-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Digital Foundry Performance Analysis: The Division beta (PS4 Vs. Xbox One)
- Thread starter Get_craycray
- Start date
Ninja Sharingan
Banned
I say bring back the days of true PC exclusives ( I don't really ) Absolute power houses Like Far Cry Etc that push the current PC specs and make console owners cry that they can't play it.
I don't really want this. I would like more people to be able to play games. With the spiraling cost of video games this would not be possible anyway.
Brad Grenz
Member
And that's a bad excuse when we know they've gone to the effort to develop more advanced effects for the PC version that should be fairly trivial to implement on PS4 where the majority of their sales are likely to be. Using Xbox One equivalent effects was a choice they made and the amount of work to implement them is unlikely to be significantly less than those already being created for PC.
That was before the patch.
Not sure how much we should read into that, I have seen some of those same shots reproduced and they are much clearer than those posted, have also seen some shot's where they claim the PS4 version looks worse.
I expect the PS4 version to be better or at least it should be, but my point is screenshots can easily be manipulated.
biglittleps
Member
Seems like they are using XB1 as primary platform to develop most of the titles and then porting to PS4 which is making the advantages of the PS4 power not used properly.
yup. xbox definitely seem to be lead platform. i figure the backlash they get due to parity and untapped potential on PS4 is smaller then the backlash they get from poorer xbox performance when porting from PS4 to xbox?
biglittleps
Member
May be they brute-force the extra PS4 power for porting to save time and money instead of applying PS4 level optimizations and developing the game around the hardware advantages, which is why we see same resolutions/FPS for most of the Ubisoft titles. So the efforts they put on the PS4 version is far less compared to the XB1 version even though PS4 version is the one which sells and played most, but they dont care PS4 gamers and want parity which is why i wont support ubisoft mostly and also they are milking their franchises a lot which i hate.
Ubisoft is not one developer with one engine you know. Ubisoft is a publisher with several studios that bear the tittle Ubisoft something.
This is made by Ubisoft Massive, formerly Massive Entertainment..the studio that used to make World in Conflict. And the engine they are using is called snow drop engine. It's got nothing to do with the Anvil Next that AC and Watch Dogs used, or the Dunia 2 engine that Farcry team uses.
If Ubisoft were Sony then Ubisoft Massive would be some studio like Guerrilla Games and Ubisoft Montreal would be another studio like Naughty Dog. Yet just because they bear the name Ubisoft they are usually considered to be one entity. Same happens for Rockstar Games I suppose.
Ubisoft is not one developer with one engine you know. Ubisoft is a publisher with several studios that bear the tittle Ubisoft something. This is made by Ubisoft Massive, formerly Massive Entertainment..the studio that used to make World in Conflict. And the engine they are using is called snow drop engine. It's got nothing to do with the Anvil Next that AC and Watch Dogs used, or the Dunia 2 engine that Farcry team uses.
If Ubisoft were Sony then Ubisoft Massive would be some studio like Guerrilla Games and Ubisoft Montreal would be another studio like Naughty Dog. Yet just because they bear the name Ubisoft they are usually considered to be one entity. Same happens for Rockstar Games I suppose.
Also slight bugbear
JC3 is not a "port", Port has a specific meaning i.e. it's developed for one platform then ported (converted) over to the next. But people seem to use it synonymously to describe a developed product that is not good on one platform but is good on another, even if it is developed for both of them simultaneously with no porting involved. JC3 runs bad because the CPUs on consoles are bad, and it's the same reason why Unity has performance issues (which apparently got somewhat fixed later and made PS4 version the better version supposedly)Possibly. Purely as a business strategy I can see leading with XB1 making sense. If you don't like it I guess you decide whether to support it or not.
As it is some developers by the nature of their strategy (DICE at EA spring to mind) are producing games/engines that highlight the differences in various platforms. They still lean towards PC and right from the start you've seen resolution differences on PS4 and XB1.
Ubi I think are taking the approach of targeting XB1 as the lowest denominator knowing the game should perform fine on PS4 and PC if correctly ported as a result (their execution was uneven to begin but has more recently improved). It may be Massive working with Ubi have gone the same route.
There is a case, given PS4 has more power and appears easier to develop for still, to argue that economically putting say 60% of effort into base game and optimising for XB1 with say 40% to stabilise and align code base on PC and PS4 delivers lowest cost vs results although it probably does mean PS4 doesn't get pushed as hard as it might with super optimised code and assets.
Ultimately if games seem almost identical each purchaser has to decide how they feel about what that implies for development strategy.
Myself if the game is stable, fun to play and looks "good enough" on my platform of choice I don't really care about parity or whether another version is almost identical. It's bugs, poor optimization, frame rate dips and screen tearing that annoy me.
M_A_C
Member
I don't know if you guys have seen this excellent The Division Beta – PC vs. PS4 vs. Xbox One Graphics Comparison from CandyLand.
It's obvious here that the Xbox version is muddier. Almost looks like lower res textures: https://youtu.be/f-kzKbXFvwc?t=3m18s
It's obvious here that the Xbox version is muddier. Almost looks like lower res textures: https://youtu.be/f-kzKbXFvwc?t=3m18s
impossible? no, but there were plenty of exclusive games on the 360, and none of them quite matched what some of the top tier PS3 exclusives were able to do (Killzone, Uncharted, TLoU, etc...)
lollll
i would have to agree with you...the power difference was close enough that the overly complicated PS3 hardware was a stupid decision...Unfortunately for MS this gen...they have the more complicated, but also weaker hardware
Goddamn the difference from PC to console is staggering with this game, dem shadows
Lol your easily pleased
Dynamic weather.
so which 360 games were on par visually with the franchises i mentioned exactly??
http://writingexplained.org/your-vs-youre-difference
Based on the indoor shots it seems that PS4 has very slightly higher res shadows. The grate scene shows more gradiations in the shadow above the door frame. A couple textures like the sign it zooms in on about 3 minutes in also seem to be slightly higher res. Outdoor stuff is likely due to variations in time of day and weather but it seems there are some more differences than originally thought when you look closely.
Yes, God of War 3 would make the list of best looking PS3 exclusives as well
Frame rate all over the place too much for me
Yes, but that is not a proof at all. The only way to say so would make the same devs use the same effort and resources when making the same game.
It's like saying that ps3 would not be able to run Halo 4. Yes, I know that sounds ridiculous but there is just no proof for it. And don't argue with how a game looks. Performance and needed resources are not in a proportional dependency.
Pathfinder
Member
New updated thread. The Division on Xbox One uses dynamic resolution scaling.
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?p=194051123
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?p=194051123
ninjablade
Banned
dude i owned both consoles, switched ps3 late in the gen, halo 4, forzas horizon, and gear of war 3 look as good except for uncharted 3, which was the best looking game of lastgen. red dead redemption 360 version was also best looking open world game on lastgen consoles.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
To you.
ninjablade
Banned
to many people, you can look at the digital foundry article, they were extremely impressed. along with many posters here back in the day.
WickedLaharl
Member
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
ninjablade
Banned
i was talking technically, still even that is subjective.
Heh, you *REALLY* like the look of Red Dead Redemption.
I think it's a nice looking game but it never really knocked my socks off, to be honest.
ninjablade
Banned
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_1aOuU0wtxA
how can this not knock your socks off in 2010, it's looked a generation ahead of any open world game on consoles at the time. i guess you must have had a gaming pc that runs crisis.
We now need that wrestling gif with "it was dynamic all along"...
Can't believe this thread devolved into a PS3 vs 360 debate. That was very "what year is it".
Anyway I guess XB1 having dynamic resolution vs PS4 apparently holding solid 1080p/30fps should appease everyone (mostly)
Can't believe this thread devolved into a PS3 vs 360 debate. That was very "what year is it".
Anyway I guess XB1 having dynamic resolution vs PS4 apparently holding solid 1080p/30fps should appease everyone (mostly)
I'll still take Killzone over Halo as the best looking FPS last gen...Uncharted 3/TLoU stand above everything else...
GTA V is IMO a better looking game than RDR...and the PS3 version was better there...