Digital Foundry Article Technical Discussion Archive [2014]

I remember one poster here that was trolling BF4 for not being 1080p/60 while his precious KZSF was - hence BF4 was no "next gen enough" .
Its so hilarious given the big fuss about res.

 

For those who are interested in re-projection, here's couple of links on subject.
http://advances.realtimerendering.c...nal Iterative Reprojection(Siggraph2012).pptx
http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/um/people/hoppe/proj/bireproj/

IMHO.
All sorts of re-projection, shader use and decoupling shading from resolution will be one of the big things this new generation.

 

Isn't this the the concept of the force unleashed high frame prototype?
But I don't think this is what KZSF had used, or even related.

 

Yes, it's similar.
Of course in this case you do not create whole frame from nothing, you know exactly what the frame is and what the most information are in the frame.

I'm quite sure that this trick is version of the temporal AA method they used in SP campaign.

 

Conceptually, it's pretty much the same thing as TAA.

It's just that you're aiming for 1 sample-per-pixel from .5 spatial samples-per-pixel, as opposed to "antialiasing" stuff like 2 samples-per-pixel from 1 spatial sample per pixel.

 

Sounds to me like GG did something incredibly smart. There are going to be a lot of interesting developments this gen. Five years from now, there's going to be some pretty cool stuff out there.

 

Do hope to see some slides at GDC.

 

Absolutely. Implementation details would be really exciting. And certainly if GG was intentionally keeping quiet before, that approach has backfired hard enough that it probably no longer stands.

I want to see a double-buffered forward-rendered game that literally locks its framerate by flipping the buffer even if the frame isn't finished.

Bonus points if the game draws things in opposite order of usefulness to the player.

"And the last thing to go was... the trollface easter egg behind the skybox."

(But hey, it's locked 1080p60.)

 

I hope it was only because they were a launch game and wanted to ensure decent framerates for MP. I personally have a good excuse for not noticing the effect in MP, as I haven't touched the MP yet at all. In fact, barely even got into the SP (only at chapter 2 or so). Still disappointed though.

 

If we could somehow harness the static electricity generated from all that rubbing, something of real good could come of this.

 

To be honest I doubt I would have enjoyed SF MP more if it was 1080p.

 

some things never change, like war, war never changes, except when it does, but not really.

 

Step 1: frame time circuits on
Step 2: channel energy into the flops capacitor
Step 3: ???
Step 4: where we're going, we don't need roads (power of the cloud!)

---

Alternate Ending

Electro-polished metal apples

 

Killzone MP 1080p direct captured png (2.5MB link) from Neogaf by Dark10x:

http://i.picpar.com/ARA.png

It looks surprisingly good (for an internally rendered 960x1080p image). I would say at least better than most upscaled 900p image.

BF4 at 900p (strong FXAA + upscaling) could be easily sharper than this if it was not uspcaled and without its blurring AA solution.

 

Based on Tupolev's ncie explanations, if the camera is standing still and the spatial offset is alternated, then the framebuffer should become the blended equivalent of two completely different 960x1080 images. So in theory it should contain the same amount of information as a normal 1920x1080 image.

It's only in motion where the trick becomes really visible.

 

so if they can get the game to run at a higher frame rate and alternating the vertical lines quicker, this would make the scaling even less noticeable to most eyes?? Would adding some high qaulity camera based motion blur help?

 

Pure speculation but I wonder if the eye is simply more accepting of compressed horizontal resolution than vertical resolution - perhaps because of the wider FOV. Some optical illusions only work in certain orientations so the human eye is clearly not equal in resolving things in this regard. There has been research [PDF] into this but the jury is still out.

I've not played KZ:SF multiplayer myself and have no wish to get involved in the '1080p crowd' war myself!

 

The MP capture is better than BF4 @ 720p, but BF4 @ 900P is definitely sharper and missing the artifacts of the blending. It does however, give a interesting blooming look to it, YMMV.

 

Image quality looks great to me. I think a drop in sharpness while moving would not be as noticeable. Seems like a very clever trick.

My question, is why didn't they do the same in single-player? I guess I'd have to see a single player pic beside a multi player pic to really compare.

 

Because they din't aim for 60fps in SP?!
Not that GG actually achieved 60fps in MP anyway.