Digital Foundry Article Technical Discussion Archive [2010]

[Ruskie]

@ Ruskie

As BO is 960x544 on PS3 u would only need 11,3 ms.

You mean it would take 13ms,right?Because of almost twice less pixels?Yes,but lower the resolution the worse the results of MLAA because MLAA does not have stored information to work on sub pixels.

Edit. Function said it above.

 

[AmFreak]

Nope

522.240 / 921.600 = 0.566 * 20 = 11.33

 

[Ruskie]

Nope

522.240 / 921.600 = 0.566 * 20 = 11.33

It does not matter,i just got that of top of my head,i thought you wrote 21,33ms,you probably edited it.What matters is that MLAA on that resolution would give bad results and would not free RSX significantly.Now,do you want to waste ~14% of spu time for bad results while not significantly freeing RSX i dont know.All i know is that Barbarian said it would not worth it.And who knows if they have that much of spu time anyway,it seems to me that they dont.

 

[djskribbles]

I don't see anything wrong with constructive criticism and/or questions, as long as they're not offensive to the developer. I'm sure multi-console owners don't really care, but for PS3-only owners, it's hard to just keep your mouth shut, especially with such a high profile title like CoD where previous titles were nearly identical. If you don't achieve parity and you come to post here (or anywhere for that matter) expect some questions to be thrown your way. No one should be surprised by this.

 

[JB9861]

While gamers like us may recognize and appreciate higher frame rates, Regular Joe doesn't know the difference between 60fps and 30fps. It's for this reason that I don't understand why IW or Treyarch don't lock the framerate down to 30fps and add in some new effects.

Joes notice. It may not significantly impact their enjoyment or influence purchases, but they can discern many things along with gamers. They just don't care as much.

 

[liolio]

Ok back on topic and I've to take the shot while Barbarian is still raoming here

So Barbarian do you still hold true to your prediction for the next gen system, ie a 8 cores/32 thread monster?

OK that's OT but too many posts to report I'll report mine

 

[Shifty Geezer]

You cannot compare different games feature-for-feature as a measure of engine efficiency. Game engines are way more complex than a list of features connected together. Seeing an effect in one game does not mean its absence in another game shows the devs aren't very good. This isn't about protecting the feelings of developers, but about using sound reason to form our opinions, and cross-game comparisons provide pretty much no insight whatsoever, so it's saving your own time to abandon that line of reasoning, and find answers through different channels.

 

[Rangers]

While gamers like us may recognize and appreciate higher frame rates, Regular Joe doesn't know the difference between 60fps and 30fps. It's for this reason that I don't understand why IW or Treyarch don't lock the framerate down to 30fps and add in some new effects.

COD is by far the best selling franchise (well I guess a few Nintendo franchises may compete...) in the world and is 60 FPS (well, close to it depending on platform). While I've often agreed with you, there's no way they're going to do something risky and fundamentally change the game now. If the games sales were faltering, then maybe.

 

[Laa-Yosh]

Yeah, it's never ending appeal for multiplayer is certainly related to the low control latency. Even if the players can't tell what the difference is, I'm sure they're aware that it's better than the other games in some way.

 

[Billy Idol]

well, I don't agree that low controller latency, or 60Hz has anything to do with the success of COD...peer to peer online makes this obsolet - but it is just my opinion!

COD4 was a well thought out MP game, with lots of interesting stuff...like the leveling aspect for instance...this got fans all over the world hooked, and now they are loyal to the brand...until either the game quality significantly decreases in time or until something better is on the horizont!

How do you argue 60Hz with respect to the HALO MP success? I think, brand loyality fits here as well...

 

[Laa-Yosh]

Halo is big, but hasn't got either the sales or the number of online players that the x360 version of the newest COD game, at least as far as I know. It's a solid second place and offers a lot of unique and cool stuff but still not as massive for some reason.

 

[nightshade]

When I ask my friends (the ones who aren't technically well informed) as per why they like call of duty over other shooters, they'll almost always mention fluidity/smoothness in one of their points. So yea I guess low input latency must've played a considerable role in making COD series huge.

 

[Laa-Yosh]

Yes, just think about it, if the 60fps feature wouldn't give them some kind of edge then they probably would've abandoned it already, in order to catch up to their competitors in other graphical features.

 

[function]

well, I don't agree that low controller latency, or 60Hz has anything to do with the success of COD...peer to peer online makes this obsolet - but it is just my opinion!

Frame rate and input latency are not made "obsolete" by network gaming because not all of the output and feedback the game gives you is dependent on network latency. In fact most of it isn't, and benefits from higher frame rates and lower input latency.

 

[makattack]

Yes, the memory saving from turning MSAA off is a lot less than 18Mb.
Plus, if you want to do MLAA you'll have to move your frame buffer to main memory which is usually more scarce than video memory.
And don't forget that the cost of MLAA was quoted at 20ms for 1 SPU (for 720p I believe, for COD it will be less). At any rate that's quite a lot of SPU time for a 60fps game, that needs to get everything done in 16ms.

I really do appreciate you posting your behind the scenes input on this forum. It really does make me appreciate the game a lot more. Great job. It also reminds me of a time long ago, when game developers were almost like celebrities to gamers.

I'm curious about some old comments you had about MLAA prototyping. Was it COD:BO that you were testing MLAA on?

http://forum.beyond3d.com/showpost.php?p=1367328&postcount=132

 

[Squilliam]

When I ask my friends (the ones who aren't technically well informed) as per why they like call of duty over other shooters, they'll almost always mention fluidity/smoothness in one of their points. So yea I guess low input latency must've played a considerable role in making COD series huge.

Also the 2nd best selling (previous best) Halo is likely the 2nd most responsive game and about as responsive for 30FPS as you can get. I think latency is actually more important for newbies because maybe it makes the game easier to control for people who aren't using a controller 24/7. Theres no scientific basis for this but the first console game I felt comfortable playing was Halo and even if I spend months without touching a controller I feel I can always pick up Call of Duty / Halo with the most minimal of aclimatisation time.

 

[Billy Idol]

Ok, guys...if 60Hz is the reason for financial success. Why not other devs jumping in and producing 60Hz games?! What's the reason for this...are those devs to stupid to realize it?

I know that I am over-dramatic here...but sometimes you guys make success sound too easy and IMO you guys over-simplify stuff.

And by the way, do you guys remember the discussion Insomniac had, about how they studied impact of 60Hz gameplay and found no correlation between financial success, review success and 60Hz framerate?!? I think there was even a thread here at B3D forum about this topic...

EDIT: if you guys are arguing about responsive controlls in general, i.e. low controller latency - it would be interesting to see if there is a correlation between responsiveness and financial/review success?! Maybe the biggest article DF ever did: testing controller latency of successful games and see if those successful games are always on top in this discipline?

 

[function]

60hz is a factor. There are other factors.

No-one is calling every developer that makes 30hz games stupid. Calm down.

60hz games used to be very, very common. They are still more common than you might appreciate. Depending on your objectives, you might choose higher frame rate or a lower frame rate and more detail per frame.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Ok, guys...if 60Hz is the reason for financial success.

There is never a magic bullet, sure-fire way to make a mega successful product. In the whole scope of COD, one of the ingredients that are blended and baked to perfection (according to those who play the game, which isn't me) is a higher than usual refresh rate. Lose that and the COD product loses one of its distinctive ingredients, so it isn't overall as a product as good, meaning it can't stand out as strongly versus other titles baked to a different recipe that doesn't use 60fps refresh.

 

[Ruskie]

60fps for COD is a must.Its the same reason why racing sims(Forza/GT) are 60fps.More response and much smoother experience,very important for a multiplayer.Other games dont necessary need 60fps and im fine with that.

And I have to say that its very disappointing that people who have not played Black Ops are taking a crap on its graphics and calling developers names just because of the worst ps3 performance.Its ruining the games all around amazing achievement image along with its looks,which are fantastic.While Ill admit that some parts of the game are not so hot, there are much more of those that just wowed me like no other fps on 360,just sheer scope and chaotic moments are something you wont find in other fps on the shelves...and its running so amazing.Great achievement Barbarian.