Digital Foundry Article Technical Discussion Archive [2015]

[iroboto]

It's an interesting solution that 343i has cooked up. There has been a lot of talk about dynamic resolution, and we've never truly received dynamic resolution at the level at which 343i is working at it. We've talking massive swings as low as 832x810 and I'm assuming as high as native 1080p.

For this to work and maintain 60fps the solution is likely more advanced than what we're used to seeing. Interestingly enough, I don't know whose shoulders of responsibility this falls on, the render team, or the engine team, but I think so far the goal is to get the game working at a solid 60fps no matter what, and then switch over to optimizing the render code. They have enough time, the question is whether they can really keep the locked 60fps. I don't think we're going to see a performance that should be worse than COD:AW. And that was fairly locked 60fps and mainly running an equivalent of 900p. So if that's a benchmark for performance of a multi platform title (last year), 343i will do better.

The resolution that should be important to look at is the MP resolution, they should give us an idea of the worst case scenarios of the game. MP shouldn't be dynamic if they are looking to get halo into eSport.

 

[Rangers]

The DF article shows it's not locked 60 anyway, despite the ultra low resolution dips. Drops to 50, quite substantial.

Which is good imo. Because I want campaign at 30 anyway. If they end up more like 40-45 FPS it will blunt the impact of 60, like some COD's were.

 

[Billy Idol]

It's an interesting solution that 343i has cooked up. There has been a lot of talk about dynamic resolution, and we've never truly received dynamic resolution at the level at which 343i is working at it. We've talking massive swings as low as 832x810 and I'm assuming as high as native 1080p.

For this to work and maintain 60fps the solution is likely more advanced than what we're used to seeing. Interestingly enough, I don't know whose shoulders of responsibility this falls on, the render team, or the engine team, but I think so far the goal is to get the game working at a solid 60fps no matter what, and then switch over to optimizing the render code. They have enough time, the question is whether they can really keep the locked 60fps. I don't think we're going to see a performance that should be worse than COD:AW. And that was fairly locked 60fps and mainly running an equivalent of 900p. So if that's a benchmark for performance of a multi platform title (last year), 343i will do better.

The resolution that should be important to look at is the MP resolution, they should give us an idea of the worst case scenarios of the game. MP shouldn't be dynamic if they are looking to get halo into eSport.

Huh?? Wipeout already had it on PS3 to achieve 60Hz and up to Full HD...nothing special about 343i here.

Even on Vita, the KZ game used it highly effective.

I am wondering when the range of resolution is this high, if it is even worth it in the end or too jarring during gaming.

Honestly, they should go for 30Hz locked(to max out the possibilities of large scale battles) in the campaign and 60Hz target in MP!

 

[Rikimaru]

832 x 810 !
That's 73% of 720p. And 33% of 1080p.

 

[nightshade]

It's an interesting solution that 343i has cooked up. There has been a lot of talk about dynamic resolution, and we've never truly received dynamic resolution at the level at which 343i is working at it. We've talking massive swings as low as 832x810 and I'm assuming as high as native 1080p.

For this to work and maintain 60fps the solution is likely more advanced than what we're used to seeing. Interestingly enough, I don't know whose shoulders of responsibility this falls on, the render team, or the engine team, but I think so far the goal is to get the game working at a solid 60fps no matter what, and then switch over to optimizing the render code. They have enough time, the question is whether they can really keep the locked 60fps. I don't think we're going to see a performance that should be worse than COD:AW. And that was fairly locked 60fps and mainly running an equivalent of 900p. So if that's a benchmark for performance of a multi platform title (last year), 343i will do better.

The resolution that should be important to look at is the MP resolution, they should give us an idea of the worst case scenarios of the game. MP shouldn't be dynamic if they are looking to get halo into eSport.

If you compare this to the "dynamic resolution" solution seen in Advanced Warfare and Witcher 3 then sure it is advanced, but in reality this seems to be no different than the dynamic resolution seen in WipeoutHD, Wolfenstein:The New Order and Rage or even Black Ops 2 on PS3. The dynamic resolution is the reason why the two id tech games atleast never drop a single frame. If you are gonna implement dynamic resolution then you better make sure that the framerate is atleast maintaining a constant line with zero dips.

Killzone on vita rendered the game at native when you were still but it would drop if you moved and the scene in front of you was demanding.

 

[iroboto]

Huh?? Wipeout already had it on PS3 to achieve 60Hz and up to Full HD...nothing special about 343i here.

Even on Vita, the KZ game used it highly effective.

I am wondering when the range of resolution is this high, if it is even worth it in the end or too jarring during gaming.

Honestly, they should go for 30Hz locked(to max out the possibilities of large scale battles) in the campaign and 60Hz target in MP!

Yea I'm thinking it's not so simple. There is the idea of predicting load before the resolution drops. Some games might have an easier time with that than others. I'm holding my reservation until the game is complete. It's clear to me at least that the game won't be operating at below 720p (which it is), so it's obvious the game is not ready for prime time. Several months left to go

 

[AlNom]

343i need to deal with >1 enemy showing up. As it was, the framerate simply drops. Their promises of larger scale are...........


.......a concern.

 

[steveOrino]

That resolution range is insane and I fail to see the point. Looking at that analysis they aren't hitting the 60 mark consistently anyway thus I doubt the game will spend much time at max resolution. Just lock it at 720p60 and call it a day. Why have the image consistency be all over the place?

 

[AlNom]

Why have the image consistency be all over the place?

PR. ¯\(0_o)/¯

 

[HTupolev]

PR. ¯\(0_o)/¯

0810pr

 

[Billy Idol]

That resolution range is insane and I fail to see the point. Looking at that analysis they aren't hitting the 60 mark consistently anyway thus I doubt the game will spend much time at max resolution. Just lock it at 720p60 and call it a day. Why have the image consistency be all over the place?

Because it is not even always higher than 720p and not always 60Hz either, so atm no 720@60 locked is possible.

Anyway, optimization can do wonders! I judge the game when it is released...maybe even the devs right now are not completely sure what is the best and are experimenting...

 

[hesido]

I thought fair bit of optimizations are done closer to the end of the development cycle...

 

[iroboto]

Common guys, even this is a bit much for you guys. Dynamic resolution you drop the resolution so that the GPU can meet its refresh target. If you are hitting super low resolution and still can't hit your refresh it's not the GPU, it's the CPU.

 

[AlNom]

¯\(0_o)/¯

 

[Cyan]

343i need to deal with >1 enemy showing up. As it was, the framerate simply drops. Their promises of larger scale are...........


.......a concern.

It's 60 fps people, be graceful to God.

 

[Inuhanyou]

ugh, this is what they dropped split screen co op for? My goodness. This game is coming out this year and 343 seems to not have nailed down their priorities at all. Sub 720p swings and still not even close to hitting a solid 60in any sense of the word.

Just cap it to 30fps! Naughty dog had to take their hits for talking crap about 60 and then having to reel back expectations for the retail product, but they did so.

343 should not feel forced to go to 60fps to 'prove' their games 'current genness'. Just deliver a stable 30 and work on making the game work in general instead. That online situation of MCC should never be repeated again

 

[DrJay24]

Common guys, even this is a bit much for you guys. Dynamic resolution you drop the resolution so that the GPU can meet its refresh target. If you are hitting super low resolution and still can't hit your refresh it's not the GPU, it's the CPU.

You know this how?

 

[Scott_Arm]

Depends when the lowest res drops occur and for how long. If you never notice them, then it's a good optimization. If you can notice them, then it becomes more subjective. Everything is a compromise. If they cap at 30fps that still a compromised experience. Personally, I'd take close to 60Hz with dynamic res over 30Hz as long as the dynamic res was effectively unnoticeable.

 

[Clukos]

The game looks rough in these screenshots in the DF article

I would argue that even 900p30 (if 1080p30 is not achievable) would be better for single player than what we get now.

 

[Jay]

It definitely will be interesting to see how it's viewed both graphically and gameplay wise once it's released.....
Normally 30 campaign and 60 multi player seems to be a reasonable and excepted trade off.

Have you played the MCC? I've heard people say that 60 in campaign makes a big difference?
How do you think it looks and do you think that 60 made a worthwhile difference?
Wonder if MCC fed into the decision for Halo 5?