• 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.

Performance Analysis: Multiplayer on Call of Duty: Advanced Warfare(PS4/XB1)

SFenton

Member
Another explanation for this is that on multiplayer always changing resolution might mess up the balance of the game. If I'm facing an opponent and he gets full 1080p and things are more blurred on my side it doesn't seem that fair.

I feel like that's kinda ridiculous. PC players in any competitive game deal with this sort of thing all the time and I've never heard anyone complain about it.
 

Mononoke

Banned
Cool.

I went in knowing that the PS4 would be the better version visually.

I also went in knowing that I prefer the Xbox One controller for fast-paced multiplayer games, and that all the people I play with regularly will be buying it on Xbox One.

I'm happy with my decision.

Ironically, I'll be buying the 900p Assassin's Creed:Unity on PS4 (along with Far Cry 4, since I don't plan on playing it multiplayer at all).

I was considering getting this on X1 because I too love the controller. But I found out the X1 controller doesn't have impulse triggers for most third party multiplats. IMO they make shooting games much better. So without that I was swayed back to PS4 for the better resolution and performance.

I really wanted to convince myself to get it on X1. I had just got done playing Sunset for a week, and LOVED IT. It reminded me how much I liked the X1 controller, and the system. And it bums me out that it's always collecting dust. But I figure, I'll be getting MCC and that is a major FPS...and will have the impulse triggers (seeing as its MS). So I'm okay with getting COD on PS4.

I'll be getting Unity and GTA on PS4 though too. So I'm kind of wondering what I can get on X1 outside of MCC =/
 

kidko

Member
Could be when it's auto saving at checkpoints. Played about half of the campaign so far and the chugging when it auto saves is the only real performance issue that stuck out for me.

That makes way too much sense. I'll pay attention tonight
 

Seanspeed

Banned
So the conclusion is based on only one metric of performance?

What is with people not seeing the BS like this?
That comment was specifically talking about framerate.

They mention resolution afterwards in the article, which I'm betting you haven't actually read or else we wouldn't be having this discussion.
 

Kakulin

Banned
The new 3-yr development cycle has revitalized this franchise. Great job Sledgehammer! They have set the standard for future PS4 competitive shooters. 1080p @ 60fps or bust! Take note Bungie!
 

GnawtyDog

Banned
So the conclusion is based on only one metric of performance?

What is with people not seeing the BS like this?

We do read the text, the subtext is what DF makes its clicks on. People care about the subtext more often than not. Eurogamer should get competition for these kind of articles and clicks - otherwise you're stuck with their monopoly for "performance analyses" and whichever way they chose to present the info.
 

Pimpbaa

Member
Wonder if MS had engineers embedded at Sledgehammer to get the Xbox One version in the shape it's in. The dynamic buffer and 1360x1080 resolution seem like clever optimizations.

Dynamic resolution isn't something all that new or clever. It was done on Wipeout on the PS3 and Ninja Gaiden 2 on the Vita.
 

dEvAnGeL

Member
Wonder if MS had engineers embedded at Sledgehammer to get the Xbox One version in the shape it's in. The dynamic buffer and 1360x1080 resolution seem like clever optimizations.

Dynamic resolution isn't something all that new or clever. It was done on Wipeout on the PS3 and Ninja Gaiden 2 on the Vita.
9kONtzB.jpg


on a serious note is great both platforms hold their target on MP, this is where it is important
 

thelastword

Banned
I actually had the same thought. One one hand it might explain why they locked it in the multiplayer but on other it just seems like just a cumbersome task to do it by hand. It seems way much work compared to reducing it when the load on the system got too high.

Another explanation for this is that on multiplayer always changing resolution might mess up the balance of the game. If I'm facing an opponent and he gets full 1080p and things are more blurred on my side it doesn't seem that fair.

Of course, it's all speculation. It could be cool if devs could explain why they chose this approach.
I never thought of that, I actually chuckled reading that, lol.
 

kiguel182

Member
I feel like that's kinda ridiculous. PC players in any competitive game deal with this sort of thing all the time and I've never heard anyone complain about it.

Well you can't (or shouldn't) lock resolutions on a PC but it can be an handicap. With better resolution you see your enemies more clearly in the distance for example. Not saying it's a massive advantage but it's still an advantage.

I never thought of that, I actually chuckled reading that, lol.

I'm not sure if you are making fun of what I said or not.
 

USC-fan

Banned
Well you can't (or shouldn't) lock resolutions on a PC but it can be an handicap. With better resolution you see your enemies more clearly in the distance for example. Not saying it's a massive advantage but it's still an advantage.



.

What you do is no PC is turn some of the gfx settings setting to low. Really give you an advantage way more than some resolution increase.
 

kiguel182

Member
What you do is no PC is turn some of the gfx settings setting to low. Really give you an advantage way more than some resolution increase.

But that doesn't mean the resolution itself can't give you an advantage.

No, no. never thought of it that way. I just had an image of a guy going for a kill and things got all blurry, just a mental picture. It reminded me of some of the gifs I'd seen around here.

Okay then lol I wasn't sure what you meant.

But yeah, obviously it wouldn't be very pronunced since the resolution isn't that different but the effect might've been a little jarring and in the heat of a battle might not be that good, specially if the opponent isn't affected at the same time.
 
Sooo after all the gloating yesterday by certain posters the ps4 version is actually the more technically accomplished cod experience. Not surprised those peeps have gone M.I.A for this thread. tsk, tsk.
 
Sooo after all the gloating yesterday by certain posters the ps4 version is actually the more technically accomplished cod experience. Not surprised those peeps have gone M.I.A for this thread. tsk, tsk.

It is indeed, and i was lambasted yesterday because i dared to list the advantages of each one (PS4 came out on top).
 

Nocturn

Neo Member
I was hesitant to buy this game on the xbox one (since that's where my friends are playing it on). But I'm surprised that the resolution doesn't bother me as much as it usually does. Having fun playing the game with my buddies makes me not care about all this resolution/FPS crap.
 

benny_a

extra source of jiggaflops
I was hesitant to buy this game on the xbox one (since that's where my friends are playing it on). But I'm surprised that the resolution doesn't bother me as much as it usually does. Having fun playing the game with my buddies makes me not care about all this resolution/FPS crap.
Nothing personal but I think that is my favorite GAF phrase of 2014.
 
It is indeed, and i was lambasted yesterday because i dared to list the advantages of each one (PS4 came out on top).

No, you were lambasted yesterday for playing copypasta with a single post of yours three times, on three separate pages.

While some of the items you listed could have been considered fact, you then chose to rank them by order of importance based on your opinion. Then you tried multiple times to pass that off as the absolute truth while at the same time trying to convince people that you had no hidden agenda, when multiple people quickly noticed otherwise.

That's why you were lambasted. Let's keep things truthful now.

If you want, I can go through your post history and detail every step of what occurred. (Hint: You don't want me to do that.)
 
considering everyone who seriously games has a 1080p tv. 1080p is really important. rather take a few drops in frame than have the whole game at 900p
 

CLEEK

Member
The game is V-synced on my XB1, zero tearing and 60fps glory.

So yeah.

I'd take Framerate > Resolution

Every time.

Wow, you should sell your magical XB1 to the Digital Foundry guys, so they can do another face off.

Digital Foundry said:
Paired with that are a few torn frames, with the upper 33 per cent of the screen cut in each case.
 

virtualS

Member
The game is V-synced on my XB1, zero tearing and 60fps glory.

So yeah.

I'd take Framerate > Resolution

Every time.

So you'd take an imperceptible maybe 1 fps average advantage over a 40% increase in resolution and no crushed blacks?

That's cool.
 

onanie

Member
No, you were lambasted yesterday for playing copypasta with a single post of yours three times, on three separate pages.

While some of the items you listed could have been considered fact, you then chose to rank them by order of importance based on your opinion. Then you tried multiple times to pass that off as the absolute truth while at the same time trying to convince people that you had no hidden agenda, when multiple people quickly noticed otherwise.

That's why you were lambasted. Let's keep things truthful now.

If you want, I can go through your post history and detail every step of what occurred. (Hint: You don't want me to do that.)

Threats are frowned upon in most places.
 
Ehh, all i can do is chuckle. I did nothing but post facts, i posted no lies. But whatever... you really seem to have a beef with me.

I don't even know who you are.

I just happen to remember you from the other article last night, and I'm calling you on your claim that you were totally innocent.

Don't hide from your agenda. Own it.
 

coastel

Member
Played a good bit of MP on Monday. Seemed solid though had an issue with one map where the game actually freeze's for a second or two here and there. Must be a bug with that map if I notice the map again will have to see if it happens again. Ps4 version.
 
So, ultimately PS4 has the better version; news at 11.

Imperceptible framerate dips that rarely happen in single player and not really at all in multiplayer. Plus it has better resolution, IQ, and no crushed blacks. It's a no brainer if you own both consoles.
 
I don't even know who you are.

I just happen to remember you from the other article last night, and I'm calling you on your claim that you were totally innocent.

What am i guilty of?, posting facts?, am i the first gaffer to post the same information on a different page for those that might have missed it (quoting myself for the new page)? A: I'm not.

And i'm in no way upset, i am however baffled by your apparent fixation with me and my seemingly unforgiveable sins.

Let's not derrail the thread, if you feel like saying something PM me... toodles!!!
 

Jburton

Banned
So PS4 has the better frame rate in MP, no tearing and higher res.


I wonder if we will see multiple threads on this.
 
What am i guilty of?, posting facts?, am i the first gaffer to post the same information on a different page for those that might have missed it (quoting myself for the new page)? A: I'm not.

And i'm in no way upset, i am however baffled by your apparent fixation with me and my seemingly unforgiveable sins.

Let's not derrail the thread, if you feel like saying something PM me... toodles!!!

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=924628&page=13
 

cookienut

Banned
I have both consoles but like most games, I ended up with it on the X1. Mainly due to digital game sharing with my friend and the super cheap and easy way of buying off other storefronts. $50Au is all I spent and my friend gets a 'copy' too. Resolution be damned for a bargain!

Btw, apart from the crushed black issue, I really can't see any difference. Maybe Im old and blind.
 
How variable is this "variable resolution" on the XB1?

It's removed entirely from multi-player, and euro gamer has one image, from an empty room, of it in single player.
 
How variable is this "variable resolution" on the XB1?

It's removed entirely from multi-player, and euro gamer has one image, from an empty room, of it in single player.

It varies from 1360x1080 to 1920x1080 during SP, depending on action on screen, and stays at 1360x1080 at all times during MP.

1360x1080 scales better than straight up 900p, but it's still a scaling method, so there's side-effects of that.
 

M_A_C

Member
So, ultimately PS4 has the better version; news at 11.

Imperceptible framerate dips that rarely happen in single player and not really at all in multiplayer. Plus it has better resolution, IQ, and no crushed blacks. It's a no brainer if you own both consoles.

Seems like it will always be a no brainer this gen.
 
It varies from 1360x1080 to 1920x1080 during SP, depending on action on screen, and stays at 1360x1080 at all times during MP.

1360x1080 scales better than straight up 900p, but it's still a scaling method, so there's side-effects of that.


We know it varies, according to PR, but has anyone actually witnessed this variation? Like euro gamer says an empty room runs at 1080, that's not varying because of action, that's running at 1080 because there's fuck-all to render. Does it actually vary when you're in the battlefield and there's calm?
 
Top Bottom