I certainly wouldn't trust this guy too much; he didn't mix some terms with the UC4 video he was totally wrong on quite a few things and we his capturing technique doesn't seem very good for doing a detailed analysis. In short I don't really think he has any credibility compared to DF.
-
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.
NXGamer: Assassins Creed: Unity Performance Analysis.
- Thread starter CozMick
- Start date
Like what exactly? I dont really want to compare both, after he started to throwing volumetrics and tessellation left and right.
thelastword
Banned
OP, the framerate actually goes as high as 48fps unlocked. I don't know if you want me to cap it, but it's there. I agree though NXgamer deserves some credit since he is so thorough in his videos trying to educate even the casual gamer on what this differences are, what they mean, more importantly he schools the gamer on what some of the latest tech and effects are in current games, Very informative stuff all round.
I don't really trust his videos much either and take everything he says with a grain of salt, he gets his technical terms wrong quite often. He is good at pointing out things others may have missed, but I don't really know what he's using to get his Framerate numbers, and that along with getting terms wrong has me doubting alot of what he says. In his Order analysis video, I thought it was interesting in that he referred to DOF being used in the game as motion blur.
All I want is the trust in that I can trust the numbers he is putting out there, which is why I still prefer Digital Foundry as we do know their method and they provide graphs, side by side comparisons and what not to help me decide for myself, I could care less about what they write or what they write as the final verdict. But I just feel that I can't trust this guys method for some reason.
All I want is the trust in that I can trust the numbers he is putting out there, which is why I still prefer Digital Foundry as we do know their method and they provide graphs, side by side comparisons and what not to help me decide for myself, I could care less about what they write or what they write as the final verdict. But I just feel that I can't trust this guys method for some reason.
I have not watched the video yet, but that quote stuck out to me too.
Dictator93
Member
Is he using FCAT? DF does that, and it is 100% accurate.
thelastword
Banned
So you rather a techspot that does less analysis, less frame passes, does not know the difference between ssao and hbao (rivals faceoff), did not report on foliage difference on first inspection in GTA5 when regular gamers saw it in a flash,(perhaps it was too subtle a difference) just as 900-1080p is apparently. Did not report that the PS4 ACU was unlocked, did not report that PS4 Farcry had God Rays, did not report that PS4 version of FC4's framerate was much more stable. A site which has presented less and less like for like scenes in the last few comparisons, (FC4, DA.I, GTA5), took forever to publish the PES faceoff, YET have no problem seeing a CLEAR advantage in a game which the XBONE won apparently. A bland looking strider game with AF is a world of difference I imagine.
Removed God Rays on FC4 PS4 post patches, unlocked framerate in Unity pre patches, the latter illustrating how much of an afterthought the PS4 version was for Ubisoft.
They havent done analysis post patch for Far Cry 4. They are not missing info, but the whole article.
They tested Unity probably after patch only and we still dont know how accurate info about unlocked info is. Without methodology of NXGamer we cant even start to talk about it.
Like the massive prolong frame drops in Xbone FC4.
Crossing Eden
Hello, my name is Yves Guillemot, Vivendi S.A.'s Employee of the Month!
Muppet of a Man
Member
This is interesting, given the well established microsoft preference that DF (or at least richard leadbetter) has, going so far as to essentially provide editorials to defend microsoft's poor technology choices for the x1 prior to this gen starting, as well as downplaying every shortcoming x1 versions have compared to the competition as not really being meaningful when that is not at all how they described it last gen when the advantage was on x360 most of the time. There is clearly a well evidenced fanboy-like bias, which doesn't help anyone's buying decision for multiplats.
It didn't matter as much last gen when their bias aligned with the superior version of console multiplats. But now DF can't really be trusted to give us a clear picture because that same preference is getting in the way of them advising clearly.
I have only seen this guy's one video. So, I am not aware of any clear biases he may have at this point.
Wickerbasket
Member
I don't know what hardware/software NXGamer used to perform the comparison, but he used the same method for both, so it should give a fair representation of how the game runs on each platform. More people like this are going to keep popping up until Digital Foundry stop editorialising their findings.
All I want from DF is the unaltered facts and data from multi platform comparisons. I'm not really interested in whether they believe lower resolutions and missing effects matter now, because I know they mattered to them last generation. If they're going to throw their opinions around in their articles, they should at least stay consistent.
All I want from DF is the unaltered facts and data from multi platform comparisons. I'm not really interested in whether they believe lower resolutions and missing effects matter now, because I know they mattered to them last generation. If they're going to throw their opinions around in their articles, they should at least stay consistent.
Crossing Eden
Hello, my name is Yves Guillemot, Vivendi S.A.'s Employee of the Month!
DF hasn't even made an article about this patch yet. People really need to stop it with the conspiracy theories.
Wickerbasket
Member
I'm not talking about this particular comparison, I'm talking about DF in general.
You need to read past gen comparison as well, because their made apologist opinions for Sony ports even if they underperfomed, as long as they do not compromised gameplay or visual integrity of the game.
And DF is not a single entity.
Also You dont need to read their opinion, they present mostly facts, their opinions are like 10% of the whole article.
Crossing Eden
Hello, my name is Yves Guillemot, Vivendi S.A.'s Employee of the Month!
DF has many different writers on hand, many of which are freelance. You cannot make it seem like DF is one big entity.
The Dutch Slayer
Member
That was great going to follow more of his stuff I really enjoyed the video and now I have a better understanding how how Patch 4 works.
Wickerbasket
Member
It's clear that the whole tone of their articles is slanted a certain way. I don't pay attention to which writers are bias and which aren't; if I read an article that reads like apologist bullshit then that reflects badly on the whole site and it's what I'll remember them for.
You have a tech comparison website claiming that a difference in resolutions is fine now, and that missing effects hardly matter. They're basically arguing against their own relevance.
martino
Member
look the mgs review and you will understand...really wonder what is his config.
SMOK3Y
Generous Member
Same here
martino
Member
it's educative to say overall console choice are best , better iq is not worth it imo...but i can understand it can be pleasant to hear for somes.
he takes big risks claiming most of the differences in gz will come in ps4 tpp.
I'm sure you don't mind a bit this guy saying his opinions on things, though.
From what I gather, a lot of the complaints about DF seem to be what they say, not that they're saying something at all. Its just a matter of convenience. "Who is saying what I want to hear?".
Are you saying he is bias?
Too bad DF got showed up by an amateur. when you have these awesome pros *missing* in your face massive frame drops. Any other choice is better.
I guess some people don't like common sense narrative where more power hardware has better performance. Such an awful, awful narrative.
Wickerbasket
Member
Well, there's obviously going to be more complaints about something people feel is plain wrong. What they say often doesn't match the results they've gathered, or they try to downplay the differences. They didn't feel the need to do that last generation, so I don't see why they're doing it now.
The type of people who read these articles DO care about differences in resolution and missing effects and it's annoying to be told that these differences don't matter. I mean, if they don't matter, why are they even bothering doing a comparison? Why am I reading their articles? Should I not bother? It boggles the mind.
They did the same things past gen for many PS3 ports. Its not a bias to the platform, just their opinion. And their opinions most of the time is just saying that one platform perform better, but the disadvantage isnt that bad to make game unplayable.
About the same opinion as many people here have that PC platform advantage is meaningless, because they are fine with they get from current gen consoles.
But they did this in past gen analysis.
Wickerbasket
Member
I don't remember them down playing resolution differences and missing effects.
Do you?
Edit: So they recommend the 360 version of MotoGP if you have the choice, but say buy either version for Far Cay 4. OK then.
Examples found in a minute.
Again, its not agenda, just their opinion. Stop looking for some kind of conspiracy theory.
Far Cry 4
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2014-far-cry-4-face-off
MotoGP
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-xbox360-vs-ps3-round-30-face-off?page=5
Red Dead Redemption
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-red-dead-redemption-face-off?page=2
Wickerbasket
Member
So you don't remember them downplaying resolution and missing effects last gen?
Because neither do I.
Edit: So they recommend the 360 version of MotoGP if you have the choice, but say buy either version for Far Cay 4. OK then.
You're posting a lot of old articles saying get the 360 version. Thanks I guess?
3rdamention
Member
I love this site. And the guys commentary is fair and avoids console war narratives...
I just fine it funny that the PS4 was achieving around 45fps on rooftops on PS4 prepatch and DF never mentioned it, never showed it, never alluded to it running unlocked...
Why would DF leave that out...??? I mean, it was something that should have been mentioned in a performance analysis...
So even though the wording of the whole summary is basically the same, the lack of 'If given a choice You should buy it on PS4' means that they are downplaying or are bias?
Yeah You are completely reaching. They said that PS4 is better, like they said that xbox 360 version is better, but game is still fine on the second platform as well, there is nothing more or less about this summary.
Wickerbasket
Member
It changes the whole tone of the paragraph. They're basically telling you which version you should buy in the old articles, but now suddenly that the difference isn't in Microsoft's favour, either version is fine?
If you don't see the difference then I can't help you.
Like I said, you like what you want to hear. DF isn't always 100% on point with their analysis explanations or observations but their mistakes or oversights are not that common.
This guy, on the other hand, has been shown to be massively inaccurate and misses quite a bit all in the matter of a few articles. Not to mention a completely unknown testing methodology. But that gets looked past because he's saying what people want to hear. Your last sentence seems to typify this attitude - that PS4 should always be better therefore anybody who possibly says this might not be the case or god forbid, doesn't think its quite as massive a victory as you want it to be, is biased and not worth listening to.
They did do this last generation(talking about personal thoughts). This idea that they didn't is a complete fabrication by the 'DF is biased' crowd.
And nowhere did they say any resolution difference or whatever doesn't matter. I have no idea what you're talking about, but I guess it is easier to argue against a conveniently designed strawman than reality.
They haven't stopped making recommendations. Again, no idea what you're talking about. :/
We don't see a difference because there is none and there is no apparent bias.
There's a difference between what developers should do and what they have done. If a game runs better on Xbox, don't get mad at DF for pointing it out.
3rdamention
Member
Lol, yes they did..
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/d...test-assassins-creed-patch-boosts-performance
Edit, my bad, I assumed you were getting defensive about Unity again...
Not what I asked.
Agreed 100%
Shadow Warrior
They clearly say to get PC if You have good spec, PS4 if You have both consoles and Xbone if You only have Xbone. Isnt that clear enough for You without words 'buy this version'?
Alien Isolation
Where is that downplaying? Where is that bias? You're reaching so much.
====
He was talking about Far Cry 4 post-patch article which still does not exist.
The bias is extremely subtle. For instance, they'll list the Xbox first even though everyone knows the Xbox sucks and Microsoft smells. In fact sometimes it's so subtle it's hard to tell that the bias exists at all.
Is there a place where they describe the FCAT setup and how they implemented it for console games?
PeakPointMatrix
Member
Wait why don't people trust DF? Geniunely curious, haven't kept up. Have they been lying?
They use similar setup to FCAT on consoles, but not exactly FCAT. They use FCAT for PC analysis though.
I remember tweet to repi with their profiling tool, but i wont probably find it now
