Is to be expected. Dont lay any time on it, better spent on content on youtube for us intrested to watch
Digital Foundry Article Technical Discussion [2021]
- Thread starter BRiT
- Start date
- Status
Is to be expected. Dont lay any time on it, better spent on content on youtube for us intrested to watch
"High end" isn't a well defined term. Its raw meaning is 'the better part of what's available'. So you're into the territory of 'what does he mean, high end?' which appears to have backfired for some users, like me, who took that to mean something like "targeting a high end PC, kinda like Crysis, so you can expect it to really push the boat out and wow you as it's not limiting itself to middle tier to lower GPUs," or "at the high end of what games are achieving, exclusively on PC."
I don't see particular value in a semantics argument. If some people are going to interpret "High End PC Exclusive" as meaning a top tier title, it makes more sense to me to change the presentation to avoid such misinterpretations than to try to educate the masses to all align their interpretations of a particular phrase.
I don't think Dictator is necessarily out of place here. He's specifically looking at a high budget title that no one talks about. Its certainly higher budget than any indie title and most AA titles and it's got fully fleshed environments, a large story, audio and dialog, animations, enemy types etc. with a slew of advanced graphics features. It is by definition a high end game; and I think if this was released on console today, many would peg it as AAA quality. Given some of the other titles we have out there, there's no reason it can't compete in that bracket. You and I both know this, having developed indie titles, this is a serious a production that can't be done with a small team. Games aren't just how much is spent on rendering; there's a ton of actual content that needs to be built to support a title of this scope."High end" isn't a well defined term. Its raw meaning is 'the better part of what's available'. So you're into the territory of 'what does he mean, high end?' which appears to have backfired for some users, like me, who took that to mean something like "targeting a high end PC, kinda like Crysis, so you can expect it to really push the boat out and wow you as it's not limiting itself to middle tier to lower GPUs," or "at the high end of what games are achieving, exclusively on PC."
I don't see particular value in a semantics argument. If some people are going to interpret "High End PC Exclusive" as meaning a top tier title, it makes more sense to me to change the presentation to avoid such misinterpretations than to try to educate the masses to all align their interpretations of a particular phrase.
While S&F 7 is clearly not competing for driving the graphics industry forward, that shouldn't immediately denounce it of a 'high end' tag. Exclusivity is really just a description of whether it's available on another platform; exclusivity has very little correlation to whether the game actually looks good or has a high budget placed on it. Many indie titles are exclusives, we don't expect them to be graphic barrier busting titles.
Last edited:
Im not going into if this game is impressive or not, some think 2077 or rift apart dont look impressive, everyone have their own views on what looks stunning and whatnot.
This thread is for technical discussions, not this again on if/that videos have the wrong title. Its going to create non-technical discussions that have none to little to do with the games technical analysis but more on whats 'classed as high end or not'. DF supposedly has a closer relationship to B3D, and its clear one of the DF members didnt really appriciate what was said.
Anyway, a reminder of the forum rules set by a moderator in the first starter post of this thread. Maybe im all wrong on this, its just to discard my message then. i just want to keep the single DF member we have left here. Seeing the rules of engagement, someone's breaking the rules and its being accepted by a mod.
https://forum.beyond3d.com/posts/2186482/
les of Engagement : Read before posting or run the risk of losing posting rights in the Tech Forum!
This is principally a technical discussion thread. It is allied to the other tech analysis threads and shares the same rules as those which you should familiarise yourself with. The purpose is to discuss the findings of the Digital Foundry articles on a technical level, including the techniques employed by game developers in their games, and the comparative design decisions off cross-platform titles. Digital Foundry is more closely allied with Beyond3D than other gaming sites which is why they get special mention here!
What this thread is not, is a place to complain about a port's quality and make accusations of developers, to offer feedback on the quality of the Digital Foundry writing or the writers' biases, trumpet your preferred console over the other, talk business and sales, or otherwise sidetrack the discussion from talking about the gaming technology covered in the Digital Foundry articles. If you do not post to the required standard, your posts will be removed, and persistent unwanted contributions will see you locked out of the Technology Forum.
If you want to leave editorial feedback for Digital Foundry, the best place is to leave a comment for the relevant article(s).
Last edited:
Mate polygon count alone is far higher than any ps360 game, Oh sure I agree its not super amazing
Best ps3 game prolly uncharted 3, sword and fairy 7 is better but its not a huge leap, those diminishing returns
Riddlewire
Regular
When John talked about why he liked GTA III's world traversal at 1:34:30, I wish Morrowind had suddenly popped into his mind as an additional point of comparison. No line drawn on the map like Assassin's Creed, but also no icon on the map like GTA III. You had to read your journal and identify destinations visually. It's why some of us still prefer Elder Scrolls 3 to everything that has come after. The world becomes more real to you if you have to navigate it like you would a real place that you've never been.
Which is clearly better described by "high budget PC exclusive" than "high end" where the 'end' of what (budget? graphics? power consumption? time to complete?) is left to the reader's imagination.
My point is just that it is fairly ambivalent and some people are taking it one way and shaping their discussion of the technology around the interpretation of that key phrase. We can put the matter to rest by clarifying what Dictator's message is or, better yet as I realise below, just ignore it as a Red Herring.I agreed with you here, and was about to clean things up, but actually the points were technical discussion, on the rendering features. The interpretation is influenced by the choice of presentation - hence the reason there are guidelines for B3D on choice of thread title, because that sets the mood for the discussion. The main problem is that the criticisms weren't handled well and those disagreeing with the observations didn't do so on a technical level but just focussed on the broad, ambiguous phrase. As such, discussion to date should stay but the discussion should move on such that....
From now on, anyone wanting to discuss the piece on Sword and Fairy 7 needs to talk about the features and compare to relevant other titles with clear references, ignoring the fact it has 'High End' in the video title.
Subsequent debate about what 'high end' means will be removed.
Last edited:
davis.anthony
Veteran
hmm, not sure about dp4a missing on PS5 quite yet, at least I haven't seen confirmation of it.
The video in question wrt to DF:
I didn't actually get to watch this until now. Interesting! The commentary around RT was very interesting. A not requested feature because they didn't think there would be enough performance to do it.
I'm glad that the whole industry moved forward on this one, this is really where I wanted gaming to go and I hope to see some incredible RT based titles 3-4 years from now. If not by next gen when we expect full pipelines to have made a conversion.
edit: nvm I see it now:
https://www.resetera.com/threads/intel-xess-intels-answer-to-dlss.473709/post-71679036
Last edited:
mate calm down if I did miss something, then sorry. And Im not an established member of this forum, take that back.
Dude I am agreeing with the unwarranted praise of this SK title, but its a step above any PS360 title
snc
Veteran
it's hard to tell without more context here on the backstory of PS5. It does seem like they were way ahead of MS in terms of getting out their kits and what not and perhaps they didn't see this as a win for them.
But without DP4a it's just going to add a couple instructions to the process, maybe some overflow handling needs to be done additionally. But it still has rapid packed math, so it's not ultra terrible. it's just not as ideal as having it I suppose.
davis.anthony
Veteran
Is that actually the case? Question not a statement.
I would've thought that the waste/overhead that you need to run the same calculations would be much higher.
Not saying it definitely makes it unusable.
I guess it's one of those wait and see items. Typically we've done a lot of machine learning without DP4a in the past and tensor cores, and typically it's fine. I'm not exactly sure how much performance we're extracting from DP4a, so for me it seems like it may be a thing where 'training time' it's a bigger issue than it is at runtime. But it's hard to say, typically we don't try to get NN to run in 4ms or less, so this could be a factor. But at the same time I don't want people to worry about XeSS on PS5 if it or something equivalent never arrives on it anyway. I guess it's like the XSX having 36 double pumped ROPs. We said it was no concern, and when we finally have some benchmarks then we can reassess if it is a concern. I don't think most people will be able to hypothesize DP4a / ~DP4a performance on runtime NN on a PS5 since there are so many factors involved there, so it seems like we'll just have to wait and see games utilize it on PS5 before we say it's an issue.
Didn't Intel release some information on their XeSS ML-AA performance? Anyone remember the details, was it one set of numbers with their GPUs instructions and then another set of numbers with DP4A? Did they also comment on feasibility of running XeSS without DP4A?
Looked through more content on WCCF and found the part I was vaguely recalling, it's from an interview with a Principal Engineer, Karthik Vaidyanathan.
https://wccftech.com/intel-xess-interview-karthik-vaidyanathan/
https://wccftech.com/intel-xess-interview-karthik-vaidyanathan/
Usman: Does XeSS work on hardware with no XMX or DP4a support with an FP16 or FP32 fallback?
Karthik: No, not at the moment. We will look into it, but I cannot commit to anything at this point. Even, if you were able to do it, there's the big question of performance and whether its justified.
davis.anthony
Veteran
If Sony can offer a Checkerboard Rendering 2.0 that decreases the performance cost and increases the consistency of it's quality across games I think that'll be enough to get them by if they don't have any way to realistically use ML in the real world.
- Status
Similar threads
