• 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: Prey First Look

Full article.

A quote:
Scheduled for release next week, Bethesda recently released a demo version of its new take on Prey, effectively giving you the chance to sample the first hour of the full game. After development stalled on a sequel to the original game, Prey was rebooted from scratch by Arkane Austin - and what we have here is a new take on the formula made popular by System Shock and BioShock. The revamp also brings with it new technology - specifically CryEngine - a surprising choice bearing in mind the success enjoyed by Bethesda with its own proprietary idTech and Void engines.

CryEngine is a powerful platform but its history on consoles has not always been especially positive. Evolve worked out fine overall, but other titles have suffered from fluctuating frame-rates, long loading times or both. Generally speaking, we would see beautiful things from the engine running on PC, but the tech didn't seem to scale especially well to the consoles, whether we're talking about PS4 or Xbox One.

However, after spending some time with Prey, we came away impressed with how CryEngine is utilised, and the performance delivered here is solid. To be clear though, Prey's charms lies in its game design and visually it feels a touch dated at times (though remember - we are only looking at the beginning of the game) but it offers very large maps to explore backed up by some solid art design. It's a game that looks and feels like no other CryEngine title we've seen before, and it looks and runs well on both consoles. We have the standard rendering split here - it's 1080p on PlayStation 4 and 900p on Xbox One.

Video.

Here's a first look at Prey, based on the demo giving you access to the first hour of the game. No PC or PS4 Pro yet - we'll report on the full game release as soon as we can.

Didn't see a thread.
 

LCKellow1994

Neo Member
Hopefully the performance in the demo areas will extend to the rest in the full game. Performance was great, no dips during combat and only a minor freeze when autosaving after entering certain areas.

I shall look forward to any Pro support news. A resolution bump with downsampling on 1080p displays would be pretty nice.
 

Maxey

Member
Glad to see they focused on stable performance over pushing visual fidelity.

I even happen to like the stylized look they went for.

Wish more developers had that performance priority in mind.
 

Nielm

Member
The biggest issue for me was the sound-mix. I'm not talking about the loud, distorted combat music (although that was an issue for me too,) I mean the distorted dialogue and poor directional audio.
 
Was it known this was CryEngine long ago?

Nothing to right home about i guess, but wouldnt beths IdTech engine have been better, probably have hit 60fps.

Idtech 6 wasn't ready when they were developing Prey, most probably

And yes, it was known that the game uses CryEngine. Hell, the CryEngine website showed it themselves.
 

jimboton

Member
If you read the OP, they do and that the developers are aware of the issue and are fixing it for release
Could you please point me at the OP quote where it says anything about input lag? I'm still not seeing it.

And whether or not the dev acknowledges the issue has nothing to do with my question, which was whether Digital Foundry mentions input lag in the demo and how bad it feels to control in ps4, or if it's just their standard pixel and frame count comparison.
 

BigTnaples

Todd Howard's Secret GAF Account
It's wierd to see Cryengine next to words like dated.

I remember when nothing could touch it.
 

nynt9

Member
Was it known this was CryEngine long ago?

Nothing to right home about i guess, but wouldnt beths IdTech engine have been better, probably have hit 60fps.

Yes, since announcement. And we've seen that Dishonored 2 on their idTech 5 wasn't a star of performance, and presumably idTech 6 is too new for the devs to have gotten this game out now.
 
Could you please point me at the OP quote where it says anything about input lag? I'm still not seeing it.

And whether or not the dev acknowledges the issue has nothing to do with my question, which was whether Digital Foundry mentions input lag in the demo and how bad it feels to control in ps4, or if it's just their standard pixel and frame count comparison.

Aside from the basic resolution differences, though, the two consoles appear basically identical bar some missing shadows on Xbox One, but the two versions don't quite feel the same right now. In the demo build, controller input on PS4 is sluggish and the game feels very unresponsive as a result making it difficult to deal with enemies. In comparison, Xbox One version does not suffer from these issues and feels clearly more responsive overall.

Thankfully, a staff member from Bethesda received word from the development team that the final PS4 release will not suffer from this problem. "To address input lag, the fix within the final release in the game changes the raw input curve on the PS4 controller to be more responsive at the low end, and to tweak responsiveness to the center point on the controller (narrowing the dead zone.). The net result is faster/more responsive movement," a NeoGAF post reveals.

Hopefully this will prove true as in its current form, the game just doesn't feel responsive enough on Sony's platform. It's an issue we do hope to see resolved because elsewhere, the demo performs nicely. Unlike many CryEngine console titles, Prey turns in a surprisingly stable level of performance. On PlayStation 4 we ran a large chunk of gameplay through our frame-rate analysis tools and discovered that it holds 30 frames per second nearly 100 per cent of the time. The occasional loading hitch pops up from time to time but honestly, it's a rare occurrence with no real impact on the quality of the experience.

By extension, it's safe to say that Prey offers some of the best performance we've seen in a CryEngine console title to date. Moving our focus over to Xbox One and we see an almost identical level of consistency and fluidity in the game. Aside from one bizarre instance where strafing around some potted grass causes lurches down to 20fps, we're good to go. Hopefully this isn't indicative of performance hiccups with other alpha-heavy scenes elsewhere in the title but as things stand, the Xbox One version features none of the input lag issues found with PS4, making it a little softer to look at but definitely better to play right now.​

GAF -> DF -> GAF hehe
 
Could you please point me at the OP quote where it says anything about input lag? I'm still not seeing it.

And whether or not the dev acknowledges the issue has nothing to do with my question, which was whether Digital Foundry mentions input lag in the demo and how bad it feels to control in ps4, or if it's just their standard pixel and frame count comparison.

It's not in the OP anymore, but it's in the article:

In the demo build, controller input on PS4 is sluggish and the game feels very unresponsive as a result making it difficult to deal with enemies. In comparison, Xbox One version does not suffer from these issues and feels clearly more responsive overall.
 

jimboton

Member
Aside from the basic resolution differences, though, the two consoles appear basically identical bar some missing shadows on Xbox One, but the two versions don't quite feel the same right now. In the demo build, controller input on PS4 is sluggish and the game feels very unresponsive as a result making it difficult to deal with enemies. In comparison, Xbox One version does not suffer from these issues and feels clearly more responsive overall.

Thankfully, a staff member from Bethesda received word from the development team that the final PS4 release will not suffer from this problem. "To address input lag, the fix within the final release in the game changes the raw input curve on the PS4 controller to be more responsive at the low end, and to tweak responsiveness to the center point on the controller (narrowing the dead zone.). The net result is faster/more responsive movement," a NeoGAF post reveals.

Hopefully this will prove true as in its current form, the game just doesn't feel responsive enough on Sony's platform. It's an issue we do hope to see resolved because elsewhere, the demo performs nicely. Unlike many CryEngine console titles, Prey turns in a surprisingly stable level of performance. On PlayStation 4 we ran a large chunk of gameplay through our frame-rate analysis tools and discovered that it holds 30 frames per second nearly 100 per cent of the time. The occasional loading hitch pops up from time to time but honestly, it's a rare occurrence with no real impact on the quality of the experience.

By extension, it's safe to say that Prey offers some of the best performance we've seen in a CryEngine console title to date. Moving our focus over to Xbox One and we see an almost identical level of consistency and fluidity in the game. Aside from one bizarre instance where strafing around some potted grass causes lurches down to 20fps, we're good to go. Hopefully this isn't indicative of performance hiccups with other alpha-heavy scenes elsewhere in the title but as things stand, the Xbox One version features none of the input lag issues found with PS4, making it a little softer to look at but definitely better to play right now.​

GAF -> DF -> GAF hehe

Thanks! Let's hope that's in fact the only source of input lag on ps4 and it's completely addressed for release. It really did feel awful.
 

nOoblet16

Member
Btw John that FPS drop on Xbox due to alpha, you can trigger it at the beginning as well when you are in the test room. You will see two glass cabinet like things next to the window from which you are being observed..one on each side. If you look through that such that, you have two layers of alpha transparency on screen taking a lot of screen space, you'll experience the same kind of FPS drops.

Yes, since announcement. And we've seen that Dishonored 2 on their idTech 5 wasn't a star of performance, and presumably idTech 6 is too new for the devs to have gotten this game out now.
Tbh if Void engine is idtech 5 and "not new" then the same applies to idtech 6. Both of those are two new technologies that were branched off from idtech 5.

Most likely what happened was that neither Void nor idtech 6 was available when Prey started development as those engines were being developed simultaneously with the games using them, so the only other option was to use idtech 5 or some other third party middleware.
 
I don't get the complaints about the graphics, the game looks amazing.

I have to disagree with both you and John here, the game looks ok but there's nothing especially impressive about its visuals. It's not bad but I expect more out of triple-A games nowadays. It has the look of a launch title and even then I think that it doesn't compare favorably to games like Killzone Shadowfall.
 

Maxey

Member
I have to disagree with both you and John here, the game looks ok but there's nothing especially impressive about its visuals. It's not bad but I expect more out of triple-A games nowadays. It has the look of a launch title and even then I think that it doesn't compare favorably to games like Killzone Shadowfall.
I think Arkane just goes for the stylized look in their games. Maybe they realize they have limitations and don't go for a more photorealistic style.

Or they just have different priorities, focus on game design rather than pushing the visual envelope.
 

tuxfool

Banned
Honestly it looks fine to me. My complaint is that they completely failed to handle the aliasing in the specular highlights. It ruins the visual consistency almost as badly as the aliasing in Nintendo games.
 

etta

my hard graphic balls
I have to disagree with both you and John here, the game looks ok but there's nothing especially impressive about its visuals. It's not bad but I expect more out of triple-A games nowadays. It has the look of a launch title and even then I think that it doesn't compare favorably to games like Killzone Shadowfall.
I think people are spoiled and demand Horizon-level graphics out of everything these days, expecting each new game to look better than the last.
 
I think Arkane just goes for the stylized look in their games. Maybe they realize they have limitations and don't go for a more photorealistic style.

Or they just have different priorities, focus on game design rather than pushing the visual envelope.

Maybe, but in the triple-A space you kinda have to do both of else risk having your game be ignored by the mainstream.
 

nOoblet16

Member
I don't get the complaints about the graphics, the game looks amazing.
If you are talking about art then that's different from graphics.

It doesn't look amazing graphically...it's actually quite mediocre with very off and dated looking materials. For example, I can't tell ceramics from metal very well, leaves lack any sort of translucency or specular highlights, wood seems the same as plastic. All these materials look even worse when they are put under a different light source like this flashlight...which doesn't even cast shadows.

Basically the PBR in this game seem to be non existent, it's why it's lacking the "current gen" look.
 
I think people are spoiled and demand Horizon-level graphics out of everything these days, expecting each new game to look better than the last.

I won't deny that. I do expect games from big studios to keep pushing the technical envelope further and further with each release. Having impressive graphics is pretty important for mainstream success.
 

Maxey

Member
This reminds me of people complaining about the graphics in the first Dishonored.

It seems Arkane simply doesn't make graphically impressive games and that's fine.
 

nOoblet16

Member
I think Arkane just goes for the stylized look in their games. Maybe they realize they have limitations and don't go for a more photorealistic style.

Or they just have different priorities, focus on game design rather than pushing the visual envelope.
But Dishonored 2 looks modern graphically...this one does not. Also this is not the same studio as Dishonored 2. So any comments that "this is how Arkane is" is kind of unaware of that fact and not quite right.


I think people are spoiled and demand Horizon-level graphics out of everything these days, expecting each new game to look better than the last.
When people say it looks dated they are not asking for Horizon level graphics...that's just dismissing the criticism and ignoring that the game actually does have sub par graphics.
 

etta

my hard graphic balls
Maybe, but in the triple-A space you kinda have to do both of else risk having your game be ignored by the mainstream.

I won't deny that. I do expect games from big studios to keep pushing the technical envelope further and further with each release. Having impressive graphics is pretty important for mainstream success.
That's an unsustainable model, dev costs balooning leading to loot boxes and open world check boxes.

If you are talking about art then that's different from graphics.

It doesn't look amazing graphically...it's actually quite mediocre with very off and dated looking materials. For example, I can't tell ceramics from metal very well, leaves lack any sort of translucency or specular highlights, wood seems the same as plastic. All these materials look even worse when they are put under a different light source like this flashlight...which doesn't even cast shadows.

Basically the PBR in this game seem to be non existent, it's why it's lacking the "current gen" look.
No I meant from a technical point of view, and this art style certainly doesn't need PBR.

Sub-par graphics?
Come the hell on.


ss_ff6b4efb3add6ea9a1d67f5c6c0fae6661ed9fd8.1920x1080.jpg


ss_788d370761d6b3c488f4314ea2752170621573c6.1920x1080.jpg


ss_8fcc1a7b13352ad4d0b13d6b32bcd77929f0bc2b.1920x1080.jpg


"Sub-par"...
 

kuYuri

Member
I haven't really been following Prey since it's initial reveal since I've gone on media blackouts for games more often.

The Bioshock feel makes me way more interested in this game. It's a shame there's no PC demo to try.
 
If you are talking about art then that's different from graphics.

It doesn't look amazing graphically...it's actually quite mediocre with very off and dated looking materials. For example, I can't tell ceramics from metal very well, leaves lack any sort of translucency or specular highlights, wood seems the same as plastic. All these materials look even worse when they are put under a different light source like this flashlight...which doesn't even cast shadows.

Basically the PBR in this game seem to be non existent, it's why it's lacking the "current gen" look.

Yea, my view as well. The art style does help the game a bit but also hurts it when it comes to certain things (e.g. ugly character models). That inconsistency, combined with what you pointed out, results a in game that mostly looks medicore.
 

BigTnaples

Todd Howard's Secret GAF Account
Does the Demo not have Pro enhancements or was it just a time related thing for this video?
 

nOoblet16

Member
No I meant from a technical point of view, and this art style certainly doesn't need PBR.
Every art style benefits from PBR. Even a cartoon like Ratchet and Clank benefits massively from using PBR. The entire point of PBR is that it is a rendering philosophy that brings out the best in art which is why to say a certain artstyle "doesn't need PBR" is quite honestly a very dismissive comment to make when there's a criticism made about a game's use of PBR.

It can't be impressive from a technical point of view and at the same time not use one of the most basic elements of what makes current gen games look current gen.
 

Alienfan

Member
Games are expensive to make and the AAA space is unsustainable enough as is, I don't mind if not every game looks like Uncharted 4.

Plus the game looks great!
 

GavinUK86

Member
I'll take performance over visuals every time. Add a nice art style over the top and I'm all in. I don't need every game to push the technical boundaries. Just give me a solid performer and I'm sold. I've played the demo on both platforms and both feel solid. Hopefully the PC version is just as good.
 

etta

my hard graphic balls
Every art style benefits from PBR. Even a cartoon like Ratchet and Clank benefits massively from using PBR. The entire point of PBR is that it is a rendering philosophy that brings out the best in art which is why to say a certain artstyle "doesn't need PBR" is quite honestly a very dismissive comment to make when there's a criticism made about a game's use of PBR.

It can't be impressive from a technical point of view and at the same time not use one of the most basic elements of what makes current gen games look current gen.
Are you talking about the same PBR that makes materials look more realistic?
Think about it for a minute, you're saying every art style, even on the cartoony end of the spectrum, needs to look more realistic??
Imagine TF2 or Overwatch with PBR, dear God...

Agree to disagree then.
 

BigTnaples

Todd Howard's Secret GAF Account
Are you talking about the same PBR that makes materials look more realistic?
Think about it for a minute, you're saying every art style, even on the cartoony end of the spectrum, needs to look more realistic??
Imagine TF2 or Overwatch with PBR, dear God...

Agree to disagree then.

Overwatch with PBR would be great.


As would Titanfall 2.
 

nOoblet16

Member
Games are expensive to make and the AAA space is unsustainable enough as is, I don't mind if not every game looks like Uncharted 4.
Why would you make it seem like when people make a criticism about the visuals then they are asking for Horizon or Uncharted level graphics ? You aren't the the first person to say that so I'll say this again.

Sometimes games are just dated looking and they don't have to look as good as Horizon, UC4 or whatever game you can think of, to be modern looking. Dishonored 2 achieves to look like a modern game and it doesn't look as good as Uncharted 4.
 

Maxey

Member
Are you talking about the same PBR that makes materials look more realistic?
Think about it for a minute, you're saying every art style, even on the cartoony end of the spectrum, needs to look more realistic??
Imagine TF2 or Overwatch with PBR, dear God...

Agree to disagree then.
PBR doesn't necessarily make materials look life-like, they just provide artists with a superior method for creating them, AFAIK.
 

Black_Stride

do not tempt fate do not contrain Wonder Woman's thighs do not do not
Every art style benefits from PBR. Even a cartoon like Ratchet and Clank benefits massively from using PBR. The entire point of PBR is that it is a rendering philosophy that brings out the best in art which is why to say a certain artstyle "doesn't need PBR" is quite honestly a very dismissive comment to make when there's a criticism made about a game's use of PBR.

It can't be impressive from a technical point of view and at the same time not use one of the most basic elements of what makes current gen games look current gen.

Every artstyle?
2770178-3434724233-Guilt.jpg
 
Are you talking about the same PBR that makes materials look more realistic?
Think about it for a minute, you're saying every art style, even on the cartoony end of the spectrum, needs to look more realistic??
Imagine TF2 or Overwatch with PBR, dear God...

Agree to disagree then.

Cartoony games can use PBR (Ratchet does IIRC). A variety of games with different styles use PBR. It's not as if using PBR in Prey would make the game look more realistic, it's a way of handling the way materials are rendered.

Team Fortress 2 would probably look damn amazing with PBR. It's been a while since I played it though, so haven't seen any of the graphical updates the game received.
 
Top Bottom