V-sync is almost always enabled, but there are exceptions - Darksiders 2, for instance, has loads of tearing on Wii U.As far as I know the Wii U version is 720/30 (without tearing, because vsync is always on in Nintendi systems). Hopefully the developers reach this goal.
Yes, and as I said on the last page, some of their claims turned out to be completely wrong too.So the initial performance analysis that DF did a few weeks ago and got slated for is almost exactly the same as retail?
Didn't SMS publicly frown upon it?
Of course that will happen - in the actual Face-off. This is just a preliminary look.
So the initial performance analysis that DF did a few weeks ago and got slated for is almost exactly the same as retail?
Didn't SMS publicly frown upon it?
Wow. That confidence in contrast with the finished product is hilarious.
You can disagree with Evo's decision to go with 30fps for DC, but at least it's an absolutely unwavering 30fps with zero screen-tearing. I'd take half the frames if it meant consistency over double the frames with dips and tears all day every day.
Yes, and as I said on the last page, some of their claims turned out to be completely wrong too.
I think the code was still presented as being more up-to-date than it actually was, and that's what SMS were unhappy about. I also got the impression that SMS were more angry at Bandai-Namco for the actual fuck-up than with DF for just analysing what was put in front of them.
Whoa, someone from SMS actually said that?
I assume they don't understand anything about hitting a locked frame-rate. DriveClub is certainly capable of running higher than 30fps but that cap was selected in order to prevent fluctuation. It may not be optimal but it NEVER dips or changes ever.
I bet performance would be very similar to Project CARS if it were unlocked.
Well, GT6 doesn't run that well at such a resolution. Much better at 720p (at least you can choose!)
Still, I always felt that Polyphony was uncomfortable on PS3 and their engine just wasn't well suited to that platform. It offers a lot of features that are better suited to PS4 and should work much better there. Very excited to see it myself!
I still think that DriveClub overall is better then pCars on the consoles. Yes DC is 1080p/30 but it runs amazing and also looks better then pCars.
I hope they release a pCars demo.
This is not true in the final game. Why make a point of addressing this when that isn't the case?
They claim both use the same settings and that the artefacts observed were bugs. Well, as we can see, this is NOT the case at all. The same motion blur from the preview build is in effect in 1.01.
To be honest, I think the SMS team DID do a good job and the results are generally solid...but the fact that DF was called out over the preview build when, in the end, the reported problems were not resolved is pretty unfair. Of course, I also understand that nobody wants to see their game torn apart like that either, but expectations were quite high. I will say that the difference between the final game and the build I played last August on PS4 is truly night and day. It's come much further than I expected.The post was from Ian Bell / CEO at Slightly Mad.
With regards to the quote, taken from a thread at WMD, Ian has asked us to pass on that he was specifically referencing frame-rate e.g. the team deserved a few congratulatory slaps on the bum for achieving 60FPS in 95% of normal racing conditions!
As for this team member - I am unable to sit down at the moment and will require a good dose of calamine lotion this evening.
Regards
SMSRenderTeam
PS4:
+1080P
+More stable frame rate
-less AF
-Ghosting
+ Higher res shadows
Xbox One
-900P
-Less stable frame rate (especially when there are lots of alpha effects like in the rain)
+Better AF
+No Ghosting
-lower res shadows
Obviously updates will be coming, but screen-tearing, touchy framerates and image ghosting are especially disruptive for me for this type of game. This is feeling more like a pass for me, until changes get things up to snuff. When the underlying simulation of something like this is fighting to keep up with what's on screen, I have to step back.
What is this "image ghosting", are we talking about the per-object motion blur?
PS4:
+1080P
+More stable frame rate
-less AF
-Ghosting
+ Higher res shadows
Xbox One
-900P
-Less stable frame rate (especially when there are lots of alpha effects like in the rain)
+Better AF
+No Ghosting
-lower res shadows
A lot, actually. The road becomes your primary focal point so, even at high speeds, it's the thing you see the most. Using high quality AF in a driving game is really important even if it's only applied to the track surface.
That said, with enough motion blur, it's less of an issue.
That stress test. Not encouraging at all.
Not if you're planning on racing exclusively in torrential rain.
Not if you're planning on racing exclusively in torrential rain.
No, the anti-aliasing on PS4 works by blurring frames together and it causes a ghosting effect.
Why is adaptive vsync used so much on consoles instead of triple buffering? Triple buffering would still allow it to have fluctuating framerates but eliminate the tearing. Is there a reason for that?
I wonder if backers can get direct answers from the devs as to why this is so.Hmmmm........
XB1 gets better AF, again, PS4 blurring / banding is bad.........
Interesting, do you have a link to a source/method used? It seems to offer very good anti-aliasing to stationary objects.
It just looks like per-object motion blur here (ignore the bad tearing on XB1):
I don't get it. If the Xbox has more CPU available for developers, why doesn't it have the same or better framerates than the PS4 in all scenarios?
EDIT: Wow, that is going to be so disorientating. It's hitting mid 30s in the rain. How can reviewers give this a good score on the consoles when it can't maintain anything close to 60fps as a sim racer?
Good Lord the jaggies in the xone version. Really noticeable in the last picture.Interesting, do you have a link to a source/method used? It seems to offer very good anti-aliasing to stationary objects.
It just looks like per-object motion blur here (ignore the bad tearing on XB1):
But on the stationary objects I see good AA with no ghosting
How does it deal with stationary objects?
It's not per object motion blur at all, it's just plain ghosting.
This is per object. You can see that it's a nice smearing blur containted within the entity it's applied to, not a ghosting/frameblending effect. Right now the Xbox version has far nicer motion blur because it doesn't too this, the overall IQ manages to look better even at the lower res, just because it's not trailing everywhere like the screenshot quoted.
Meanwhile we see PS4 brings a unique approach to per-object motion blur. This isn't seen on Xbox One in any mode, though the banding artefacts may not be to every taste.
So...how can DF still get things wrong when the devs have explicitly explained how things work?
We have been told that AF on the consoles is the same...and its done on multiple passes...
We have also been told that the "ghosting" is an additional temporal AA method on the PS4, yes DF continues to INSIST that it's a motion blur...and we have been told that the developers actually prefer it...annnndddd we've been told that a slider is going to be added to turn it off at the expenses of more jaggies
The title is pretty ambitious.
I have to congratulate the SMS team and I know they will be further improving the game and adding options to make all of us happy.
What is the worst offender, a lot of cars or rain???
The version to get is obviously PC, if I had a good one.
There are different types of per-object motion blur. That picture you posted is velocity based pixel post-process.
Seems DF agree
I though Developers said motion blur it's on ps4 but the AA cause some issue with it.PS4 does not seem to have any motion blur. Just a frame blend. There's no blurring along a path. The most logical thing is they are probably offsetting the camera quarter pixel back and forth in alternating frames it is to contribute to anti-aliasing, but it's not doing anything fancy. Notice below the shared frame in two consecutive frames.
Digital foundry is simply wrong in their assumptions.
What you see is not per-object motion blur. It is frame blending.
The hell you are talking about? Developers said motion blur it's on ps4 but the AA cause some issue with it.
It's dynamic AF.Another PS4 game with shitty AF?, wtf... Looks like lastgen texture filtering in them pics.
Pretty rough on both and no clear "winner".
Are you telling me that you think the AF treatment is the same on both boxes in these screenshots?
The ghosting seen on the PS4 is a hitherto unknown AA implementation as there is literally no other game on the market with ghosting this bad with a temporal AA solution. Calling it post FX AA is unsupportable calling it a blur filter is generous on the part of DF.
Just because a dev says so doesn't mean it's true after all they've already stretched the truth by claiming that the code they did the preliminary analysis on was unrepresentative when it's proved to be basically identical to the Day 1 patch.
PS4 does not seem to have any motion blur. Just a frame blend. There's no blurring along a path.The most logical thing is they are probably offsetting the camera quarter pixel back and forth in alternating frames it is to contribute to anti-aliasing