I don't think it is an API problem for Evolve all version have some missing shadow, PS4 maybe more than other. Maybe they will do a patch for all version.
Last edited:
Encyclopedia Brown & The Mysterious Case of the PS4 and the Missing Anisotropic Filtering
- Thread starter Rangers
- Start date
- Status
I don't think it is an API problem for Evolve all version have some missing shadow, PS4 maybe more than other. Maybe they will do a patch for all version.
Could this lack of shadows in some scenes be due to a shadow offset issue ?
I'll address you all at once. To begin
Performance is a generic statement, I'm not specifically targeting the hardware or the API, or the SDK, or even how the game is coded or what not. The available budget is a mixture of varying features all fighting for available resources until an eventual bottleneck is reached.
My stance is not unreasonable: in situations in which you cannot reach your frame budget, you must reduce the features. This is not something unremarkable in any way. We have been doing this with PC since the beginning of time, removing features that otherwise impact our framerate. In the console world we are not privy to such customization, so the developers put together what they feel is the best settings for the player. They may even go as far as performance tuning _per LEVEL_. This is what I'm suggesting.
Your arguments are the following:
a) The developers don't know how to enable AF. Yet we can see clear as day that AF is ON, it's just not 16x AF.
b) It is an SDK problem because look, Xbox and PC and PS3 can all do it, so PS4 should be able to as well. This is logical, except even in the Stryder scenario that players continually post as indication of a SDK bug, even Xbox does not have as high of a precision in AF than PC. Suggesting they could have gone even higher, and yet it didn't. This is clearly once again not an issue with the SDK. As such, and we have posted many times earlier - Cerny has written that there is no hardware or SDK bug that exists in regards to AF. I do not know how else that statement can be clear. AF is found in other games where it can match and exceed Xbox but not necessarily climb as high as PC. This means AF is working. AF is just not being scaled as high as 16x.
c) Developers don't know that they aren't shipping with AF - all AAA (and indies
edit) games have publishers that go through certification every single time you submit your game for submission. I would know this, I have been denied for missing out on a Copyright symbol on Sony Entertainment and missing accents for the French version of the game I had to release. I am given an extensive excel document every time I submit the game for certification about every bug that Sony finds and suggestions on where my performance _SUCKS.
So it is not possible that both DEVELOPER and (publisher before sony) and SONY miss out the fact that AF is NOT on? There are patches weekly for games, why have none of these no AF games not been patched yet?
Now lets get to shadows as a performance feature.
Xbox doesn't perform as well as PS4 in this game, it should be noted. And we can see in some levels where their shadow quality is the same and in some areas they are not. This could suggest that the developers are tuning the levels to run at their best for each console for each map. Lets assume you are right that shadows are a bug, they should be there, but in many screen shots I have posted they are not, no self shadowing, no environmental shadows, if it's a bug, then it's running very well over 30fps with that bug enabled. With it enabled a whole level of environmental shadows and self shadowing, you could very well see a large drop in performance. And the concept of time of day is disproven over and over again in those screen shots. The one with the man with the ship hovering overhead suggests that the light is behind the man, which is why the man is dark. So how is it that only the PS4 version has highlights on shadowed areas? on the ship? Why is the dock a bright orange? We can see the geometry on the cliff on that picture xbox and PS4 are the same, yet on PC it's a much higher geometry. What about the shimmering in the water on the PC edition not found on either console? Are these bugs? If so, are they not saving performance for not rendering them?
The sarcasm is heavy handed here, I added that screen shot because PS4 is not missing shadows in this case, but draw distance and foliage is missing compared to Xbox one; both consoles are missing even more with respect to the PC version. Is this reasonable that on this particular level devs felt the need to enable shadows but remove other items? I don't think this is unreasonable but I do see trades happening here.
Performance is a generic statement, I'm not specifically targeting the hardware or the API, or the SDK, or even how the game is coded or what not. The available budget is a mixture of varying features all fighting for available resources until an eventual bottleneck is reached.
My stance is not unreasonable: in situations in which you cannot reach your frame budget, you must reduce the features. This is not something unremarkable in any way. We have been doing this with PC since the beginning of time, removing features that otherwise impact our framerate. In the console world we are not privy to such customization, so the developers put together what they feel is the best settings for the player. They may even go as far as performance tuning _per LEVEL_. This is what I'm suggesting.
Your arguments are the following:
a) The developers don't know how to enable AF. Yet we can see clear as day that AF is ON, it's just not 16x AF.
b) It is an SDK problem because look, Xbox and PC and PS3 can all do it, so PS4 should be able to as well. This is logical, except even in the Stryder scenario that players continually post as indication of a SDK bug, even Xbox does not have as high of a precision in AF than PC. Suggesting they could have gone even higher, and yet it didn't. This is clearly once again not an issue with the SDK. As such, and we have posted many times earlier - Cerny has written that there is no hardware or SDK bug that exists in regards to AF. I do not know how else that statement can be clear. AF is found in other games where it can match and exceed Xbox but not necessarily climb as high as PC. This means AF is working. AF is just not being scaled as high as 16x.
c) Developers don't know that they aren't shipping with AF - all AAA (and indies
edit) games have publishers that go through certification every single time you submit your game for submission. I would know this, I have been denied for missing out on a Copyright symbol on Sony Entertainment and missing accents for the French version of the game I had to release. I am given an extensive excel document every time I submit the game for certification about every bug that Sony finds and suggestions on where my performance _SUCKS.So it is not possible that both DEVELOPER and (publisher before sony) and SONY miss out the fact that AF is NOT on? There are patches weekly for games, why have none of these no AF games not been patched yet?
Now lets get to shadows as a performance feature.
Xbox doesn't perform as well as PS4 in this game, it should be noted. And we can see in some levels where their shadow quality is the same and in some areas they are not. This could suggest that the developers are tuning the levels to run at their best for each console for each map. Lets assume you are right that shadows are a bug, they should be there, but in many screen shots I have posted they are not, no self shadowing, no environmental shadows, if it's a bug, then it's running very well over 30fps with that bug enabled. With it enabled a whole level of environmental shadows and self shadowing, you could very well see a large drop in performance. And the concept of time of day is disproven over and over again in those screen shots. The one with the man with the ship hovering overhead suggests that the light is behind the man, which is why the man is dark. So how is it that only the PS4 version has highlights on shadowed areas? on the ship? Why is the dock a bright orange? We can see the geometry on the cliff on that picture xbox and PS4 are the same, yet on PC it's a much higher geometry. What about the shimmering in the water on the PC edition not found on either console? Are these bugs? If so, are they not saving performance for not rendering them?
The sarcasm is heavy handed here, I added that screen shot because PS4 is not missing shadows in this case, but draw distance and foliage is missing compared to Xbox one; both consoles are missing even more with respect to the PC version. Is this reasonable that on this particular level devs felt the need to enable shadows but remove other items? I don't think this is unreasonable but I do see trades happening here.
PC missing shadows might just be a result of over tuning for Xbox. I'm not going to try to explain this one, TurtleRock studios can resolve this one rather easily.
As I stated earlier Xbox is not running a better AF than PC, nor is it running a higher anti-aliasing solution. So your point is not as strong. Xbox is maxed in this scenario when attempting to reach 60 fps for Stryder. Why it's maxed you are welcome to split onto another topic to discuss, but as the game is developed and running it is maxed. It's clearly no Order1886. But not every game has talents like MJP and Sebbbi running the show. There are only so many few super talented coders out there, studios need programmers, so you get what you can and you complete the game. If I'm hired at a AAA studio would not half the board be laughing? But the possibility exists. I am comfortable with the idea that it's maxed. A higher AA would drop frames below their desired target.
Once again, we don't know what caused the issue. WRT Order1886 having perfect AF, I would not put unreleased products as your definition of _it can do it_. We have been burned way too many times this year on unreleased products. DriveClub as great as it looked released footage with absolutely perfect AA, but upon release came out shimmery. Forza 5 had it's downgrades, Watch Dogs had it's downgrades, the list goes on. Drive club has a lower precision AF while playing the game that is clearly upped in photo mode. So screenshots are not matching what we see in game either. Performance and quality of AF in drive clubs case is directly correlated. It's not like they magically forgot to turn it up to 16x when the game is running but left it at 16x for replay/screenshot mode.
For GNMX maybe. Not for GNM.
Last edited:
According to Sony there are no hardware or API reasons for games to lack aniso.
This is several engines in the hands of different developers, who clearly understand what aniso is and how to use it.
Aniso isn't free, especially if bottlenecks elsewhere aren't hiding the bw and cache costs.
A super, epic post and this bit really nails down the argument.
Also worth noting is that a single platform game can factor in the cost of aniso early on, with no consideration of how it would affect other platforms. In the case of The Order, it is also 30fps and well below 1080. It may have the headroom for aniso that games with larger buffers and more fragments to sample textures for do not.
The games that are in the discussion are all 1080P with post process AA, that's less bandwidth intensive than 1920*800/4*MSAA in The Order
Also regarding that tweet, if it really is the artist who decides then it begs the question, why have in on Xbone then ?
KZ SF have pretty good 8xAF for the ground texture and 2x or 4x for other textures and it is 1080p. I don't think talking about exclusive game is relevant. Do a multiplateform game is probably very different to do an exclusive one.
Edit:TLOU R is 16xAF too and the only remaster with this level of AF.
Edit:TLOU R is 16xAF too and the only remaster with this level of AF.
Metal_Spirit
Regular
Of course it is not unreasonable. It's a possibility!
Another suggestion is a simple, and unfortunately quite common, Bug. Evolve is riddled with shadow bugs, especially on the Xbox One as you can read on the forums. A Patch is on it´s way to fix those on Xbox! So if the Xbox has shadow problems that others do not, other may also have bugs Xbox has not.
So, in regard to AF, apparently the Unfinished Swan team uses better the lower bandwidth and a 8 year old hardware (PS3) than it uses the larger bandwidth and extra power of the PS4. Matter of talents?
Don´t get me wrong iroboto, I know consoles are not that powerful, and that tradeoffs must exist sometimes, and you are quite right there, but some inconsistencies are just not explainable by anything else than a bug somewhere. Unfinished Swan is made by Sony Santa Monica, and unlike Driveclub it has no reasons not to support 16xAF on the PS4 since it supports it on the PS3.
So yes, in some games, like Driveclub, I could explain the lack of AF as bandwidth limitation. But in Stryder or Unfinished Swan? How do you saturate 176 GB/s with Stryder? And with Unfinished Swan that runs on the much lower bandwidth PS3?
It is only a demo and by a japanese developer but PT
I've never heard of a game globally turning shadows on and off dynamically. I've heard of reduced quality, reduced filtering and reduced rendering distances. If you are going to come up with a theory based on performance, then it should have some supporting evidence. A empty scene of a bridge having no shadows is not good evidence while there is plenty of scenes with lots of action and shadows. Also if the PC also shows the same thing, that is further evidence of a bug. It reminds me of the god rays in Far Cry 4, there one patch, then gone in the next and then back again in the third.
Good theories don't only use cherry picked data, they have to work for all the evidence. When you cherry pick to support a theory based on bias, then you are acting like global warming deniers or creationist.
The AF data is all over the place. The data cannot simply support a performance trade off. There is too much data from games that have no such trade off to make. The swan game is likely internally rendering over 100fps. I'm guessing Strider also has a huge headroom. A theory has to support this evidence or it is a bad theory.
I don't know what could explain the mess of data about the AF.
Good theories don't only use cherry picked data, they have to work for all the evidence. When you cherry pick to support a theory based on bias, then you are acting like global warming deniers or creationist.
The AF data is all over the place. The data cannot simply support a performance trade off. There is too much data from games that have no such trade off to make. The swan game is likely internally rendering over 100fps. I'm guessing Strider also has a huge headroom. A theory has to support this evidence or it is a bad theory.
I don't know what could explain the mess of data about the AF.
- Most games have it
- Some "easy" games don't
- Some "hard" games don't
- Some "hard" game do
Causes of lack of AF on PS4 titles
1) Multiplatform engines, from multiple companies, are bad ports and lack AF on PS4 even though they got it working on X1 which has weaker hardware and more restrictive APIs.
2) Performance limited by bandwidth on PS4, but not on X1 or PS3 (Unfinished Swan)
3) Artists, from multiple companies and multiple games, all forgot to enable AF for textures on PS4
4) SDK bug, or non-trivial implementation with the PS4 API
The only answer that makes sense is #4.
1) Multiplatform engines, from multiple companies, are bad ports and lack AF on PS4 even though they got it working on X1 which has weaker hardware and more restrictive APIs.
2) Performance limited by bandwidth on PS4, but not on X1 or PS3 (Unfinished Swan)
3) Artists, from multiple companies and multiple games, all forgot to enable AF for textures on PS4
4) SDK bug, or non-trivial implementation with the PS4 API
The only answer that makes sense is #4.
I found an interesting Restrictions and limitations on the Microsoft Visual studio (Direct3D) API
https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dn642451.aspx
From what I understood (please correct me If I am wrong), there are 3? different APIs that the devs can use on PS4:
- GNM (very fast API but hard to use)
- GNMX (good API and less hard to use)
- ?Pure DirectX code that can be then easily compiled by Visual Studio for the PS4?
https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dn642451.aspx
From what I understood (please correct me If I am wrong), there are 3? different APIs that the devs can use on PS4:
- GNM (very fast API but hard to use)
- GNMX (good API and less hard to use)
- ?Pure DirectX code that can be then easily compiled by Visual Studio for the PS4?
If for a reason or another, the directX 11 compiler of visual studio recognizes the GPU as only level 9.1 then it will compile the code at max AF 2X.
Could this detail help us (maybe guide us) into resolving this mystery?
Could this detail help us (maybe guide us) into resolving this mystery?
I'm sure you can use Visual Studio to make PS4 games with the PS4 SDK, but you wouldn't use the standard Windows compiler.
Edit: Visual Studio is just an IDE. You'd be compiling with whatever the PS4 SDK's compiler is, and linking with whatever the SDK libraries are.
In other words, if some bug or oversight were preventing AF from being enabled, it would be a bug or oversight in the PS4 SDK.
Edit: Visual Studio is just an IDE. You'd be compiling with whatever the PS4 SDK's compiler is, and linking with whatever the SDK libraries are.
In other words, if some bug or oversight were preventing AF from being enabled, it would be a bug or oversight in the PS4 SDK.
Last edited:
Can you compile any directX11 code (maybe with some minor modifications) directly into PS4 binary code with a tool (compiler) provided by the PS4 SDK?
That information can't be NDA protected, right?
That information can't be NDA protected, right?
- Status
