Digital Foundry Article Technical Discussion [2023]

Status
Not open for further replies.
it doesnt seem like they even tried on the animations! and even some last gen games had better lighting, killzone shadow fall looks miles ahead compared to infinite like theres alot of games last gen with better lighting, i dont get how it ended up looking like that, if 343 really gave everything they have and thats it! then im intrigued. Id forgive multi plat titles and small studios or the usual broken japanese dev game but first party titles are unforgivable either looking that bad or performing bad.
I think this video here my provide some hints as to why games and halo turn out poorly while some other games turn out great. I think the commentary in the clip here could offer some great reasons as to the why Halo looks particularly flat.

 
But if your game does not sell at launch, do you think the publisher will just chalk it up to no interest? With focus groups, surveys and what not they do during development, you think there is no "after action reports" being done on titles that do not live up to their expectations?

If a game launches in a bad state, you do not buy it, but move on, do you really care about if a sequel arrives ? I mean trailers look good, game looks fun, has a hook that realls you in, but the execution is bad. Do you really want one more game, even after 6 months of patching?
Yes, I do. Chalk it up to PC gamers lack of interest, maybe their marketing wasn't enough this time? Perhaps some other release drew attention away from their games?

Focus groups and surveys would say many games should be successful when we know not all are.. Basically if you give a publisher any room, you risk that they'll attribute it to something else. Why not remove that ambiguity and be VERY clear?

At the end of the day, we want the publisher to be successful so they can continue business... Remember, the idea is that we actually care about and want the game.. We WANT to buy the game and are willing to spend $60-$70 at launch for it. The thing we're pushing for is for games to not be in a terrible state at launch. This mentality that we're currently in where it's ok for them to release in a shitty state and patch later is terrible and needs to change.. but at the same time we don't want games to skip our platform completely.
 
It's a good game, but it failed to critically live up to the expectations of what a flagpole tent game should look like.
There should have been a 'Ryse of Rome' type game to showcase the power of the new consoles, like they did with Order 1884, or Demon Souls. Xbox missing this was the critical failure in my opinion.
I agree but that wasn't on your list.
It was passable, so in the end of if they had got the GAAS right it would've done alright.
I was pretty critical but more so based on what they originally showed of the slipspace engine and how it turned out.
Talk about downgrade.
 
I agree but that wasn't on your list.
It was passable, so in the end of if they had got the GAAS right it would've done alright.
I was pretty critical but more so based on what they originally showed of the slipspace engine and how it turned out.
Talk about downgrade.
Yep. If it ended up looking like the initial showings that would have been plenty.
 
Yes, I do. Chalk it up to PC gamers lack of interest, maybe their marketing wasn't enough this time? Perhaps some other release drew attention away from their games?
You think that a company that spends millions building and marketing a game, just leans back and cross their fingers when they ship the game? And has nothing in place to pickup why it went good/bad to improve their "formula" for the next game?

Focus groups and surveys would say many games should be successful when we know not all are.. Basically if you give a publisher any room, you risk that they'll attribute it to something else. Why not remove that ambiguity and be VERY clear?

It has been reported that pubs/devs have KPI's like Metacritic score/ratings, sales numbers etc etc. So they have to followup on those items to fulfil the contracts.
If they do not uncover if a game bombs due to releasing oi a bad state then, I have serious doubt about them as a company.

At the end of the day, we want the publisher to be successful so they can continue business... Remember, the idea is that we actually care about and want the game.. We WANT to buy the game and are willing to spend $60-$70 at launch for it. The thing we're pushing for is for games to not be in a terrible state at launch. This mentality that we're currently in where it's ok for them to release in a shitty state and patch later is terrible and needs to change.. but at the same time we don't want games to skip our platform completely.

On here we "know", well, at least have a good indication of why games are not successful. I would assume anybody who makes a living out of making/publishing games will have the same information and more, if not they should start lurking on here.
 
I loved Toukiden 1 and 2 on PS4. That was primarily a vita original series so the jump in tech here is great compared to that. Still not perfect however
 
If they can enable FSR2 across the board, they should seriously consider doing so, IMO. When frame time issues crop up on the Xbox platform, they seem consistent across all Xbox machines this generation. When it does pop up, it usually affects all Xbox consoles, both last-gen, and current. I know people don't want to hear the tools' excuse, but I really do think there is something that developers are missing that allows issues like that to make it into shipped products.

p.s. about the Xenia comparison. I never intended to use Xenia to play games that were already on the BC list so I never bothered to try. Finding some negatives with the ones that are on the list. Shader compilation being a huge issue with Star Ocean. With Lost Odyssey I haven't been able to make it past the first cinematic. It might not be compatible with this version for Xenia Canary.
 
Last edited:
But if your game does not sell at launch, do you think the publisher will just chalk it up to no interest? With focus groups, surveys and what not they do during development, you think there is no "after action reports" being done on titles that do not live up to their expectations?

If a game launches in a bad state, you do not buy it, but move on, do you really care about if a sequel arrives ? I mean trailers look good, game looks fun, has a hook that realls you in, but the execution is bad. Do you really want one more game, even after 6 months of patching?
Well yeah, of course they wont be having proper/complete data for proper surveying. Not selling enough at launch is a lot different than having some good sales initially and low sales very soon after launch. The latter gives info that the interest was there and then lost, so you can survey the people who bought it. How can you expect people to complain in surveys about an issue they havent experienced? The game issues are not known until a game is purchased. A game cant be boycotted for something that is an like an unknown. You cant get proper surveys without knowing whom to direct them to. Surely people who didnt buy it can claim something they heard about but from where? How large was the population whom they heard the information for?
 
If they can enable FSR2 across the board, they should seriously consider doing so, IMO. When frame time issues crop up on the Xbox platform, they seem consistent across all Xbox machines this generation. When it does pop up, it usually affects all Xbox consoles, both last-gen, and current. I know people don't want to hear the tools' excuse, but I really do think there is something that developers are missing that allows issues like that to make it into shipped products.

p.s. about the Xenia comparison. I never intended to use Xenia to play games that were already on the BC list so I never bothered to try. Finding some negatives with the ones that are on the list. Shader compilation being a huge issue with Star Ocean. With Lost Odyssey I haven't been able to make it past the first cinematic. It might not be compatible with this version for Xenia Canary.
This this this. Skip the 30fps "high resolution" mode and put in some FSR2 for the 1080p modes! It would go a long way
 
But if your game does not sell at launch, do you think the publisher will just chalk it up to no interest? With focus groups, surveys and what not they do during development, you think there is no "after action reports" being done on titles that do not live up to their expectations?

If a game launches in a bad state, you do not buy it, but move on, do you really care about if a sequel arrives ? I mean trailers look good, game looks fun, has a hook that realls you in, but the execution is bad. Do you really want one more game, even after 6 months of patching?
I find this a really sad state of affairs nowadays. Developers used to get more than one crack at something before being called a complete failure. Sometimes they dont get it right the first time, but improve hugely the second try once their workflows are established and they've got a clearer picture of what they're aiming at.

This whole 'one strike and you're out' mentality is really stifling the industry heavily. You certainly cant think like this and then get equally mad if pubs and devs go for much 'safer' or 'broadened appeal' approaches.
 
Since Xbox consoles have had the ability to run all games in 120hz containers as far back as the Xbox One S, I'd like to see Digital Foundry test under those conditions when inconsistent frame-time issues are present. Tom mentioned fluctuations between 16,33, and 50ms frame times, meaning he was only testing at 60hz. At the very least, it should always be mentioned that Xbox consoles have the ability (if you have a 120hz panel) to mitigate this stuttering appearance.
 
I wonder if Sony and Microsoft removed the ability for developers to patch games it would improve the quality of titles at launch.
When gone gold meant something.

Almost need something like:
day 1 patch is free.
Up to 4 weeks costs, maybe cheaper for indies
After is free

Would really need all platform holders to agree.
During first 4 weeks or so is probably really important so they would take more care.
 
Tom mentioned fluctuations between 16,33, and 50ms frame times, meaning he was only testing at 60hz. At the very least, it should always be mentioned that Xbox consoles have the ability (if you have a 120hz panel) to mitigate this stuttering appearance.
How do you stop an Xbox game switching the refresh rate to 60Hz?
 
As far as I'm aware games on Xbox, since at least the 360, have no control over the display output settings.
Wouldn't that impact games that offer Performance and Fidelity options? E.g. there are plenty of TVs in use that support 4K and 120Hz but aren't HDMI2.1 so can't do both. So if you set your Xbox Display Options your console to 120Hz, and the game can't reduce it to 60hz, it'll be limited in driving higher resolutions.

Games surely want the ability to pick 120hz/1080p or 60/4K without the user having to change the console settings.
 
Wouldn't that impact games that offer Performance and Fidelity options? E.g. there are plenty of TVs in use that support 4K and 120Hz but aren't HDMI2.1 so can't do both. So if you set your Xbox Display Options your console to 120Hz, and the game can't reduce it to 60hz, it'll be limited in driving higher resolutions.

Games surely want the ability to pick 120hz/1080p or 60/4K without the user having to change the console settings.
On Xbox if you have such a TV, it won't allow you to set 120hz at 4k in the system menu. Output resolution and refresh rate are controlled by the system and games cannot change it. So even if games have a 120hz mode, it won't be selectable unless you already have 120hz enabled in the menu, and therefore must be at a resolution your display supports 120hz at.
Are Microsoft and Sony just as responsible for ensuring games release in a 'good' state on their platforms as developers are?
No. Because while it would make sense for companies to try to enforce some sort of glitch free, level performance experience, such restrictions would mean that games made by From Software, Bethesda, Deck 13 and CDPR would likely never be released.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top