Frostbite managed great multi threading under DX11. Since moving to DX12 it's gotten much worse. DX11 doesn't support GPU driven rendering but that isn't being used anyway so it's a moot point.
Last edited:
Digital Foundry Article Technical Discussion [2023]
- Thread starter BRiT
- Start date
- Status
In which games has the number of unique objects and their detail seen a meaningful increase over the best we previously had?
I just finished the Battlefield 1 campaign. Beautiful game but the environment and character detail is far below Jedi Survivor. The fog is laughably bad in BF1, lots of banding and low resolution.
Battlefield 1 is from 2016. It's an example of great multithreading under DX11. BF V ups the object and detail level considerably while also being properly threaded under DX11.
BFV is next on my list.
Silent_Buddha
Legend
This is why you hear so many stories about companies beefing up their recruiting department during the pandemic only to have most of their recruiting department doing nothing because they're all trying to recruit from the same relatively small pool of talent.
For example,
A former Meta recruiter paid about $200,000 a year says her team 'did nothing' as there 'really wasn't enough work'
Maddie Machado, a former Meta talent sourcer, said the Facebook parent had an "inefficient process" and most recruiters couldn't meet targets.
www.businessinsider.com
Thus you saw Meta, MS, Google, etc. all let go thousands of recruiters this year that they had hired during the pandemic when they were all desperately trying to recruit (poach) from the same pool of talent.
Regards,
SB
What are you talking about? The port perfectly matches the technically state of the Xbox Series game!
Before we had this expression “arcade perfect” when port of an arcade game on consoles was superb. Now they took it to heart and we have another “console perfect “ port.
Well I talked about this before.
Games are already taking WAY longer to make than ever before. And with increasing studio sizes, the costs of development are skyrocketing. And even before the pandemic hit, most games were getting delays before release. It was obviously BS how every single dev/pub blamed Covid for every single delay since, as clearly most would have gotten delayed regardless.
Point is - opportunity to recoup costs becomes more and more scary the longer a game takes to make, so publishers have to put their foot down somewhere. Combined with the increasing complexities and challenges of making games, it's just a complete recipe for problems. There's no great solution other than for developers to stop aiming so high, and equally gamers to stop demanding so much. Which is never going to happen. So expect the general trend of 'games releasing with issues' to continue going forward.
Mostly talked about this above already. The idea of 'releasing a game when it's ready' is a fairly outdated notion that few publishers can actually afford to do nowadays. It's just not practical.
I'm not justifying the state of some games, and more immediate issues that can be rectified, but most issues dont get addressed that easily, and many will simply linger in some capacity forever.
No it isn't. The problem is that what developers deem as "ready" these days... has veered unacceptably far off course compared to consumers.
Inuhanyou
Veteran
The game devs are just lazy idea has as many problems with it as blaming workers in general for problems rather than the structure, unit cohesion, leadership and so on.
Dehumanizing low level programmers goes on enough without it being normalized because AAA games don't come out properly cooked.
One of the most obvious reasons is because publishers can get away with it now they think. In an online world pubs thought processes is games are never truly done. So they can weigh taking a hit on a terrible launch by rushing a game out in a bad state on the idea they can fix it to varying degrees later on as long as they hit some internal quarterly goal.
Because that is now normalized it becomes a problem for us, but as long as they get some suckers it's a bet they are willing to make
Dehumanizing low level programmers goes on enough without it being normalized because AAA games don't come out properly cooked.
One of the most obvious reasons is because publishers can get away with it now they think. In an online world pubs thought processes is games are never truly done. So they can weigh taking a hit on a terrible launch by rushing a game out in a bad state on the idea they can fix it to varying degrees later on as long as they hit some internal quarterly goal.
Because that is now normalized it becomes a problem for us, but as long as they get some suckers it's a bet they are willing to make
When talking about complexity/challenge, you're probably imagining I'm talking about depth of systems and whatnot and that's not it. It's the graphical make-up of games most of all, though it can also be the increasing amount of system complexity in what used to be more straightforward action games and whatnot.
And if I really have to explain how graphical complexity has gone up with these recent games on this board of all places, I dont know if this can even be any kind of constructive conversation to begin with.
@Inuhanyou I don’t think devs are lazy. There’s obviously a knowledge gap. I’d blame internal training more than anything. If you have CS grads entering an industry that don’t have experience with best practices and profiling, you have to teach them. I’m the case of Jedi survivor the issue is allocating memory in the render thread. That just shouldn’t happen. Should have been found in code review, in profiling. People should know not to do that. Doesn’t make sense that no one noticed. It’s an engine architecture problem. It’s not at the level of the publisher. It’s at the level of the developers. The whole thing is very strange.
No it hasn't. Developers are NOT unaware that their games have issues. I literally explained all this already. It's a matter of cost/financial calculation. At some point, it becomes too dangerous to keep delaying a game. This was not that big an issue in the past cuz development costs were not so insane.
lol, you're out of your mind.
Nobody said a game has to be perfect. And no duh it's a matter of cost for the publisher.... We know, and are getting tired of being shoveled out a broken, unoptimized product, and paying $70+ for it.. so the publisher can save some money..
We don't give a damn "how dangerous it is"... Publishers who continually do stuff like this are going to eventually see how dangerous it is TO release completely broken/unoptimized games.
Last edited:
No, I'm just being realistic and not jumping to lazy, reactionary assumptions because it's easier to do so.lol, you're out of your mind.
Ya know what, maybe this forum does need to be retired. The amount of actual quality discussion has fallen to the lowest that I've ever seen. With the seemingly permanent death of GPU discussion, it feels like crows picking at bones at this point.
You're just making excuses that don't... and shouldn't EVER matter to the consumer at all. Thus when I say consumers have an expectation of a certain degree of quality for a release.. and that publisher are failing to meet it... puts you in a defensive mode. Publishers now, have the mentality of "push and patch"... and that's just simply undeniable. That's what they do now, and it has gotten to that point BECAUSE consumers have allowed it. PC consumers have been conditioned to accept that games will have issues... and largely PC gamers accept a lot of BS in their games... however now it's getting to the point where obvious technical issues, obvious lack of utilization, obvious bugs, are just completely destroying the ability to even enjoy or play the game properly.
This is an entire industry problem. No single profession or group is getting all the blame. It's a failure on multiple levels.
And you want to know why this is all coming out??? Because people are actually looking at it now.. and asking questions. We can actually look at traces from the games and see how and why it's completely underutilizing the hardware.. how amateur some of this stuff is. What else are consumers supposed to think when a game releases like that, and then TWO DAYS LATER, gets a 15-30% performance improvement patch... with the promise of more patches in the future...
I like how some people.. and even developers point to games before as "not being complex" which is why they didn't have such issues in the past... when those games were just as complex for their time as these games are now. The difference is now you need a ton of people to make the pretty art... Because other than art... I'm failing to see how these games are SO MUCH more complex than the games from the last couple of generations. We're still doing the same stuff we've always done in games...
The point is... when you drop a game, and it's performance is completely terrible, and then patch it a couple days later, and then make it what it should have been in the coming months... people get pissed off.. as they should.
Since CPU are multicore developing a performant game engine is much more complicated and we have a dev from Epic Games told us than Direct X 12 is hard to master.
From the Cyberpunk 2077 GDC 2023 presentation where CD Projekt explained how difficult it was to do improve multithreading of the RED Engine before it was like tons of engine inefficient from a performance point of view with main and render thread. And some teams need to do this transition. Some have done it Naughty Dog, Id software, Bungie, Guerrilla Games . Some not like Insomniac before Spiderman 2 but it was planned. And it is not because they are lazy or not competent enough. Studio need to ship game and do a full refactoring of the game engine is hard.
Good multithreaded code is difficult.
Never said it wasn't.
And that doesn't explain how mere days/weeks later, performance drastically improves and stutters go away.. in some of these titles.
I completely understand that game dev is hard and complicated... What I'm saying is that it was also hard and complicated back then too... Devs who look back will obviously say it was a simple time... but it wasn't back then either..
You just don't have the same amount of people "championing" performance and optimization as you did back then. Back in the day, top programmers made a name for themselves with their engines and novel ways of doing things. Their code was their identity and being performant meant everything. They wanted to extract every ounce of performance out of something, because it would reflect on their own personal reputation. Now you seemingly have a lot of tech artists which know how to make insanely beautiful things.. but not how to optimize it.
Because they need to ship game at the moment the publisher decide it is okay. For Jedi Survivor part of the trace shows the game is made on consoles first and after they port the code. Maybe it woud be better to take time to port the game to PC and wait months later or like Rockstar one year to ship the PC version.
I expect DX12 problem to disseapear after devs have shipped one game on it.
- Status
Similar threads
