Edit: glad they fixed it.
-
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: Hands-On with Project Cars
- Thread starter Theorry
- Start date
Edit: glad they fixed it.
CyclopsRock
Member
I'd rather they do performance features on the game I'm actually going to play rather than the one I'm not.
Bamco is the publisher. Publishers handle PR, that's their job, that's why they get a nice cut from every copy they sell. It's very romantic what you say but it's not grounded in reality.
I wish we'd get actual in-depth information like this for more games. Interesting that EQAA is still available and in use.
I don't mind. I have internet, most people who read DF have internet in some way.
I personally don't see the problem.
If someone who owns a PS4/XBO don't have internet I doubt they're worried more about performance than we are.
Is that so? Are the IQ benefits similar despite being cheaper?
Dictator93
Member
I misspoke:
This article explains it well
The IQ it can achieve is cheaper than the MSAA required for that same quality. 4xEQAA, unless I am mistaken, is slightly more expensive than 4XMSAA.
im of mixed feelings with the Day 1 patch thing...
On one hand I very much appreciate, and like the fact that devs continue to work on, optimize and improve their product AFTER it has gone gold...and i think they should encouraged to do so...
On the other hand, i agree with you that the trend of broken or at least terribly performing games is appalling...I understand an issue like something with GTA5 where youve got some seemingly random performance issues, and letting that game "go gold" but too many times it seems like the devs just dont care how their product performs...and its sad
No they don't. An article was published with clear measurements on performance. It also stated that the build was a submission build and therefore would reflect how the game performs.
People making comments based on that are not stupid - they were misinformed.
Bullshit is harsh, they had a miscommunication. I really hope the RTM build is a locked 60. Anything less is really going to be disappointing at this point.
Castef
Banned
mmmmh... "bullshit".
Ok, it was an older build. Yet, if THAT NUMBERS are real I'm having a hard time believing that the final release will reach 60FPS with everything "on" (which is something I'd expect on console, settings-wise).
instead of "bullshit" I'd consider it an useful warning.
Should let you reduce grid.
Bitch Pudding
Member
I honestly do not think that developers cannot be bothered about the (technical) performance of their games. I can just asume that certain deadlines set by publishers are far more responsible for that development.
It was much better, but consistent?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=QtJ7s3u4bAs
Not really.
Ha ha, good one. You're right, I've simply forgotten, it seems, since I was the one that made that video you linked to.
This thread started at 08:12, the first mention that SMS were not happy came in at 10:41 yet it took them until 14:04 to update the article. How long does a phone call take, especially when the devs are already stating that the build is old. It should have been updated, even if only partially, before 12:00.
Wait, so it's actually more expensive but produces better results? Damn, bad choice if the XB1 version is still suffering from frame drops.
Dictator93
Member
Hah yes. It being in use is a good thing, that means they are taking advantage of GCN, but its choice given the current level of performance is... yeah.. questionable.
Let alone any subsampling. I would imagine the PS4 is using some form of hardware aa as well. I hope it is at least.
NoMoChokeSJ
Banned
Whelp, sounds like PC for me.
There is no traditional publisher here in that sense. Bandai just have the distribution rights. The game has already been funded.
Wouldn't it be better to just use SMAA and use the performance overhead to raise a few settings a level higher?
Dictator93
Member
Being a console game and racer, I think turning down anything IQ related (besides af) is a great idea to hit 60.
SMAA sounds like a great way to help that.
TylerDurden4321
Member
That's what I was thinking. Racing phsyics-engines run on higher framerates (Forza 5's engine is 300+ fps if I remember right) and PCars has so many cars rendered... many devs have called the CPUs in this gens consoles a bottleneck, so I directly jumped to the same conclusion, that it's a CPU-limitation problem.
But thinking about it, if the framerate holds up in clear weather conditions, then it's probably not a CPU-limitation.
The best solution for me would be if the game would guess ahead if it will run into low-fps trouble in the race you selected and then give you options like...
"constant 30fps",
"less (weather) effects",
"lower internal resolution",
"go back to race options",
"run it anyway",
"Idk, let PCars decide for me".
But who knows, maybe it really was that this build wasn't ready for technical analysis and the final version will run at smooth 60fps without much of a downgrade.
As long as they clearly state how old the build is, and respond quickly to errors, then there is nothing wrong with it. Here though they were unclear on how old it is (even in Bamco did give them incorrect information it was still presented badly in the article) and it took them too long to update the article after the issue was highlighted.
In the future when doing pre-release performance and graphical analysis they should try and get the month of the build so they can be very clear in stating how old the build is so people are not mislead to believe it is a close to release or representative build when it may not be.
Yup, after all, in some cases, SMAA can look as good as MSAA but with much less of a hit.
Unless Reprojection is not like Timewarp then this is somewhat incorrect. Reprojection is a 2D warp of the last frame from head tracking data before the last frame is rendered to help latency, hence why Oculus and Nvidia is warning against using Timewarp as an "interpolation-device" to up the framerate.
These words in this context is incorrect and borderline a lie.
The more correct way to say is that the benefit is that developers don't have to scale down scene details, but with the cost of lower image quality.
No
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2013-11-23-digital-foundry-vs-forza-motorsport-5
But then their target was 60fps steady, at expensive of visual bells and whistles.
Well Forza's goal is always 60. All sims should be 60 imho. Arcade racers, I'm alright with them being 30.
Edit: I do love weather effects and number of cars thought. Forza 6 has a lot to prove.
Less than three and half an hour. People at eurogamer probably have more to do than just to wait for calls about updating articles. Not to mention to check where they were wrong with, contacting the author of the article (who perhaps isn't even working at an office at eurogamer) and then finally do the update to the article.
In my opinion the response time is nothing we should make a big case of.
AstroNut325
Member
I've asked this question before for other games with day 1 patches: Are later prints of disc including the patches? Example: If I buy PCars in 2016... Will the disc version in retail include the patches?
You know what? I'd love to know this as well.
I know instances where this has happened but I'm not sure it's the norm.
Would be interesting to know, though.
Rock Solid basically. Turn 10 go for that true lock every time.
Despite the build differences, I don't see the X1 or PS4 holding 60 at all with the final game here.
It's a possibility of course...we'll see.
Pcars runs at 60 fps in sunny conditions with moderate amount of cars on track. Forza 5 is always sunny and has a third of cars on track with noAA and noAF, and the lighting is completely pre-baked, which basically means the game doesn't calculate lighting at all.
Hardly ever. They don't even bother patching the online copies, they just download the v1.0 and then all the patches afterwards.
Hendrick's
If only my penis was as big as my GamerScore!
Agreed. Also DF has really dropped off a cliff as far as credibility goes.
AstroNut325
Member
That is unacceptable.
Which are the sacrifices they had to make to stay true to their vision of solid 60 fps.
I guess we'll see what FM6 brings to the table, but I wouldn't be surprised if there is no weather..........
I dont think SMS are getting the credit i think they deserve here.
On Xbone if you download an online copy, all the patches are already included. Basically before it was Game + Patches, but now devs update the Game and the one in the store is the latest build. Don't know how ps4 handles this.
Yeah, I agree. Forza 5 is marginally better than Forza 4 on 360 in terms of tech, the models/textures have obviously improved, but the lighting has remained practically the same since Forza 1, and there are a lot of cut corners like mirrors running at 30 fps, cars not having any reflections with the full grid, and so on. It will be interesting to see what changes they make in Forza 6, but I wouldn't bet on realtime lighting and weather.
Gran Turismo 5: Academy Edition included all patches up until 2.07 on the disc.
Although that game's patch system is a joke, so that was the least you could expect from a re-print.
I understand part of what you're saying, in terms of their overall strategy for rendering priorities (real-time lighting on moving objects, pre-calc on static objects, SSR, etc), but the bolded (which comes across as the thesis of your point) is just at odds with reality.