Digital Foundry Article Technical Discussion [2018]
- Thread starter Shifty Geezer
- Start date
-
- Tags
- digital foundry
- Status
Well the thing is that the game looks significantly better than everything else bar TLOU2, Death Stranding or Cyber Punk? That it doesn't belong in this gen even though true next gen could be yet again significantly better.
Significantly is a bit exaggerated.
Horizon is behind in draw distance for foliage and maybe density. But for the rest they might be close.
But then there is the setting and great art and atmosphere that set it appart and make it really appealing.
D
Deleted member 11852
Guest
It's understanable. If you've been involved in a multi-year project making all sorts of complex designed engineering decisions, it's probably a bit disheartening to have your work dissected, sometimes inaccurately, without an opportunity to comment first. And this is risk with 'superficial' analysis, like trying to work out a hard works without disassembling the engine. You can see some of the what, but none of the how.
I would likely see DF work more collaboratively with developers when that is possible because what the how and why is often more interesting than knowing the what. That's probably not viable in many cases, though, especially if DF are looking to release analysis super quick to benefit for the hype from any given video, demo or game release.
No assumptions should be made on whether DF are going ahead without consideration for the devs involvement or not. It's just as possible that the devs choose not to comment when approached as they aren't approached at all.
Last edited:
Ike Turner
Veteran
Well he is not wrong..besides glancing over GDC whitepapers and keynotes the DF team doesn't seem to have the sightless clue about how an engine is really working...
Last edited:
The biggest audience is probably Sony console owners, could be the reason DF is adjusted after that. DF needs to generate money to stay alive just like any company.
Tkumpathenurpahl
Veteran
Maybe, but they're basically critics, and a film critic doesn't have to know exactly how to make a film in order to be an entertaining and worthwhile critic.
That said, a film critic is often more informative and interesting when they possess greater knowledge than the average Joe, so I do think DF could perhaps do with having an actual game engine programmer on staff. But that's probably cost prohibitive.
That said, a film critic is often more informative and interesting when they possess greater knowledge than the average Joe, so I do think DF could perhaps do with having an actual game engine programmer on staff. But that's probably cost prohibitive.
Certainly, the more DF could understand and impart the better their articles would be.
But frame rate, frame pacing, input lag, loading times, streaming issues, texture filtering, resolution, dynamic resolution parameters etc are all interesting in their own right and impact on enjoyment. Oh yeah, and comments on HDR implementations, because that's a thing customers are sinking massive monies into and traditional media e.g. your PC or phone web browser can't get that across.
Particularly this gen, when rendering technologies are often identical across platforms the performance characteristics are the main differentiators it natural to focus on these differences. And this gen we've had upgraded systems into the mix too, again with performance improvements being the main differentiators.
So yes, more understanding and discussion would be good. But "more harm than good", especially in light of the platform differences? No, that's bollocks.
And from the industry that used to get away with bullshots, offline renders presented as real time in-game footage, flat out big budget CGI presented as running real time on console, and "best version representing all platforms, take yer chances on what you get" ... nah, we're definitely much, much better off for having DF.
But frame rate, frame pacing, input lag, loading times, streaming issues, texture filtering, resolution, dynamic resolution parameters etc are all interesting in their own right and impact on enjoyment. Oh yeah, and comments on HDR implementations, because that's a thing customers are sinking massive monies into and traditional media e.g. your PC or phone web browser can't get that across.
Particularly this gen, when rendering technologies are often identical across platforms the performance characteristics are the main differentiators it natural to focus on these differences. And this gen we've had upgraded systems into the mix too, again with performance improvements being the main differentiators.
So yes, more understanding and discussion would be good. But "more harm than good", especially in light of the platform differences? No, that's bollocks.
And from the industry that used to get away with bullshots, offline renders presented as real time in-game footage, flat out big budget CGI presented as running real time on console, and "best version representing all platforms, take yer chances on what you get" ... nah, we're definitely much, much better off for having DF.
I don't think they talk about performance video comparison between platform but more about technical and artistic choice from video about a game engine or a game.
Because realtime rendering is much more than a list of feature. Choice are made and they are very important to achieve artistic vision.
D
Deleted member 11852
Guest
I do assume, based on the times that analysis has been published and devs have reached out quickly to correct inaccuracies, that's it's not part of DF's normal process to seek input from devs at all on face off and analysis videos. Where they have engaged with devs it tends to be a very different type of article. Embedding an extra layer of consultation to their process could result in a DF articles missing that hot window of buzz where people are more likely to click an article about the current hot game rather than a game that was hot a month ago. If DF do reach out as a matter of routine, I think we'd have heard given how open John Linneman (dark1x) has been on forums.
I agree. Some analysis, not always perfect but generally corrected quickly when something slipped by them, is way better that nothing. Otherwise you're waiting for GDC for insights onto the latest gaming tech and sometimes that's a bit heavy going, e.g. 80mb PDFs with 180 pages!
DF is not perfect, indeed, but they still do a decent job to give basic and important informations : resolution, framerate, what's the best version, is there a downgrade, etc.
Actually, DF might push developers to better polish their games and it's a very good thing for the gamers.
Actually, DF might push developers to better polish their games and it's a very good thing for the gamers.
Isn't that suggestion always redundant? They always recommend PC, because it's the best - shocker. And then PS4 over XB1, and PS4 Pro over PS4, and XB1X over PS4P. Have there been any cases where that pecking order hasn't been maintained?
Not always true. Sometimes the games are badly optimized on PC. See Arkham Knight.
Also, they show what kind of efforts the developers put on the strongest hardwares.
For instance, it's not rare to find dissapointing Pro/X versions with minimal upgrades.
They're only reliable when it comes to hard data measurements. Anything else is way out of their league.
Can we blame them for that ? I mean even a developer could not do much better than DF without a deeper acess about how the engine works.
They are limited to more superficial informations by definition.
Ike Turner
Veteran
Yup but even hard data measurements are sometimes wrong (they've be wrong quite often when it comes to pixel counting (see latest Far Cry 4 Xbox X version where they got the resolution wrong. They claimed fixed 4K when it is dynamic)… The DF: Retro is great though even if the are sometimes some head scratching comments when the tech is discussed in some of the vids.
They certainly could study much more about how real time rendering works if they wanna be tech journalists. I'm no game dev nor journalist. I apreciate real time rendering purely as a hobby and I've spotted myself thousands of times on DF videos displays of a completely superficial and naive understanding of how these engines work. I've taken the time read about rendering tech from both past and present, I read gdc and siggraph papers just for fun, and every year I understand more about that stuff. They have no excuse to know less than me, seriously.
- Status
Similar threads
