Ike Turner
Veteran
Nope assets are identical on both, but PS4 is smoother and in some place as higher Anisotropic filtering (indoors).
Digital Foundry Article Technical Discussion Archive [2016 - 2017]
- Thread starter Rangers
- Start date
-
- Tags
- digital foundry
- Status
Is this the same engine as Battlefront?
Edit: never mind, Snowdrop/Frostbite. Got them confused. All we need now is a Coldfeet engine.
Edit: never mind, Snowdrop/Frostbite. Got them confused. All we need now is a Coldfeet engine.
D
Deleted member 11852
Guest
A f*cking huge downgrade indeed from the reveal trailer, it's not bad looking nor is it impressive by any means. Huge inconsistency in its visuals, often times you see low res textures, simple geometry, sparse environment and flat lighting but for a MMO it's pretty decent I guess. I don't think anyone here expected it to win any graphics awards tho.
I think many were in awards-thinking mode. Until we started getting the usual UbiDowngradeSoft updates.
These guys - except the Farcry team, for some reason - really need to learn what 'setting expectations' means.
Ike Turner
Veteran
Yeah what f*** huge shameful downgrade!! /s.
Give me a break... or post this kind of hyperbole nonsense over at NeoGAF...
This is one of the most impressive game ever and is nearly identical to the 2013 reveal tech demo.
Sorry..off-screen footage because GameDVR didn't work the first day of the beta:
http://1drv.ms/1RSmYG8
http://1drv.ms/1RSn1BF
And Game DVR
http://xboxdvr.com/gamer/TheMAK11/video/14319094
http://xboxdvr.com/gamer/TheMAK11/video/14319156
http://xboxdvr.com/gamer/TheMAK11/video/14319155
http://xboxdvr.com/gamer/TheMAK11/video/14319185
Give me a break... or post this kind of hyperbole nonsense over at NeoGAF...
This is one of the most impressive game ever and is nearly identical to the 2013 reveal tech demo.
Sorry..off-screen footage because GameDVR didn't work the first day of the beta:
http://1drv.ms/1RSmYG8
http://1drv.ms/1RSn1BF
And Game DVR
http://xboxdvr.com/gamer/TheMAK11/video/14319094
http://xboxdvr.com/gamer/TheMAK11/video/14319156
http://xboxdvr.com/gamer/TheMAK11/video/14319155
http://xboxdvr.com/gamer/TheMAK11/video/14319185
We arent saying that its ugly. We said downgrade...in relation to the original which, yes, it did look better
Even digital foundry admitted to that
Don't get your knickers in a twist boo. Just opinions. Supported by facts. And reality.
Don't forget the original is a vertical slice. We don't know how the game was at that point but only what they've shown. Yes the game is a bit "downgraded" in some areas but i still think what they delivered is really impressive. Stable performance on consoles and scalable on PC, great lighting and one of the best and cleanest AA implementations on PC or console to date. They really delivered as far as i am concerned, the videos on youtube and the alpha didn't do it justice imo.
Dynamic resolution for The Division on Xbox One. It is more a 1792x1008 title and full HD when seeing the sky...
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/d...sion-beta-on-xbox-one-uses-dynamic-resolution
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/d...sion-beta-on-xbox-one-uses-dynamic-resolution
The Division:
- Dynamic 972p to 1080p on XB1 with occasional tearing in some maps, frequent drops / tearing in Dark Zone map.
- Constant 1080p on PS4 with a locked 30fps.
Now that we can see the whole picture, the performance delta between consoles is finally pretty similar to 95% of the others multiplat games.
- Dynamic 972p to 1080p on XB1 with occasional tearing in some maps, frequent drops / tearing in Dark Zone map.
- Constant 1080p on PS4 with a locked 30fps.
Now that we can see the whole picture, the performance delta between consoles is finally pretty similar to 95% of the others multiplat games.
Expected but not a deal breaker for the X1 version thanks to the really good TAA used in TD. It seems like they aim for visual parity between the three systems when it comes to most effects (with shadows, AO and draw distance bumped up on a good PC obviously).
Maybe giving XB1 gamers the option on locking The Division at 900p/30fps? Seems like wasted resources if you're getting screen tearing and frequent drops.
Frequent tearing only on one map, incidentally the only map DF didn't test.
Yep, good AA indeed, blur acceptable, decently antialiased and stable in motion. Hopefully Ubisoft is going to use it on their others AAA games : Watch_dogs and AC. They can keep FQT + TAA on Far Cry though that is perfect with a game with so much vegetation.
Who knew that using a variant of the simple best bang for the buck and old SMAA 1X would look so good on a console game... Meh almost everyone did know it since eons ago duh! Well, they finally decided to ditch their "need only 30mn to implement it in your game" FXAA.
Gameplay pics were counted at 1080P by Global here and in other places, so it's not just sky. It may be when looking at a wall...
I hate dynamic res just because of the uncertainty of it. I think I wouldn't mind it if devs would publicly give us an absolute scaling lower bound, but they dont. Anyways the low points of The Division seem pretty high comparatively (for example not like Halo 5 that can drop to ~720p pixel counts)...
People who are that concerned about visuals are going to look at screens carefully and watch high-quality vids from Gamersyde and stuff like that. It's pretty simple. If they like the way it looks, they'll get it. If they don't, they won't. There's really no reason to know what the real numbers are, except for curiosity. Framerate is different, because it actually affects the controls. Releasing resolution numbers other than 1080p is only ever a losing strategy because most people don't understand what it means, other than, higher is better. They'll basically use Spinal Tap logic and demand their resolution is turned up to 11.
Knowing the minimum would be interesting from an engine POV (e.g. buffer management), but it otherwise (IMO) isn't a very interesting metric without having some sort of measured distribution of occurrences, something that (as noted) would be highly improbable without access to direct engine metrics, and a considerable amount of QA time sampling to cover all sorts of scenarios.
You might have to accept that the lowest observed measurement implies that amongst the scores of images, there were none obviously lower to the analyst, and that's subjective enough as it is.
So... do you trust them enough to not spend hours coursing through hours of your own captures to find a lower bound? Do you care enough to spend the time while the rest of the galaxy burns?
You might have to accept that the lowest observed measurement implies that amongst the scores of images, there were none obviously lower to the analyst, and that's subjective enough as it is.
So... do you trust them enough to not spend hours coursing through hours of your own captures to find a lower bound? Do you care enough to spend the time while the rest of the galaxy burns?
Last edited:
Obviously it didn't bother you before the updated DigitalFoundry article. So why let it bother you now? If DF didn't point out - you be pleased as punch.
Anyhow, what should bother you (or you hope gets resolved) is the screen tearing. That's more jarring IMHO, than dynamic resolution.
Last edited:
- Status
Similar threads
