Ninja Sharingan
Banned
I have seen a lot of dx12 comments and the gap closing comments in here, we should go after them now.
-
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
I have seen a lot of dx12 comments and the gap closing comments in here, we should go after them now.
While it's not the difference between high and low PCs gpus we've seen games with 50% more pixels on screen on ps4, the difference isn't a little as you make out.
Ninja Sharingan
Banned
I have a friend with a 960 and one with a 970 they can both set the game to the same settings and one card runs it smoother than the other. It's the exact same situation here. I don't see them arguing or going on forums fighting over who's system is better. The funny thing is these consoles are more or less identical bar the gpu. It's just one says Sony and the other says ms. Yet they both use amd. It's like someone buying a Dell and arguing with an alien ware or whichever pc manufacturer you can think of. They both use of the shelf cheaper parts to sell to consumers
tattooed_dwarf
Member
Nah, we who look further than resolution number can laugh at those "parity" shouters, since there isn't such thing as parity here.
It's big enough to do better everything the xbox does. That's why one platform consistently runs things at 900p and the other all the way up to Full HD. When parity is achieved, you can be 99% sure that xbox as squeezed to death while PS4 still got plenty of juice unused.
This was very noticeable during PS2 -Xbox era, And I remember the Microsoft crowd being vocal about it. It's just the opposite right now.
ThatOneGrunt
Member
Its weird to me that people are actually complaining that the ps4 performance is great, and that more people aren't impressed and happy that the Xbox One version is performing really great with with such a good looking game.
I'm surprised the differences aren't more glaring, but it's good that both versions are at least decent.
This is the post. It's about parity whining in a tactless way, not the implication that it's some sort of conspiracy.
This is the post. It's about parity whining in a tactless way, not the implication that it's some sort of conspiracy.
A mod just stepped in on the last page to tell people to drop this parity conspiracy crap and yet it seems like a bunch of people can't help themselves.
LabouredSubterfuge
Member
Edit: Fine, removed.
Read the post above yours......
LabouredSubterfuge
Member
We're not allowed to even joke about it now? That's boo.
Isn't the online only, i mean, MP game?
The game looks better than a decent amount of current gen action games but that isn't enough if the differences between the two versions aren't what I feel is acceptable based on games that are completely different!
Diablohead
Member
I played the beta without xbox live gold, the only thing locked away is joining friends for missions and the dark zone, everything else works including seeing others in safe zones.
The Crew is the same way, multiplayer is locked away behind the online sub but you still see players driving around the world and can do everything else fine.
Even though it leaves out the important dark zone aspect of the game, I guess it's pretty cool they still let you play at least the PvE only parts of the map with out an XBL Gold or PSN+ account.
Well, I expected it to look a whole lot better, I mean damn, compared to their initial coverage and press shots to how it presently looks now….
Chobel
Member
One (or both) of your friends is an idiot, 970 blows 960 out of the fucking water when it comes to graphics/performance. No reason to play at the same settings at all.
Not that I defend whatever happening in this thread (I don't), but this part makes no sense, on PC you can change graphical settings however you want.
Ubisoft ALWAYS downgrade their games visually, even on PC..I'm just used to that shit now.
CrimsonEclipse
Member
The effort to find substantial differences in this game between the two version in this thread is amazing, almost as if it's a mission. It's like feelings are hurt or something.
Well, I expected it to look a whole lot better, I mean damn, compared to their initial coverage and press shots to how it presently looks now .
I know they're essentially "targets" but people need to realize many of the initial showings represent visuals that would only be possible if the baseline was relatively high end PCs. The PS4 and XB1 are decent as mass market consoles but they don't really have the grunt for those visuals plus physics, AI, etc. Not in my view anyway.
I do wish though that more games delivered on the reveal vertical slice on PC vs being just higher fps/resolution. Not gonna happen though I suspect.
Dictator93
Member
Well, I expected it to look a whole lot better, I mean damn, compared to their initial coverage and press shots to how it presently looks now….
I think this press shot is terrible for comparison because you cannot even see any of the environmental quality or anything in general due to the post processing.
This is a better comparison shot for the game:
Insane Metal
Gold Member
Edit. Wrong thread.
UnrealEck
Member
Well, I expected it to look a whole lot better, I mean damn, compared to their initial coverage and press shots to how it presently looks now….
I don't think the beta's graphics are far off (if even at all) from that old screenshot.
Where is that alley in the game from that infamous screen anyway?
I think this press shot is terrible for comparison because you cannot even see any of the environmental quality or anything in general due to the post processing.
This is a better comparison shot for the game:
Even then dude.
It's possible the final PC version will match it, but the consoles are way off. I guess we'll have to wait and see.
CrimsonEclipse
Member
I played some DZ last night on X1 (tried to get into PC/PS4 version, but no code). What was strange is when I entered the DZ there were some weird sound effects like a strange buzzing. That would stop, I did notice some tearing where and there but not as frequently as some are reporting.
Honestly I thought it held up well, and can possibly be tweaked a little more assuming if people bring it to the devs attention.
Personally, I think the game does look great but it doesn't blow away anything. The character models are okay, what helps is the lighting and particles/effect system which makes things really stand out. They did a good job work with the 3 platforms it seems.
Dictator93
Member
Even then dude.
Not the same time of day, location or even platform. :/ (PS4 vs. PC reveal) The first reveal was quite obviously PC footage.
Comparisons have to be equalised to be valid, I say this as a person who could point out actual downgraded things though (volumetrics resolution got nerfed and there does not appear to be localised GI like in the tech trailer).
ResidentDante
Member
This is just your PS4 favoured babble coming through, there isn't plenty of juice left. You need to give up on the idea of any console being so powerful and move over to PC for huge differences.
You're referring back to something that old to finally get your revenge or something? Anyways the difference between PS2 and Xbox was way, way bigger than PS4 and Xbox One.
Jesus, some people in this thread really should be embarrassed for themselves.
The game's looking great. I think xbox fans are happy with what they're seeing, and it looks like from the other testing out there that ps4 delivers a slightly better looking more stable experience.
I'm just glad they give console owners on both platforms the choice to disable CA.
The game's looking great. I think xbox fans are happy with what they're seeing, and it looks like from the other testing out there that ps4 delivers a slightly better looking more stable experience.
I'm just glad they give console owners on both platforms the choice to disable CA.
Yes. If this could become an industry standard on consoles, that would be amazing. I hate CA, lens flare and the dirty screen filter.
Ninja Sharingan
Banned
fair play. I was just trying to bring some other point of view. Forget everything I said. I just think there is a difference between the console versions. The pS4 seems to run this game LOCKED 30 fps and looks nicer than the xbox in some places. The xbox just doesnt have hurrendous performance, but does suffer from my biggest gripe, TEARING. Something i will have to live with.
GHG
Gold Member
Well, I expected it to look a whole lot better, I mean damn, compared to their initial coverage and press shots to how it presently looks now….
This is a better shot to compare it with:
Not my screenshot, from the PC screenshot thread. Having played it on both the PC an the PS4 in the last few days I can say it looks much better on the PC than it does on consoles if you have the hardware to be able to downsample it while maxed out.
Again, these are just assumptions -- assumptions more than likely based on games made by different companies, that released during different periods/years.
Also, "parity" doesn't automatically mean using a ton of the Xbox One's power. Heck, there were a few 1080p games on last gen consoles. Therefore, "parity" could mean having 1080p games on both the PS4 and Xbox One with there being a ton of unused power on both. In this case the game would more than likely look unimpressive (even though it's 1080p).
A situation like that would make FAR more sense to get angry/mad about in comparison to this (The Division) -- a game that looks solid on both consoles.
Not really. Original Xbox got held back in ways outside of just visuals for a few multiplats. Smaller dev teams worked on Xbox (and GameCube) versions of some third party games while bigger teams focused on PS2 (most likely due to difference in console user base size). This caused some multiplats that not only looked worse on Xbox in comparison to PS2, but also played worse, and have missing game modes . That was definitely an acceptable reason to complain for people who owned the more powerful console.
That situation isn't similar to what we are seeing here with The Division though (a game that looks solid on both). On top of this, the power gap between the PS2 and original Xbox was larger than Xbox One vs. PS4.
icecold1983
Member
Well, I expected it to look a whole lot better, I mean damn, compared to their initial coverage and press shots to how it presently looks now….
theres no downgrade, its just a different TOD ldo
/s
on a serious note, how can anyone watch the trailer linked below and say the beta looks just as good if not better?
http://www.gamersyde.com/download_tom_clancy_s_the_division_e3_gameplay_trailer-31491_en.html
TheSpecialOne
Banned
I can assure you with full confidence that your assumption is definitely wrong.
Dictator93
Member
Have people been saying that?
CrimsonEclipse
Member
Well just played some more of the Beta (X1)...this time I didn't stream to my PC played directly on the TV.
Gotta say, it holds up well looking at it on the TV. I mentioned weird buzzing noise when entering DZ and now I know that is just a sound effect for lost of communication to HQ or whatever it says so not a bug.
Visuals in DZ don't seem much different from me? I noticed screen tearing once, maybe twice (guess it was more noticeable on the stream based on bandwidth fluctuation) but looks like something they can smooth out. Either good job to Massive, well done.
The real hard part is now, what version to buy? Gonna have to see how the PC community takes off on this.
Gotta say, it holds up well looking at it on the TV. I mentioned weird buzzing noise when entering DZ and now I know that is just a sound effect for lost of communication to HQ or whatever it says so not a bug.
Visuals in DZ don't seem much different from me? I noticed screen tearing once, maybe twice (guess it was more noticeable on the stream based on bandwidth fluctuation) but looks like something they can smooth out. Either good job to Massive, well done.
The real hard part is now, what version to buy? Gonna have to see how the PC community takes off on this.
icecold1983
Member
only some have been saying it looks better, but tons saying it looks just as good
The annoying part is that there is some minor legitimacy to the marketing deal claims but not in the way that they get spun. It's not some conspiracy or under the table agreement, it's just that if a version is the one being shown more often then it's going to get a few more focused passes in development which will effect the quality before release and may even have some remnants when the game is released. Nothing shady about it, just realities of development.
Dictator93
Member
Game still looks very good. Point light volumetric resolution took a hit since its reveal, also, no indoor dynamic GI that I can find.
edit...
tattooed_dwarf
Member
How accurately have they modeled Manhattan? Have they given any info on that?
Dictator93
Member
Game looks very good but far from the reveal, it's not a downgrade as big as Watch Dog but still a good one.
Dictator93
Member
People say this, but they do not describe it well in any real capacity.
Would someone be a dear and describe things which were downgraded on a technical level?
The 4 things I have found:
1. Point Light volumetrics are lower resolution
2. Global Volumetrics are of a lower resolution
3. Procedural glass shattering is there, but less world objects have it
4. No dynamic indoor GI, that I can find at least
Upgrades:
1. Character textures and materials all around are much better
The first 3 are hadly massive nerfs and probably allow for the fact that the game can actually have many more volumetric lights.
To get good XB1 performance at 1080p, it absolutely makes sense they based the game around XB1 and scaled up from there.
Yes that results in a downgrade, but that automatically is going to happen by default with fixed hardware if the initial reveal is running on PC hardware beyond the performance range metrics for all SKU's including lower end PC's. Happened with Witcher, Farcry 3 and many other games.
Now one could feasibly argue that with the GPU disparity linearly scaling with XB1's 1080p target they could have tacked on more graphics options for PS4, but they decided not to do that. As long as both platforms have good performance though does it really matter?
Ricky Ricardo
Member
Something I'm sure you of all people know: NeoGAF is a hyper-critical community full of folk who very often can't even detail what they are speaking on.
I can observe that The Division that it's not quite as sharp, IQ-wise as the reveal, but those PC shots look damn immaculate. I can't do what you did and note the exact technical differences, but I like how it looks even to this day and I'm buying it.
Thank YOU for being able to bring some actual technical content to the table instead of the usual "LOLUBISOFTDowngrade" tripe that even a parrot could recite.
The difference is about 500 gflops that might seem small to a high end GPU but Xbox One GPU is 1310 gflops so 500 gflops is a pretty big difference especially when both consoles are at the same resolution 1080P & locked at 30fps.
Think about that 1310 got you to 1080P 30fps but 500 couldn't make much difference after that?
Devs have damn near half the power of a Xbox One GPU leftover to put to good use when they go from Xbox One to PS4. you telling me they couldn't find something to do with 500 gflops?
It's not going to double the frame rate but it's enough to make a difference.