• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

DF: Hands-On With Halo 5: Guardians: Tech Analysis/Frame-Rate Test [Gold Master Code]

RG0BS1U.gif
 
Any word on how low the resolution goes?

Edit: I should clarify that I'm not going to watch the video as I'm essentially on media blackout.
 
I don't care how high or low the resolution goes. That's just an arbitrary number. What I do want to know is the average resolution.
 
I want to know how low the res goes and how often it goes low, because it's relevant to the framerate being perfectly locked.

That's still pretty brave from 343 to choose framerate over res. Good on them.
 
Less than 30 duplicate frames over 30 minutes of footage?

Jesus christ 343, that's some crazy optimisation right there.
 
Hoje0308 said:
How are those numbers arbitrary, and how is it that by averaging them they cease to be arbitrary in your eyes?
Click to expand...

Because they fluctuate constantly based on what's going on on the screen. Say, the lowest number is 1280x720. It doesn't mean the game runs at 720p the entire time. Or if it's 1920x1080 it doesn't imply that it holds 1080p majority of the time. A solid average would help me understand around what resolution the game runs at most of the time. A mean with standard deviation is a useful statistic here.
 
I didn't watch the video, i rather not see anything of the game anymore. On Reddit however someone says 1080p apparetly is a rarity according to DF. If true, i'd find that weird, i recall 343 in a interview saying it would be 1080p most of the time and only going lower when shit was getting hectic. But then again...maybe the game is nothing but hectic, hmmm.

What i am about to say is only based on the E3 video and the b-roll video after that, but that didn't look like a world of difference graphically compared with Halo 4 from TMCC. That game was 60fps too (except for some framedrops here and there, right?) So i guess the real big difference is that these levels are indeed MUCH bigger and are simply much more heavy on the action?

Again, i have not watched any other videos, none of the first three missions, so it's very possible that it looks a lot better than Halo 4 in those though. But if not, i'm just surprised that we get things like 30fps in some animations and those AF...''issues''. No disrespect meant towards the developers at all by the way.
 
Dunkley said:
Less than 30 duplicate frames over 30 minutes of footage?

Jesus christ 343, that's some crazy optimisation right there.
Click to expand...

Insane technical achievement for an engine

Interesting point from the video...at distance in large scenes enemies can start animating at 30 fps...wonder how noticeable it will be
 
Hoje0308 said:
How are those numbers arbitrary, and how is it that by averaging them they cease to be arbitrary in your eyes?
Click to expand...
Averaging a number at least in maths gives you a better view point of a sample. If the average is 720 then we know that it spend most of its time at or below 720p, then from that we can further deduce as 1080p is a rarity that it spends little time at anything higher than 900p so on and so forth.an average just gives a better view, what would be good is to have the sd and variance too.
 
I wonder how their dynamic resolution system works. IIRC Wipeout HDs system allowed the frame to go over budget and lowered the resolution in response to that. Halo 5 doesn't seem to be tearing though meaning that they must predict when a frame is going to take longer and then lower the resolution pre-emptively to prevent a dropped or torn frame.

Hopefully DF do a tech interview with 343. It would be an interesting read.

mcrommert said:
Interesting point from the video...at distance in large scenes enemies can start animating at 30 fps...wonder how noticeable it will be
Click to expand...

It shouldn't be too noticeable. Bloodborne did they same thing but at 30fps, so far away enemies were updating at 15fps. Even then while it was noticeable, I never felt like it really detracted from the game.
 
Tatsumi Oga said:
I didn't watch the video, i rather not see anything of the game anymore. On Reddit however someone says 1080p apparetly is a rarity according to DF. If true, i'd find that weird, i recall 343 in a interview saying it would be 1080p most of the time and only going lower when shit was getting hectic. But then again...maybe the game is nothing but hectic, hmmm.

What i am about to say is only based on the E3 video and the b-roll video after that, but that didn't look like a world of difference graphically compared with Halo 4 from TMCC. That game was 60fps too (except for some framedrops here and there, right?) So i guess the real big difference is that these levels are indeed MUCH bigger and are simply much more heavy on the action?

Again, i have not watched any other videos, none of the first three missions, so it's very possible that it looks a lot better than Halo 4 in those though.
Click to expand...

go play Halo 4 on mcc sometime...low poly textures everywhere...very similar visual style but graphics are on a completely different scale.
 
So full 1080P is a rarity? too bad, though must compliment them for their dedication to 60 fps, even though I think the game would benefit more from nicer visuals and a solid 30, but this is my opinion and I'm obviously in the miniority here.
 
Well after playing through the campaigns and multiplayer in the MCC (which isnt anywhere near a locked 60fps) this is just brilliant news.

Halo 5 is going to be more smooth than Tom from Parks and Rec :)

giphy.gif
 
Have gotten as far as the intro cinematic and oh my god, it's so much better. Many added sound effects just elevate how awesome everything is!

EDIT: My mistake, I just clearly forgot how good it all sounded in the first place.
 
343 earning them pay checks. Nicely done. Here's to hoping the game lives up to the great tech achievements.
 
allan-bh said:
Average resolution is the key here, unfortunately they didn't addressed this.
Click to expand...

Intermediate resolutions can be pretty hard to measure through a layer of post process AA and scaling, and I'd imagine it's even harder when they're changing in real time. Maybe they'll do a follow-up.
 
that hud. so bad..
please stinkles, give us the option to turn off the helmet or make it more transparent ;_;

Gurish said:
So full 1080P is a rarity? too bad, though must compliment them for their dedication to 60 fps, even though I think the game would benefit more from nicer visuals and a solid 30, but this is my opinion and I'm obviously in the miniority here.
Click to expand...

yay I'm not the only one who would be happy with 30fps like in the old halo games.
 
allan-bh said:
Average resolution is the key here, unfortunately they didn't addressed this.
Click to expand...

From the video voiceover.
Digital Foundry in the video said:
The dynamic resolution feature we've discussed in an earlier coverage of the game is present here aswell and it appears to deliver results roughly in par with the incomplete build we played a month ago.
Click to expand...

Last month analysis
Digital Foundry in late september article said:
What this technology means for the player is a constantly changing resolution during gameplay, ranging from something in the region of 1152x810 all the way up to a full 1080p. Fortunately, based on what we've seen so far in this build, campaign mode gameplay tends to hang around 1344x1080, during which it's fair to say full HD is fleetingly attained during big set-piece battles, such as encounters with the giant Kraken in a later mission. Interior areas inevitably hold up better in this sense, with less strain put on the engine when the level design funnels the player in one direction.
Click to expand...
 
johnnydrama said:
Because they fluctuate constantly based on what's going on on the screen. Say, the lowest number is 1280x720. It doesn't mean the game runs at 720p the entire time. Or if it's 1920x1080 it doesn't imply that it holds 1080p majority of the time. A solid average would help me understand around what resolution the game runs at most of the time. A mean with standard deviation is a useful statistic here.
Click to expand...

My point was that the resolution stats at either end aren't arbitrary, as they should be a direct result strain on the hardware. You can't simply hand wave those as being unimportant.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

DF: PS3 Emulation On PS5 Linux Tested: Killzone, MotorStorm, MGS 4, Ridge Racer 7 + Many More
Analysis Hardware  2
78
391
Bojji replied
DF on whether they are shunning Xbox coverage: harder to get Xbox codes, low viewership, and they want to focus on most distinct tech (PS5 Pro)
Opinion Analysis Platform  2 3
121
1K
Skifi28 replied
DF - Nvidia DLSS 4.5 Dynamic Multi Frame-Gen Hands-On, Pragmata Path Tracing, G-Sync Pulsar + More!
4
410
Durin replied
  • Locked
DF: Pragmata PS5/Pro/Series X/S review
Analysis 
19
486
Orpheus replied
DF Revealed that NVIDIA needed to use two RTX 5090s for the DLSS 5 tech demo (It will use single card with official release)
News  2
66
2K
cinnamonandgravy replied
Top Bottom