Digital Foundry Article Technical Discussion Archive [2016 - 2017]

Status
Not open for further replies.
I wished DF went a little further in their Rx 460 review and that they clocked/specced it as a R7 260X so we could have appreciated the whole extend of the architectural improvements over Bonaire.
 
Dark Souls 2 at 120fps would be unquestionably a better game than at 60fps. Ergo I won't play it at 60fps.

Seriously @Silent_Buddha, if you love the Souls games as much as I think you do, you should play Bloodborne. It's a masterpiece, even at 30fps.
 
Dark Souls 2 at 120fps would be unquestionably a better game than at 60fps. Ergo I won't play it at 60fps.

If you have a beefy enough PC there is no reason why you should play DS2 at a lower frame rate than is possible.

For Bloodborne however, the choice is 30 fps (with frame pacing) Bloodborne or no Bloodborne at all.
 
Digital Foundry: Hands-on with DriveClub VR
The most immersive VR racing game yet?

Simply put - this is the most immersive racing game we've played in VR to date.
...
The weight of the car and the way this is communicated within the game gives it a feeling that genuinely took me by surprise. It feels supremely natural and really gives the impression that you're sitting in a car.
...
There is simply an element of refinement and realism on display in DriveClub VR that does credit to the sheer quality of Evolution's original work.
...
DriveClub VR is the real deal - virtual racing at its finest.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2016-hands-on-with-driveclub-vr
 
Noooooo they cut the rain...

Driving in a rain in a virtual reality racing game was my dream.

NO way I can do that in real life.
 
Dark Souls 2 at 120fps would be unquestionably a better game than at 60fps. Ergo I won't play it at 60fps.

Seriously @Silent_Buddha, if you love the Souls games as much as I think you do, you should play Bloodborne. It's a masterpiece, even at 30fps.

Absolutely true. And there are many people that dislike playing at less than 90/120/144 FPS, depending on the display they have. But they'll often make do with 60 Hz if a game is locked to it or if they have to play on console, but they'll complain about it. And they almost always won't even touch a 30 FPS game.

However, and this is key, everyone has access to a 60 Hz display. Not everyone has access to a 90, 120 or 144 Hz display. And more importantly when you take into account this is the console forum, there are no greater than 60 Hz (anything higher than 60 on a display is only useable for interpolation by the display itself) HDTVs.

Hence, why 60 FPS is the minimum goal developers should aim for, IMHO.

Regards,
SB
 
Noooooo they cut the rain...

Driving in a rain in a virtual reality racing game was my dream.

NO way I can do that in real life.
It's all good mate, Neo will patch it right up and then some;).
But all I am asking for from Neo is having better AA and AF, maybe slightly better LOD and the game should look like them photomode shots pixle by pixel.
 
I don't think you guys get just how low resolution VR is. It will never look anything like gaming on a TV (with the current head sets) never mind photomode shots. Imagine sitting 2 foot away from an old CRT TV. That's roughly what it looks like.

Yes, I was shocked (at first) at how 'blocky' it was - all the talk of 1080p had me expecting a near 'smooth' experience. I would suggest it's somewhat like setting your 1080p monitor to 1024x768. Having said that - the eyes adjust.
 
I really like the PS slim design. It brings back that rare trait so often absent in Sony hardware: symmetry.
 
I don't think you guys get just how low resolution VR is. It will never look anything like gaming on a TV (with the current head sets) never mind photomode shots. Imagine sitting 2 foot away from an old CRT TV. That's roughly what it looks like.

And yet the feeling of immersion mostly wins it, imho.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top