lonedigitalwolf
Banned
Quoting myself for the new page.
-
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.
Eurogamer: COD: Advanced Warfare's campaign runs more smoothly on XB1 than on PS4
- Thread starter shinobi602
- Start date
Quoting myself for the new page.
People are talking about a game's graphics in a thread about that game's graphics. Go post in the OT or start a thread about the MP/network stuff if that's what you want to talk about.
it is what it is
Pathfinder
Member
Digital Foundry just got done saying FPS were better in the XO builds.
And do we know PS4 is 60fps locked in MP, or are we just assuming? Last I checked, Digital Foundry hadn't produced those numbers yet.
If you read the article you would see that they stated both versions seemed to be 60fps locked in mp with the ps4 being full 1080p and the xbo version being set to the lowest res and locked there. As to a definitive answer we have to wait for their full analysis.
El-Pistolero
Member
LMAO! Perfect gif response!
travisbickle
Member
What are you on about?
They are different on pretty much every variable except texture resolution!
Some of you are crazy!
Omnistalgic
Member
wait so there are just talking about the campaign here?
Come on' GAF...this one is not that big a deal...
Only thing noteworthy is X1 version is greatly improved.
Come on' GAF...this one is not that big a deal...
Only thing noteworthy is X1 version is greatly improved.
Let me get this straight:
XBOne has around 40% less detail almost 100% of the time.
XBOne tears because it employs adaptive v-sync instead of the rock solid permemant v-sync found on PS4.
XBOne does not maintain a constant 60 fps during the campaign. It merely hits 60 more frequently than the previous demo they tried....whatever that means.
XBOne suffers from black crush (not mentioned in article but rather in comments).
XBone version has likely been optimised far more at this point.
There was only a brief mention of parity in assets and textures and shadow quality upon quick inspection. There are most likely differences in PS4s favour.
And yet, the article is written to sound like the PS4 provides a compromised campaign.
Digital Foundry article? Digital Foundry article.
XBOne has around 40% less detail almost 100% of the time.
XBOne tears because it employs adaptive v-sync instead of the rock solid permemant v-sync found on PS4.
XBOne does not maintain a constant 60 fps during the campaign. It merely hits 60 more frequently than the previous demo they tried....whatever that means.
XBOne suffers from black crush (not mentioned in article but rather in comments).
XBone version has likely been optimised far more at this point.
There was only a brief mention of parity in assets and textures and shadow quality upon quick inspection. There are most likely differences in PS4s favour.
And yet, the article is written to sound like the PS4 provides a compromised campaign.
Digital Foundry article? Digital Foundry article.
Pathfinder
Member
Oh, I read the article, hence why I'm asking them the questions.
Forgive me for being dubious, but "seemed to be" doesn't seem all that definite.
Son of Sam
Banned
I think he's making the point that there's always a thread on resolution but rarely on a games actual connection. Or the fact that the X1 doesn't get the dedicated server treatment even though it has those abilities.
If you liked crushed blacks and weird-ass non-native resolutions, that's a great idea.
Pathfinder
Member
You forgot to mention the introduction of stutter and lower frame rates in the PS4 version because of its locked resolution.
Kazuma Kiryu
Member
They haven't produced any MP framerate numbers. They say it's fine, and that's it. It's in the article, linked in the OP.
If they're are no dips in multiplayer then PS4 is the clear winner IMO. Occasional drops in campaign aren't a big deal; I doubt I'll even play single player if I pick the game up
If you read the multiplayer section of the analysis, it says the framerate is as solid as their testing from Gamescom and EGX, and that extends to both consoles.
If you read the multiplayer section of the analysis, it says the framerate is as solid as their testing from Gamescom and EGX, and that extends to both consoles.
vasametropolis
Member
The frame drops are barely there based on that video and if their rarity is a result of constant 1080p, then so be it. It doesn't look like a REAL problem at all.
Fun thing to notice is that it drops to 35 during slow motion during the car jumping... that seems weird. Like bug weird.
Fun thing to notice is that it drops to 35 during slow motion during the car jumping... that seems weird. Like bug weird.
"However, we briefly dipped into the multiplayer mode on both systems in order to gain some first impressions on resolution and frame-rate. We'll need to test this much more thoroughly across a range of maps, but initial results suggest that the dynamic resolution switch is disabled on Xbox One, leading to a static 1360x1080 presentation throughout. Meanwhile, PS4 locks to native 1080p. This is significant, bearing in mind that multiplayer is the key focus for many COD fans, but the good news is that overall gameplay frame-rates seem just as solid as our recent testing on the Gamescom and EGX builds - a state of affairs that extends to both systems."
That is about as definitive as we have right now. But it sounds like the fps in mp is equal on the ps4 and xbo so take that as you will but I am guessing it will pan out to be true.
Hawk269
Member
I have played and looked at both versions and to my eye there is hardly any differences. However, in certain scenes, you can feel and see the frame rate drop on the PS4 version. It did not happen often, but I did encounter the frame rate drop where in the same location the Xbox One version did not drop. Granted it probably was running at the lower end of the resolution, but using the same Tv with the same calibration, to me and a few friends, we could not see that much of a difference when gaming between the two outside of the when the frame rate would go down.
I posted this in another thread, there are some parts where you can see less aliasing on the PS4 version and in certain scenes it looked a bit cleaner, but as you are playing and the action is intense it really was a wash between the two versions. Good news is that both versions are very good and regardless of which platform you have or favor, it is running great on both and looks the part as well.
Schweinehund
Member
Really what would determine what version I'd buy is if the ps4 is locked 60 in multi. I don't care if there's occasional dips to high 40's in campaign.
Rogue_Ledr
Banned
Between 50-60 FPS?
Who cares!?!?!
That is nearly 60 FPS. The extra resolution is worth the sacrifice.
Who cares!?!?!
That is nearly 60 FPS. The extra resolution is worth the sacrifice.
Pathfinder
Member
If they were able to lock MP to 60fps on PS4, I would be curious to know if they invoked dynamic resolution to achieve that, or if they just toned down the assets.
I believe there is stutter in both versions.
poopninjamvc3mk
I sucked six dicks to get this tag.
Whens the last gen analysis? probably gonna get a last gen copy for when the game dies down on steam
Bornstellar
Member
Isn't this 💩 bannable?
Jessie.Bristol
Member
And also be able to redeem a free Current Gen (PS4/Xbox One) copy as well, if/when you decide to upgrade
.Why would smiling chocolate ice cream be bannable?
Handy Fake
Member
Just finished the 360 version. Ran extremely well. Can feel the game running a bit below 60fps quite often, but there were not too many heavy dips besides a few occasions during some of the latter missions. It still looks impressive at times, but the aliasing sticks out pretty bad. What impressed me were the CGI scenes. They looked pretty top notch, and didn't show any noticeable macro-blocking or artifacts that you normally see in 360 games.
If you plan on getting the digital version on either 360 or PS3, I'd say go for it since you can later upgrade to a next gen copy for free.
Chobel
Member
I also didn't intend to make this hot topic, and I'm not even sure it's hot topic. I saw you comment and I didn't agree with it, so I voiced my disagreement about it. Here's the part of your comment that started it.
"Could you imagine the backlash if the PS4 version had the dynamic scaling the XB1 version has like some of you are suggesting? The parity conspiracies would be through the roof lol."
I mentioned MP not because I'm trying to nitpick on you (as you implying), but because not matter what happen in (Compaign having fixed or dynamic resolution), MP not the same resolutions means those parity conspiracies will be not just baseless and but also wrong. So backslash won't be as big as your implied in your comment.
Now, we have different beliefs: You believe that GAF will just go nuts if dynamic resolution happened in PS4, with all what happened with ACU so they will link them together. I believe GAF is bigger than that and will see we have a different situation here, well most of members since some people will go nuts over anything. So yeah, no one is going to change his mind here, so I guess like you said, we'll just agree to disagree here.
Last thing, I didn't like the tone of you last comments as you're implying I'm just here to argue just for the sake of arguing with you, like I'm harassing you or something, guess what, I'm not, I'm just a guy who's challenging your argument, so don't make it personal. And in your last comment "but I'd rather be playing Sunset or AW right now than banter over a scenario that will never happen", sorry I wasted your precious time trying to do a discussion here. /s
PS4 version never uses dynamic resolution, so your last hope is downgraded assets.
Tidus_Great
Banned
so the ps4 version wins slightly less than it usually does. but still at the end of the day ps4 version is the way to go if you want this game.
Somehow I don't believe you. I just watched the comparison video at 60fps and the first thing I noticed was the comprehensive black crush on XBOne. Seriously, so much detail is lost to black. How can people like that? It's broken. 2 or 3 frames per second here or there were completely unnoticeable. Also, I'm sure if I had both builds in front of me I'd be able to easily see the large disparity in resolution on my TV.
Black Crush. Horrible. Maybe also a performance cheat due to Microsoft's intentionally messed up gamma curve. Less detail to reneder on top of a lower resolution. Not sure if that's how it works.
Incorrect. Let me ask you this. Would you rather have a fluctuating framerate or would you rather the PS4 version also employ a dynamic resolution that would mostly stay at 1080p because of the 50% more spec power but will drop as needed to maintain a rock solid 60fps?
Not sure why the dynamic resolution wasn't employed in the PS4 version. It would have been 1080p far more often than the XBO version and wouldn't have suffered from framerate dips.
Dynamic resolution > framerate dips
Pathfinder
Member
I'm probably going to get it on XO, personally. Frame rate is more important to me than resolution.
What's even more interesting are some of the commenters at Eurogamer/Digital Foundry who would prefer the PS4 version come with an option to enable dynamic resolution to increase the frame rate.
Is black crush important at all? People keep ignoring that one when discussing differences.
AyaisMUsikWhore
Member
I'm going to say....it Call of Duty....
RespectThySole
Member
I'm not taking it personally. I just don't see the point of arguing over such a trivial statement. I'm all for debates and discussion. In fact, I'm probably more up for it for than a lot of users on this board. Just look at some of my post history if you believe otherwise.
It's just that neither of us can "prove" what we're saying as the scenario will not happen so I find wasting time on the matter to be pointless as it will lead nowhere. I also don't see why you chose to quote that post as if I said something egregious and there weren't tons of posts surrounding mine that specifically talked about the multiplayer.
If you're offended by my wording or that idea, then I apologize, but that is just the way I feel on the situation.
I don't think it's as important as most people are claiming it to be. I personally like it.
RUN!
cripterion
Member
They're doing the best they can with what they got, how is it that every thread people are criticizing devs for not reaching 1080/60fps? Maybe cause the current gen consoles are not powerful enough to do it all while keeping a decent amount of eye candy.
Jawbreaker
Member
DF never mentions it, so it's one of those things a lot of people are mostly ignorant about. I mean, your average consumer purchases their TV set based on 'torch mode' settings at Best Buy or wherever, and prefer the saturated look. However, what they fail to realize is that they're losing detail and aren't getting the pure image as the developer/artists intended. They're losing information and to make matters worse, it's not something that can be remedied by changing your TV settings. This is an issue that dates back to the 360 and it has always bothered me. Most recently, I experienced it during the Destiny alpha.
At least with the PS4, if you want the saturated look, you can do it by changing your television's settings. With the Xbone, you have no real option; you can either wash out your screen or saturate it with the black crush remaining ever-present.
Oh. You're part of why it never gets fixed. There's apparently an audience that loves "the pop".
lonedigitalwolf
Banned
Dude... do you really need to grab a pitchfork?... jeez...
Jawbreaker
Member
They seem to have the edge with framerate in the single-player portion of the game, but the multiplayer sees the PS4 at a total advantage technically.