Digital Foundry Article Technical Discussion Archive [2015]

[Reggy72]

You know well that the PS3 won several face-offs. How many times did DF concede a victory to the X1 version? The Witcher 3 is a very very special game, we are not talking about Pong here. Maybe if it was another game they would call it a tie.

DF don't care about framerate, they just care about developers doing what they want them to do.

To be fair Cyan, the differences are minimal, I bet the average gamer couldn't tell them apart played at home. At the end of the day DF articles are not really the be and end all of this pastime, more so a click hit for their site to keep the advertising revenue flowing in.

Having read the article and the comments section on Eurogamer I have to say it's something I personally will have nothing to do with as it pretty much sums up the negative aspects that plague the gaming scene.

I'll play this on Xbox One as this was my system choice and enjoy it for what it is, perceived warts and all.

 

[Globalisateur]

I gotta go, more on that later. But I just want to say that the situation of Digital Foundry is quite sad. They've become a Sony's tool. I said it before and I insist, the version with the best framerate always wins, their locked 30 fps holy grail mantra is just annoying to see.

Does anyone know of alternatives to Digital Foundry? I can't stand them! And please, CD Projekt, don't touch Xbox One's version framerate, it's smooth -as smooth as a 30+ fps framerate can be-, don't listen to these real underdogs. DF are a bunch of losers.

I think we haven't read the same article. Because of their obsession about capped framerate (to each their own ), they were forced to reluctantly give the nod to the PS4 version.

One simple example: the framerate video could not have being more cherry picked... and certainly not in favor of Sony console...Reminds me Far Cry 4 and GTA5 performance videos: Basically 90% of the selected scenes are during a streamed loading (fast travel + city or cutscenes) where the PS4 has rarely the advantage...

That video is certainly not representative of the game.

 

[Arwin]

Well, framerate wasb't a clear win for PS4, but combined with resolution ...

Digital Foundry is getting some 'competition' from NX Gamer and now Gamersyde.

 

[AlNom]

https://twitter.com/Marcin360/status/600953473178415104

Looks like they're working on framerate stuff.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

https://twitter.com/Marcin360/status/600953473178415104

Looks like they're working on framerate stuff.

They'll probably fix these before I get out of the starting area! I've just solved the case of the missing frying pan. I like how when you finish some quests, you are sometimes left with tidbits of information that seem relevant to something larger but yet isn't entirely clear. Anyway, wrong place for this.

I would have been much more impressed with the game's visuals if I hadn't watched an insane amount of gameplay videos over the past few weeks and I'm looking forward to the full analysis.

 

[Zane]

I think we haven't read the same article. Because of their obsession about capped framerate (to each their own ), they were forced to reluctantly give the nod to the PS4 version.

One simple example: the framerate video could not have being more cherry picked... and certainly not in favor of Sony console...Reminds me Far Cry 4 and GTA5 performance videos: Basically 90% of the selected scenes are during a streamed loading (fast travel + city or cutscenes) where the PS4 has rarely the advantage...

That video is certainly not representative of the game.

Videos on day 1 are, kind of, pointless. So many patches, now. GTA V had its framerate weirdness on PS4. Now, as of 1.08, or whatever, it runs perfectly fine.

 

[goonergaz]

more and more reasons not to buy games at launch, wait for a cheaper copy that runs better!

 

[Reggy72]

more and more reasons not to buy games at launch, wait for a cheaper copy that runs better!

And this gentleman is my biggest bug bear with the current gen of games consoles, the amount of disk space lost to patches because the retail version is basically incomplete or down right broken is disgusting. A console game should in my humble opinion work out of the box day one without fail, after all console gaming is supposed to be play n play not gigabytes of patches the moment you shove the disk into your console of choice. I find this particularly infuriating.

 

[Cyan]

Win what? There's no gold medal here. Having just looked at the article, you seem completely hung up but a half-heartedly given recommendation despite the article in full explains the pros and cons of both. The end result is entirely subjective. People who prefer a wandering framerate and uneven frame pacing will prefer the XB1 implementation. People who prefer a constant 30 fps will be better served by the PS4 version. People who prefer a higher resolution will also be better served by the PS4 version. Given one of those factors is subjective and one is objective (unless one actually prefers lower than native resolutions), how can the overall recommendation not go to PS4? It has one clear advantage and one subjective difference which the author clearly prefers to be locked 30 fps.

There's nothing pro-Sony about this.

You are intelligent enough to know that both factors are objective, not just resolution. People can notice both, but will complain if the framerate feels jumpy, and won't usually complain if a game is 900p and above.

People give Digital Foundry's "opinion" way to much weight. Watch their video's, and make your own opinion. Is their opinion going to change what version of the game you buy? I would say for 90% of viewers it wont, and the only reason they are really interested is because they want to be reassured they bought the "better" console. The better console is totally subjective, and if you prefer the Xbox or PlayStation, then Digital Foundrys opinion on what console has the better multi plats shouldn't matter much. Typically, the difference in these titles has been rather marginal anyway. Honestly, what I took away from the Witcher performance video was how unimpressive the game looks on both consoles. Neither one has a rock solid framerate, and there is tons of pop in at fairly short distances.

Never, ever trust everything Digital Foundry says.

They will usually look for flaws and will show the worst of the worst. But won't praise a game.

Play The Witcher 3 on the PS4 or XOne and tell me afterwards. The game is truly impressive, a technical marvel, trust me on this one.

I think we haven't read the same article. Because of their obsession about capped framerate (to each their own ), they were forced to reluctantly give the nod to the PS4 version.

One simple example: the framerate video could not have being more cherry picked... and certainly not in favor of Sony console...Reminds me Far Cry 4 and GTA5 performance videos: Basically 90% of the selected scenes are during a streamed loading (fast travel + city or cutscenes) where the PS4 has rarely the advantage...

That video is certainly not representative of the game.

I think it's obvious both versions might need a bit of extra tweaking, they are already running a lot of things at the same time, and this game has the most complex shadows I've ever seen in an open world game, there are realistic shadows everywhere. Shadows are so taxing in any game...

In the original The Witcher 1, removing shadows or setting them on the lowest setting, gave my rig a huge framerate jump. Same for Diablo 3 and others.

Usually an extremely complex game like this takes years to mature. It's like when you write a text or a novel. When you complete it and feel calm knowing the job is done, it's when it's easier for you to spot things you would change and make it better.

Look at what happened with masterpieces like Skyrim or Diablo 2.

 

[Cyan]

Well, framerate wasb't a clear win for PS4, but combined with resolution ...

Digital Foundry is getting some 'competition' from NX Gamer and now Gamersyde.

NX Gamer is making excellent videos where they explain everything without making you hate your PC or console. Their last Project Cars video is amazing, have you seen it?

They found it an issue that went unnoticed before.

Another problem with DF is that they rush their articles quite a bit, they have an observant eye but it's somewhat wasted because the articles aren't made with enough time to be considered mature.

Ideally they should write a framerate article rather quickly, like they do, then take a week or two for the final comparison article.

And this gentleman is my biggest bug bear with the current gen of games consoles, the amount of disk space lost to patches because the retail version is basically incomplete or down right broken is disgusting. A console game should in my humble opinion work out of the box day one without fail, after all console gaming is supposed to be play n play not gigabytes of patches the moment you shove the disk into your console of choice. I find this particularly infuriating.

Reggy, in this case I think it is forgivable.

The Witcher 3 is running without bugs for me and like 99% of the people. For a genuine open world game, that's an achievement in itself at launch. This is a game that deserves to be played from day one.

No collectibles and posters like in FC4 to increase the duration in an artificial manner, no Dragon Errand Boy Age Inquisition.., 16 free DLC, 2 of which are already available, open world and a technical achievement, the most realistic vegetation and realistic (complex) shadows I've see in a game, Projekt Red are owning everyone in this industry left, right and centre.

Companies like this make you feel respect for their work. Thanks for this game Projekt Red.

 

[HTupolev]

You are intelligent enough to know that both factors are objective, not just resolution.

Actually, you're both being extremely imprecise. "Objectively better" doesn't really have a place in a discussion of preference. It's all subjective.

However, Shifty's meaning still stands.
Saying that 1080p is preferable to 900p isn't particularly controversial, very nearly everyone will agree. But whether XB1's uncapped framerate is preferable to PS4's lower but more evenly-paced framerate is more of a toss-up and will vary significantly by user.
In terms of per-frame IQ PS4 has a win, and in terms of performance it's not very clear, so overall PS4 has the edge.

 

[Goodtwin]

@Cyan
The majority of Digital Foundry's videos are certainly stress test, showcasing games at their worst, but that's what they do. I never assume that these games play with a wildly fluctuating framerate all the time, because they typically don't. However, the fact that a game like COD plays at a solid 60fps when nothing is happening isn't exactly giving my much info. I want to see how the game holds up under a load, when I am in the middle of a firefight, how does the framerate hold up. Would I like to see DF get competition? Yes, absolutely. For now, I will still take a gander at their findings, but I never let their findings drastically influence my gaming purchases.

 

[Cyan]

@Cyan
The majority of Digital Foundry's videos are certainly stress test, showcasing games at their worst, but that's what they do. I never assume that these games play with a wildly fluctuating framerate all the time, because they typically don't. However, the fact that a game like COD plays at a solid 60fps when nothing is happening isn't exactly giving my much info. I want to see how the game holds up under a load, when I am in the middle of a firefight, how does the framerate hold up. Would I like to see DF get competition? Yes, absolutely. For now, I will still take a gander at their findings, but I never let their findings drastically influence my gaming purchases.

They could also take breathtaking pictures, for a change. And praise certain passages. Additionally, I think they could also make a PC comparison face-off between the day one game and the game in the future, 600 tweaks are coming, adding more beauty to this already GORGEOUS game.

But you people are right. I give up on this discussion. And I am sorry to have said such ugly things to DF staff, I'll probably edit the posts. This was such an important win.., if they gave it to the Xbox One version... Note that it never ever drops below 30 fps -except one time- in-game, and cinematics are another story. Some of them are just video, but this game is so good that in-game and full HD video look the same.

As for the subjective vs objective thing, maybe another day...

 

[Cyan]

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=164444919&postcount=2741

hmm...

What does RTSS stand for?

 

[TheWretched]

What does RTSS stand for?

http://www.guru3d.com/files-details/rtss-rivatuner-statistics-server-download.html

 

[Globalisateur]

They could also take breathtaking pictures, for a change. Additionally, I think they could also make a PC comparison face-off between the day one game and the game in the future, 600 tweaks are coming, adding more beauty to this already GORGEOUS game.

But you people are right. I give up on this discussion. And I am sorry to have said such ugly things to DF staff, I'll probably edit the posts. This was such an important win.., if they gave it to the Xbox One version... Note that it never ever drops below 30 fps -except one time- in-game, and cinematics are another story. Some of them are just video, but this game is so good that in-game and full HD video look the same.

As for the subjective vs objective thing, maybe another day...

@Cyan I think you missed the discussion both @HTupolev and me had about the DF frame-time values of the XB1 game: the fact that the uncapped rendering is effectively hiding sub-30fps drops as shown on the DF videos concerning the XB1 game.

But one thing is sure: if the XB1 game was capped at 30fps, it would very similarly (maybe a bit less on some areas) drops below 30fps like the PS4 version.

 

[Deleted member 86764]

This was such an important win.., if they gave it to the Xbox One version...

And because they gave it to Playstation it's not an important win?

I honestly can't see how you can even begin to see it as a win for Xbox, all it has is an unlocked framerate. If the Playstation version were unlocked too, would you then see it as a win for Playstation? To be completely fair on digitalfoundry, they have already pushed for locked framerates on consoles (probably not on PC though). They criticised plenty of PS games for being unlocked (Killzone and Infamous come to mind).

 

[Cyan]

@Cyan I think you missed the discussion both @HTupolev and me had about the DF frame-time values of the XB1 game: the fact that the uncapped rendering is effectively hiding sub-30fps drops as shown on the DF videos concerning the XB1 game.

But one thing is sure: if the XB1 game was capped at 30fps, it would very similarly (maybe a bit less on some areas) drops below 30fps like the PS4 version.

I've followed that conversation, but it's technical jobbery that I don't fully understand.

It will be a time -will start studying computer science next year, if everything goes as planned- when I will be able to talk geeky and help others, but for now I don't fully understand all the terms, hence I ask rather than talk about certain terms.

To tell you the truth, the fluctuations of the Xbox One are in the range of 30 to 40 fps. The PS4 has no fluctuations, but falls to 20 something fps in some cases. That is a felony and more important than the difference in resolution. But DF treat it as peccadillo.

If the Xbox One version is running at more than 30 fps 99% of the time, what makes you think that it would drop to less than 30 fps when it's obvious the console is more capable than that?

I mean, your conversation hints at the vsync and buffering being a factor, but the X1 is showing how it can handle this game just fine as it is.

And because they gave it to Playstation it's not an important win?

I honestly can't see how you can even begin to see it as a win for Xbox, all it has is an unlocked framerate. If the Playstation version were unlocked too, would you then see it as a win for Playstation? To be completely fair on digitalfoundry, they have already pushed for locked framerates on consoles (probably not on PC though). They criticised plenty of PS games for being unlocked (Killzone and Infamous come to mind).

Of course it's important, that's for sure, because this is a masterpiece. The victory should go to the game showing the higher framerate.

1080p in this situation is wrong, DF have outdone themselves with a "Greatness awaits", and "For the players" thing. If they patched the game and decreased the resolution of the PS4 version to 900p when the game is under stress, nobody would complain, maybe it would run better than the X1 iteration, but DF are wrong.

In selling the 1080p, they worsen the fps, and DF just cares about resolution and sells it, wish I had eagle vision.

 

[Deleted member 86764]

Of course it's important, that's for sure, because this is a masterpiece. The victory should go to the game showing the higher framerate.

If it's as simple as that, then run every game with an unlocked framerate. That won't go in the Xbox's favour either you realise? The PlayStation version has a refresh rate lock (at least for some of it), hence why it's either 30 or (very rarely) 20.

 

[Globalisateur]

I've followed that conversation, but it's technical jobbery that I don't fully understand.

It will be a time -will start studying computer science next year, if everything goes as planned- when I will be able to talk geeky and help others, but for now I don't fully understand all the terms, hence I ask rather than talk about certain terms.

To tell you the truth, the fluctuations of the Xbox One are in the range of 30 to 40 fps. The PS4 has no fluctuations, but falls to 20 something fps in some cases. That is a felony and more important than the difference in resolution. But DF treat it as peccadillo.

If the Xbox One version is running at more than 30 fps 99% of the time, what makes you think that it would drop to less than 30 fps when it's obvious the console is more capable than that?

I mean, your conversation hints at the vsync and buffering being a factor, but the X1 is showing how it can handle this game just fine as it is.


Of course it's important, that's for sure, because this is a masterpiece. The victory should go to the game showing the higher framerate.

1080p in this situation is wrong, DF have outdone themselves with a "Greatness awaits", and "For the players" thing. If they patched the game and decreased the resolution of the PS4 version to 900p when the game is under stress, nobody would complain, maybe it would run better than the X1 iteration, but DF are wrong.

In selling the 1080p, they worsen the fps, and DF just cares about resolution and sells it, wish I had eagle vision.

I am sorry that you don't understand completely the concepts of frame-time fluctuations or dynamic 20fps cap in cutscenes (you don't spend enough time in this forum! that must be it!). And I really look forward to having the same discussion next year when you'll start studying computer science.

But I'am not sure they'll teach you those concepts in their program...;-)