently its the latest in this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pro_Evolution_Soccer "the PES series has sold 111 million copies worldwide"
this aint a no budget indie game written with UE blueprints, hmmmm mindblowing
Maybe because VRS can be applied in a much more targeted manner than all of those other examples? In an ideal case the developer would choose to apply VRS to only those pixels where the difference is truly unnoticeable. Contrast that with CBR or even DLSS that indiscriminately affect all pixels in the frame.
Think I heard that this was possibly done just to test some things within the game, hence the demo wasn't even called PES, just "some football game" or something like that.
So I wouldn't use this to be indicative of it just yet.
snc
Veteran
just watch video you post
not presumably but xox run just on last gen settings and not on xsx/ps5, xss has mixedNo one says its perfect tech. But its intention is to render at a lower resolution in areas where higher resolution has no real impact on perception. You gain framerate with minimal impact on IQ. I don't know if its your intention, but your arguments seem to generalize that VRS offers a perceivable loss of IQ that easily distinguishable across all titles. Maybe thats why people have a problem.
https://www.activision.com/cdn/research/Sig20_VRS_final_final_DROBOT.pptx
COD has had a software form of VRS thats equivalent to HW Tier 1 VRS since WW2 and Infinite Warfare. So a form of VRS has existed in gaming on even last gen consoles for the last 5 years. They dumped and reengineered a whole new software version for Modern Warfare. In lieu of hardware support, they basically designed their own software VRS version twice.
Do you think that Activision is a glutton for punishment? Does it look they are just eyeballing the IQ differences?
Last edited:
snc
Veteran
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
