Do disk games auto-start, or are you presented with a menu to select the game?
Digital Foundry Article Technical Discussion Archive [2014]
- Thread starter DieH@rd
- Start date
-
- Tags
- digital foundry
- Status
There is an auto start option.
D
Deleted member 11852
Guest
Apparently in my dreams.
I just checked it again and no it doesn't auto starts...why did I think it did?
D
Deleted member 11852
Guest
Apparently in my dreams. I just checked it again and no it doesn't auto starts...why did I think it did?
It's ok. I was also convinced there was an auto start option and went through settings twice only not to find one.
Sent from my iPhone using Forum Runner.
It does seem like an eternity ago doesn't it. There's some old games on ps2 that apparently they still like and aren't available on ps4, so I guess that's what they go with. Whatever works for them I guess. The other issue honestly was that the ps4 was kind of lacking media side, like they kept asking me how to run Spotify, Pandora, etc, so it ended up being simpler to just have a Roku which they understand for media use, and a ps2 which they are familiar with for games. They are happy, so I'm happy. I've left the ps4 there anyways for the occasional occupant that is a gamer and knows their way around that sort of thing.
Well it's definitely tough for me to understand it I'll admit, but they are very non technical type people so things need to be simple. They can work a Roku but that's the extent of it, beyond that and they just get frustrated and don't use it. It is what it is.
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/d...o-3-xbox-one-1080p-patch-performance-analysis
So MS is concerned about resolution and is actively trying to get to 1080P at all costs?
So MS is concerned about resolution and is actively trying to get to 1080P at all costs?
Is it ever really that cut and dry? They have an image problem, that being that the Xbox is completely unable to play games at 1080p.
If they know the game can hold 1080p at 60fps for a majority of the gameplay, and suffer minor frame dips from time to time, then isn't that an acceptable trade off?
They want to prove that they can reach some sort of parity, players will spot resolution differences better than count how many frame dips there are over the course of their gameplay.
The faster they can remove the 'cannot play games at 1080p' stigma the better for them.
If they know the game can hold 1080p at 60fps for a majority of the gameplay, and suffer minor frame dips from time to time, then isn't that an acceptable trade off?
They want to prove that they can reach some sort of parity, players will spot resolution differences better than count how many frame dips there are over the course of their gameplay.
The faster they can remove the 'cannot play games at 1080p' stigma the better for them.
I don't think that'll help. People know XB1 can't hit 1080p because the Internet says so. Articles like DF tell us so. If MS trade resolution for framerate, all that'll happen is the tune will change from 'can't hit 1080p' to 'can't hit 60 fps'. As long as there's a performance deficit with the competition, it'll be highlighted. IMO MS should butt out and let the devs choose what's best for the gamers and their game (which we'll all grumble about anyway).
If you take a look at most of the 1080p/60fps games on consoles most of them suffer from frame drop (on PS4 or XB1, 900p or 1080p). They managed to run their game on XB1 at acceptable frame rate (most of the time on 60fps) at 1080p. Actually there are few games (AAA) that run at true 60fps/1080p this gen. MS should do what they can to improve XB1 games quality at all costs, I think that they did the right thing with D3.
Agreed, to a degree. Granted the quote from blizzard maybe taken out of context, so it's not entirely sure what they said, or if they explicitly indicated that the game "MUST" be 1080p no failure allowed. I think it [the game] showed there was space for it [1080p] to happen, and they worked together for it to happen for a majority of the time. If there was no way this game would run at 1080p/60fps at all ( as in, could never reach the target 60fps for more than 80% of the time), I'm sure they would have left it at 900p
D
Deleted member 11852
Guest
The article tries to put this in a very positive way but basically Microsoft told Blizzard to sacrifice framerate for resolution.
Where will it end.
They didn't show the most hectic moments of the game tough, like the multiplayer and the last hectic levels of the game.
Looks like they carefully selected what they showed in the performance video, there are never more than a dozen mobs on screen.
Looks like they carefully selected what they showed in the performance video, there are never more than a dozen mobs on screen.
Once third party developers start to get really into heavy (I mean; balls to the wall heavy) asynchronous compute, I'm pretty sure the freed Kinect resources aren't going to matter for the 1080p checkmark box... but rather matching compute for compute tasks between PS4/XB1. This is where things will get interesting...
I'd assume a move to a more compute based workload would benefit the XBO at least as much as the PS4. Afterall the ratio of FLOPs between the two consoles currently being allocated to pixel shaders won't change when those same FLOPs are allocated to compute shaders. However where pixel shaders may rely more on ROP throughput (a big PS4 advantage) compute shaders don't, therefore removing a potential bottleneck in the XBO architecture. High end PC GPU's should also benefit given they have much higher Shader:ROP ratio's than the consoles (especially PS4).
I'm talking about moving non-graphic tasks, which requires a lot of compute, over to the GPU. XB1 will have a more problematic time balancing (consistent framerate, 1080p, compute, etc...) because of the CU/ACE deficit that exists between PS4/XB1. Sure, certain task will operate better for XB1, but I don't see it maintaing "parity" because of the lack of hardware, IMHO.
Silent_Buddha
Legend
He addressed that. ROPs are used in many graphics related tasks, hence that's a potential bottleneck for XBO (16 vs. 32). That bottleneck generally goes away for compute. But then we have the compute advantage (4 more CUs) for PS4. But then we have a potential CPU advantage for XBO (higher frequency) which could be used for compute.
Comparisons are never going to be easy or predictable.
Regards,
SB
shredenvain
Regular
People know the XB1 cant hit 1080p??? Honestly I get what you are driving at, but that blanket statement is incredibly false. I agree Ms should allow the devs to make their own choices when it comes to res and framerate. The bottom line though is that the XB1 is plenty capable of supporting 1080p. The main issue is hitting 1080p at 60fps for a majority of devs.
Which isnt set in stone. A year from now we could see breakthroughs in memory management that could make it much easier to hit the fabled next gen console standard.
I just find it strange that people are constanty saying 1080p isnt possible on XB1 when there are several games that completely prove otherwise.
- Status
Similar threads
