Support NeoGAF

[Fredrik]

I also found this incredibly frustrating.

That said, there's still hope that Tomb Raider will operate at a higher average framerate.

Honestly, I'd rather they simply disable the Tres-fx features in exchange for a higher framerate. It was a pretty demanding feature on the PC and I'd imagine that's true here as well. I'm sure most people would gladly trade hair for framerate.

The XB1 version sounds as if it runs similarly to Knack, however, which is not good at all. They should have locked it to 30 fps.

It'll still be very annoying, mostly 60 with drops is still annoying since every drop from the silky smoothness will be so noticable. Look at Ninja Gaiden 3/WiiU Razors Edge, for example, it's a mess.
But yes I agree, is there a reason why we can't get a graphics menu on consoles too where we can change all kinds of things to get better performance?

 

[boredandlazy]

Well isn't it pretty much anecdotal fact that PS4 is significantly more easy to develop for than Xbox One? Certainly sounds like a major contributing factor to me.

You may be correct, but your post seems to imply that the power difference between the consoles is also not a major contributing factor.

 

[IncandescentPrecept]

Then it must be me because it's never been anything but silky smooth for me.

Same for me - KZ:SF is smooth all the time.

 

[jayu26]

While I am sure it won't be the case here, the Xbox Double Agent was regarded by the majority as being a better game with a better story than the 360 Double Agent. So there's that.


Also. $.

If 360 TitanFall is just gimped version of PC/Xbone TitanFall, and not some completely separate thing like you are painting it to be, I will call out you on it...

 

[iMax]

Only due to hardware. From the software end of things, Microsoft has always been easy to develop for. Sony was a nightmare, but they cleaned up their act for the PS4. On this front, Microsoft still probably has the edge.

That's not what I've heard. I mean, yeah the hardware what with the complications associated with the ESRAM compared to the PS4's unified setup are a factor — but I also heard the development tools were severely lacking?

 

[Sub_Level]

Wasn't foolish if people had their own reasons as to why they bought them on PS3. Same is true now (but for Xbox One).

yeah I rocked PS3 last gen despite getting a 360 halfway through. Think I will jump on the PS4 bandwagon tho because it seems like the differences this time might be more than washed out color (I know about Madden and Bayonetta fps differences)

 

[Dictator93]

This is probably less reflective on computational power and more reflective of a shitty port job.

Uh... what.

Please tell me people now accept the fac tthe PS4 has a definitive power advantage. Surely all the current multiplatform game performance has reinforced this reality.

 

[Parapraxis]

Edited

Well that was a blazingly fast purchase!

 

[Chobel]

We need some Eltorro gifs in here...

 

[Bgamer90]

If devs can get 1080p 60fps on WiiU then I'm not sure why they're having so much trouble with XBO games.

It all depends on what games we are talking about. All current systems are capable of 1080p/60 FPS.

 

[HORRORSHØW]

If Ocarina of Time can be 20fps or so then Tomb Raider can too, especially in 1080p. And like I said, the Xbox One all in one entertainment center is obviously the lead platform (microsoft wouldn't allow it to be made otherwise) so to get the illusion of 60fps on the PS4 they have to fool SONY by speeding it up by double which means you cannot play it correctly and you wont have the power of Kinect, with exceptional audio commands such as "lara, do something"

"lara, do something."

comic gold.

 

[Aaron]

That's not what I've heard. I mean, yeah the hardware what with the complications associated with the ESRAM compared to the PS4's unified setup are a factor — but I also heard the development tools were severely lacking?

I haven't heard this about Microsoft or the Xbox One. You might be misremembering something.

 

[Quadraphonic]

Are these sorts of meltdowns seriously going to happen every-time a multi play title turns out to be shittier in some way to the ps4 version??

I expect it for about another 4 months. It'll get tamer each time until E3, where everything will hit the fan again. Everyone will be obsessing over framerates there, and instantly dismissing results they disagree with since they haven't shipped yet.

Of course, a lot can happen by then, but I still expect a lot of fun at E3 this year, specifically around multi-platform games.

 

[BigTnaples]

If 360 TitanFall is just gimped version of PC/Xbone TitanFall, and not some completely separate thing like you are painting it to be, I will call out you on it...

Okay? Just stating what we have been told since day one. Not claiming any insider knowledge or anything. In the end I will be buying the Xbox One version if it is 1080p, PC version if not. 360 version if it's the better game.

It's nice to have everything.

 

[nib95]

No, it really isn't a bad port job. Not really anyway. Both are 1080p. In that situation, barring a less intensive sports game, that doesn't play into the Xbox One's favor at all, not in a game like Tomb Raider, even if it is a remake of a last gen game. The PS4 has the stronger GPU, so the more common decision this gen, at least I hope, is that devs will lower the resolution on the Xbox One version some to more or less achieve performance and graphics quality parity. Both 1080p with the console with the weaker gpu practically getting a 30fps version (and potentially decreased graphics quality or effects), something I think is far more significant than one being 720p and the other being 1080p, is a trend I hope dies with Tomb Raider lol. Not sure what they were thinking.

Not a shitty port job, but a bad decision. The resolution on the Xbox One version should have been lowered. Simple as that.

Speak for yourself. If I was an Xbox One only owner, I'd much prefer 1080p/30fps over 720p/60fps. Didn't you say in another thread you don't even game on a 1080p screen anyway?

 

[SwiftDeath]

Well isn't it pretty much anecdotal fact that PS4 is significantly more easy to develop for than Xbox One? Certainly sounds like a major contributing factor to me.

So ease of development accounts for nearly a 30fps difference?

 

[Aaron]

Okay? Just stating what we have been told since day one. Not claiming any insider knowledge or anything. In the end I will be buying the Xbox One version if it is 1080p, PC version if not. 360 version if it's the better game.

It's nice to have everything.

Seeing Titanfall in action, and knowing the developers prize 60FPS above all, there's no chance of the game being 1080p on Xbox One. There's just too much going on in the game.

 

[Miles Quaritch]

Nice to have my PS4 pre-order for this pay off.

Will be interesting to see if 60fps changes the gameplay in any way...

 

[Atlas157]

Only due to hardware. From the software end of things, Microsoft has always been easy to develop for. Sony was a nightmare, but they cleaned up their act for the PS4. On this front, Microsoft still probably has the edge.

PS4 is easier on the software side as well. Here's a tweet of a 343 employee that moved on to work for Naughty Dog.

 

[foxbeldin]

You're all missing the point here, xb1 version is balanced at 30fps while ps4 version is falling appart at 60.

 

[viveks86]

Edited

Very sneaky. I'll be watching you, mister!

 

[Metalmurphy]

Jonathan Blow vindicated.

 

[Parapraxis]

You're all missing the point here, xb1 version is balanced at 30fps while ps4 version is falling appart at 60.

Is that a direct Gies quote?

Also, this song could be his theme.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FNtjksCUMIA

 

[Aaron]

PS4 is easier on the software side as well. Here's a tweet of a 343 employee that moved on to work for Naughty Dog.

That reads more of an expectation than experience. I think you're drawing too much from it.

 

[BigTnaples]

Speak for yourself. If I was an Xbox One only owner, I'd much prefer 1080p/30fps over 720p/30fps. Didn't you say in another thread you don't even game on a 1080p screen anyway?

This. For Tomb Raider I would prefer 1080p @30 to 720p at 60.


The whole point is the enhanced graphics and textures, which are much harder to appreciate at 720p. And the gameplay benefits of 60fps are not needed for a game like TR.

For COD, BF, Halo, Forza, etc. Yes give me 60fps over resolution.


Otherwise, resolution wins out every time. Especially for games like Fallout, TED, Uncharted, TLoU, The Witcher, Deus Ex, etc.

 

[Pjsprojects]

Another Dev not putting effort in the Xbox One version? Color me surprised..... :/

Eh? Simply that the Xbone is not powerful enough to match the PS4 version.

Job done.

 

[Birathen]

Seems I bet on the right horse in this race. Not that I had much choice, seeing as I live in Tier Third World aka Sweden.

 

[DieH@rd]

Wow, just wake up and saw this 30-page thread.

Anyhow, I think that we will see this kind of power difference for every game that has heavy presence of Direct Compute effects. In this case, decision of Eidos for both version to have TressFX hair has pushed PS4 version to work much better.

While on the paper PS4 does not have more than 40% advantage for traditional rendering, the gulf can be widened if developers take advantage of PS4's customized 8 ACE approach to DC task queuing. Not only PS4 has more CU cores that they can completely dedicate to DC, they can also look for specific timings, and insert DC requests to all other CUs.

This was expected from the moment Sony announced their GPU modifications. More DC processing in multiplatform games - more advantage for PS4.

Example

Direct Compute heavy game:
Xbone 8 CU for traditional rendering, 4 CU for Direct Compute
PS4 ordinary engine - 14 CU for traditional rendering, 4 CU for Direct Compute
PS4 optimized engine - 15 CUfor traditional rendering, 3 CU for Direct compute [job of one DC CU transfered over first 15 CUs]

Performance gulf will widen whenever Xbone needs more DC.

 

[TheChaos0]

Wow. Well, it's nice to see them utilise the power instead of locking both at 30.

 

[TTSupra]

You're all missing the point here, xb1 version is balanced at 30fps while ps4 version is falling appart at 60.

Albert? That you?

 

[SenjutsuSage]

Wasn't foolish if people had their own reasons as to why they bought them on PS3. Same is true now (but for Xbox One).

I don't see it as foolish, because people can be forgiven for liking the overall featureset of the Xbox One. And also because it may be the only system they have. In the early going, the Xbox One is going to be the only one I have for awhile till I build myself back up to get a PS4 hopefeully later in the year. Whether I get the Xbox One version of this or not will totally depend on what the performance and graphics analysis is. I don't intend on doing this for every title, but both being 1080p with the fps difference already has me thinking the Xbox One version might be gimped to make 1080p, and I won't pay full price for that.

I don't make a habit out of ever buying used games, but this may be that rare exception.

 

[iMax]

So ease of development accounts for nearly a 30fps difference?

At this stage in time combined with the computational power difference, probably yeah.

 

[kyser73]

PS4 is easier on the software side as well. Here's a tweet of a 343 employee that moved on to work for Naughty Dog.

In the context of this news, this tweet & her at ND gives me a strange fizzy feeling in my belly about what the future holds for PS4.

I mean this was a CD port. They're building PS4 from the ground up.

 

[Atlas157]

That reads more of an expectation than experience. I think you're drawing too much from it.

She was already working at ND when she posted the tweets.

In the context of this news, this tweet & her at ND gives me a strange fizzy feeling in my belly about what the future holds for PS4.

I mean this was a CD port. They're building PS4 from the ground up.

I can't wait to see some Uncharted 4 gameplay, it'll be amazing.

 

[Psycho_Mantis]

I believe an underappreciated aspect of what's going on is that PlayStation 4 is the world's most powerful games console, and I think that is going to become increasingly apparent as time goes by. Even if titles are multi-platform, if the game experience is more responsive or more visually attractive on a certain platform, it definitely does play into the overall success.

Vindicated!

 

[Metalmurphy]

That reads more of an expectation than experience. I think you're drawing too much from it.

Its been confirmed by multiple devs to be the case. MS SDK is the one lagging behind this time around.

 

[LabouredSubterfuge]

Do Crystal Dynamics even know how to DirectX?

 

[nib95]

Example

Direct Compute heavy game:
Xbone 8 CU for traditional rendering, 4 CU for Direct Compute
PS4 ordinary engine - 14 CU for traditional rendering, 4 CU for Direct Compute
PS4 optimized engine - 15 CUfor traditional rendering, 3 CU for Direct compute [job of one DC CU transfered over first 15 CUs]

Performance gulf will widen whenever Xbone needs more DC.

This is what I think also. Optimisations will occur on both consoles no doubt, but I think the PS4 has the advantage of the better hardware, ease of development, and future hardware customisation advantages too. Namely with compute and hUMA.

 

[Aaron]

She was already working at ND when she posted the tweets.

She's an experienced programmer, so if she says the PS4 is easier to work with I'll take her word for it. I'm just surprised MS has failed in so many different ways with the Xbox One.

 

[REDRZA]

No, it really isn't a bad port job. Not really anyway. Both are 1080p. In that situation, barring a less intensive sports game, that doesn't play into the Xbox One's favor at all, not in a game like Tomb Raider, even if it is a remake of a last gen game. The PS4 has the stronger GPU, so the more common decision this gen, at least I hope, is that devs will lower the resolution on the Xbox One version some to more or less achieve performance and graphics quality parity. Both 1080p with the console with the weaker gpu practically getting a 30fps version (and potentially decreased graphics quality or effects), something I think is far more significant than one being 720p and the other being 1080p, is a trend I hope dies with Tomb Raider lol. Not sure what they were thinking.

Not a shitty port job, but a bad decision. The resolution on the Xbox One version should have been lowered. Simple as that.

I actually agree with you, lowering the resolution is clearly the way to go. Native 720p or 900p to maintain FPS and performance is better than dropping all the way down to 30 FPS.

Only issue that arises from dropping the resolution is then the dreaded Xbone upscaler kicks in adding artificial sharpening and crushing blacks. Dont know why MS doesnt allow a "Native" output setting for all games. I'd take native 720p or 900p with 60FPS over 30 FPS anyday.

Oh well, seems its gonna be a long gen for MS.

 

[keuja]

Wow, just wake up and saw this 30-page thread.

Anyhow, I think that we will see this kind of power difference for every game that has heavy presence of Direct Compute effects. In this case, decision of Eidos for both version to have TressFX hair has pushed PS4 version to work much better.

While on the paper PS4 does not have more than 40% advantage for traditional rendering, the gulf can be widened if developers take advantage of PS4's customized 8 ACE approach to DC task queuing. Not only PS4 has more CU cores that they can completely dedicate to DC, they can also look for specific timings, and insert DC requests to all other CUs.

This was expected from the moment Sony announced their GPU modifications. More DC processing in multiplatform games - more advantage for PS4.

Example

Direct Compute heavy game:
Xbone 8 CU for traditional rendering, 4 CU for Direct Compute
PS4 ordinary engine - 14 CU for traditional rendering, 4 CU for Direct Compute
PS4 optimized engine - 15 CUfor traditional rendering, 3 CU for Direct compute [job of one DC CU transfered over first 15 CUs]

Performance gulf will widen whenever Xbone needs more DC.

What types of Graphical effects are Direct Compute use for? Stuff like Anti-aliasing?

 

[Shin-Ra]

This is probably less reflective on computational power and more reflective of a shitty port job.

That's not what I've heard. I mean, yeah the hardware what with the complications associated with the ESRAM compared to the PS4's unified setup are a factor — but I also heard the development tools were severely lacking?

It's impressive how quickly you've squirmed your way from blaming a shitty port to blaming Microsoft's hardware and tools.

 

[iMax]

I haven't heard this about Microsoft or the Xbox One. You might be misremembering something.

I mean this:

PS4 is easier on the software side as well. Here's a tweet of a 343 employee that moved on to work for Naughty Dog.

Its been confirmed by multiple devs to be the case. MS SDK is the one lagging behind this time around.

 

[GribbleGrunger]

Well that was a blazingly fast purchase!

It came with a vast library of games too! I can't believe my luck

 

[GameAddict411]

the difference in power on paper is much smaller than this game is indicating, the only thing might make sense is that the XO has a massive bottleneck(that will probably haunt it for the rest of its life), my bet is on the memory architecture.

 

[SwiftDeath]

At this stage in time combined with the computational power difference, probably yeah.

I agree the difference between versions is likely due to both ease of development and the power differential so it's unlikely to be a bad port job as it's given adequate effort at least compared to its closest competitor

 

[iMax]

It's impressive how quickly you've squirmed your way from blaming a shitty port to blaming Microsoft's hardware and tools.

It's more impressive how you've managed to completely misinterpret my post. Even if it's a shitty port job, that doesn't necessarily mean it reflects badly on CD. If adequate software tools are unavailable to them at this point, then yes, it's gonna be a shitty port job. Understand?

 

[Jabba]

Didn't CBOAT warn us there would be more to come?

Is the asstorm post from cboat, the same as the, risk is everywhere cboat post? I haven't seen the asstorm post if it's different

 

[Always-honest]

Well here you go, to everybody that said no way to this game at $60... "unless they hit 60FPS which won't happen"

Now what?

Now they realise they must find another excuse.

 

[nib95]

the difference in power on paper is much smaller than this game is indicating, the only thing might make sense is that the XO has a massive bottleneck(that will probably haunt it for the rest of its life), my bet is on the memory architecture.

Well, if you take in to account the Xbox One's GPU reserve…it's really not "much smaller" at all. And this is not factoring in the PS4's considerably higher bandwidth GDDR5 ram, and the fact that there's more of it to play around with, due to less of an OS reserve.

So currently:

Xbone: 1.18 TF GPU (12 CUs) for games
Xbone: 768 Shaders
Xbone: 48 Texture units
Xbone: 16 ROPS
Xbone: 2 ACE/ 16 queues

PS4: 1.84TF GPU ( 18 CUs) for games + 56%
PS4: 1152 Shaders +50%
PS4: 72 Texture units +50%
PS4: 32 ROPS + 100%
PS4: 8 ACE/64 queues +400%

Looks unbalanced to me.