Why bother on theories, just say it is a demo of an unfinished game.
Image Quality and Framebuffer Speculations for WIP/alpha/beta/E3 games *Read the first post*
- Thread starter Farid
- Start date
Why bother on theories, just say it is a demo of an unfinished game.
oh yea i'm not looking at the final product. I'm just curious as to what games that overall cause a reduction in resolution for both platforms, what type of demands that they are putting on the system.
Demos are generally unoptimized, I get that part
but zoning in on 792p is curious. I really don't have much to comment on about it, game looks great though imo.It looks fine! They're obviously going for the ultra-smooth Vaseline blur look and AF wouldn't really be ideal. It almost looks like they want to try and look like CGI by blurring the hell out of everything, so pin-sharp details are out of the way. At least it looks amazingly consistent.
I think the developers confirmed that this is just a demo, early build and that they aim to run the game at 1080p, so no worries. Someone is famous here.
http://gearnuke.com/ffxv-episode-du...creenshots-reveal-sub-900p-resolution-report/
Infamous: SS used fat G- buffer with 41bytes per pixel = ~85MB.
It affects performance, but apparently it is manageable.
that is enormous
By extrapolating the missing aliased edges (edges behind "WIZ CHOCOBO POST" words) in this one I can be a lot more precise with the PS4 approximative resolution on FF15 episode Duscae: ~880p.
Definitely sub-900p on PS4 on those 2.
I believe this lower resolution was due to them trying to meet deadlines with an engine that's still being worked on since they started the transition from Ebony to Luminous just a little under 2 years ago. But we'll know when the game comes out.
I feel the three things that hurt the visuals most (in no particular order) and prevent it from having a pristine look is
1) lack of ground vegetation a bit further away, what's there looks very artificial and hand placed. it looks bad, especially after playing games like Farcry 4. (Even Farcry 2/Farcry 3 were good at this on PS360)
2) Lack of AF
3) Lower resolution
I feel the three things that hurt the visuals most (in no particular order) and prevent it from having a pristine look is
1) lack of ground vegetation a bit further away, what's there looks very artificial and hand placed. it looks bad, especially after playing games like Farcry 4. (Even Farcry 2/Farcry 3 were good at this on PS360)
2) Lack of AF
3) Lower resolution
Too true, Open world games these days pretty much have very dense grass and foliage taken for granted such as The Witcher 3, Far Cry 4 and even MGSV at 60fps. I think it's those GPU particles that's really hindering the engine to reach a higher res when shits hit the fan say after a summon. Tone them down ffs, it's only visible for a short period of time and not a huge priority over the consistency of a pristine iq.
Also what's people's take on Bloodborne retail version?
http://i.imgur.com/IHWCMOy.jpg
Looks like 1080p with FXaa to me.
Too true, Open world games these days pretty much have very dense grass and foliage taken for granted such as The Witcher 3, Far Cry 4 and even MGSV at 60fps. I think it's those GPU particles that's really hindering the engine to reach a higher res when shits hit the fan say after a summon. Tone them down ffs, it's only visible for a short period of time and not a huge priority over the consistency of a pristine iq.
Also what's people's take on Bloodborne retail version?
http://i.imgur.com/IHWCMOy.jpg
Looks like 1080p with FXaa to me.
I don't mind it. FXAA is the only thing that stands out. Some people might be quick to point out AF (on neogaf) issues, but it looks good to me. Generally speaking the tesselation/parallax tends to deal with low AF fairly well as we see here. I'd be okay with this if I could play it, and I really want to play it. The palette is a little brown lol, but it is what it is. Some more colour would have been nice, seems like the whole environment is made and carved of exactly the same type of stone. Weapons too. The contrast of the lighting on the player to the environment makes this seem pronounced.
I couldn't focus on anything but the gameplay LOL. Trying to keep it technical,but looks too fun
Looking at some of those games released or about to I think we can already declare that this generation of consoles will be the truly artistically cinematic generation.
We can thank those GPUs because they have so much "room to spare" that can be now dedicated into those commercially highly desirable cinematic post effects.
I even wonder sometimes how some of the best selling and/or best games of the last generation, like GTA5, COD, Battlefield, Batman or Bioshock even passed their Quality Control tests without any heavy layers of optical post effects.
We can thank those GPUs because they have so much "room to spare" that can be now dedicated into those commercially highly desirable cinematic post effects.
I even wonder sometimes how some of the best selling and/or best games of the last generation, like GTA5, COD, Battlefield, Batman or Bioshock even passed their Quality Control tests without any heavy layers of optical post effects.
Gamersyde HQ version http://www.gamersyde.com/news_batman_arkham_knight_postponed-16394_en.html
Batman's voice actor has been the same for all of the Rocksteady Batman: Arkham -games, but Origins made by WB Montreal has different one. Gordon's voice actor has changed more, and there's no final confirmation for Knight's Gordon actor yet
Asylum:
Kevin Conroy: Bruce Wayne / Batman / Thomas Wayne (voice)
Tom Kane: Commissioner James Gordon / Warden Quincy Sharp / Amadeus Arkham / Guard Louie Green (voice)
City:
Kevin Conroy: Bruce Wayne / Batman / Thomas Elliot / Hush (voice)
David Kaye: GCPD Commissioner James Gordon / Inmate #3 / TYGER Lieutenants (voice)
Origins:
Roger Craig Smith: Bruce Wayne / Batman (voice)
Michael Gough: G.C.P.D. Captain James Gordon (voice)
Knight:
Kevin Conroy: Bruce Wayne / Batman (voice)
David Kaye: G.C.P.D. Commissioner James Gordon (voice) (rumored)
