-
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.
DF Performance Analysis: Diablo 3 at 1080p on Xbox One
- Thread starter gruenel
- Start date
BruiserBear
Banned
Not really.
MaximusPayne
Member
"Reaching parity with our partners has been important. But in the end I don't want it to be about a number, because 1080p isn't some mythical, perfect resolution. Framerate to me is significantly more important to gameplay than resolution and the mix of those two which brings the right art style and freedom, whether it's on PlayStation or our platform."
I would say he worded it exactly right so people couldn't say he contradicted himself.
GeordieMark
Member
Well said.
7DollarHagane
Banned
Drops to 50 isn't that big a deal. It is nice that the ps4 maintains 60 though.
BruiserBear
Banned
Did it ever occur to you that Phil Spencer might not have been the guy that called up the Diablo developers and said "let's get your game to 1080p guys"? Did it ever occur to you that there are lots of people that work in the Xbox division, and some of them may even have disagreements over which is more important, framerate or resolution?
Did it also ever occur to you that maybe that quote from the developer about hitting 1080p wasn't really an exact quote, but was more just his way of expressing that Microsoft wanted to help them hit 1080p with the new SDK changes they implemented?
bananafactory
Banned
My guess is they've capped the framerate at 60 on both systems in order to reduce stutter. Unlocked, it's certainly possible the PS4 (and XB1) could hit noticeably higher numbers. I haven't watched the DF analysis yet, but if the PS4 isn't dropping frames at all then that means an unlocked framerate would give it at least 60+ on the low end when action is busy, so it could very well be going MUCH higher than that on occasion.
So in any case, I don't think they gimped the PS4 version at all. We just can't see the performance gap because they capped the framerate, similar to games that run at 1080p/30 on both systems. PS4 might be hitting 45-50 often and XB1 sitting in the 30s, but when you cap them both it will appear to be the same performance.
Not that any of this is a bad thing - though I do wish devs would include a framerate lock option, since I am one of the few who actually prefers a game run unlocked. (had no issues with TR or Infamous)
BruiserBear
Banned
Your sarcasm meter..its broke.
Just outlines the huge double standards that are so prevailent here.
Vroadstar
Gold Member
So it runs at 60 fps with dips to the low 50s?What's wrong with that?! Would anyone even notice if it was 60 or 52? Doesn't last of us dip to below 50? Should have gone 900p.
sure!
Diablohead
Member
Can we go back to the days when some early ps1 console games allowed us to change visual settings for the better, i'd take a 900p drop for solid 60 over 1080, even though it kind of sucks that the xbox one has to do that in the first place.
BotoxAgent
Member
This was actually my first thought when I read that. GAF never disappoints, lmao!
justsomeguy
Member
LOL I'm not sure if that's where it came from but it is awesome that the Xbox team work that closely with dev partners to help performance.
Vroadstar
Gold Member
I know right? I mean once released, if Uncharted 4 ever see fluctuations I guess we won't see any complains from the usual suspects.
hardcastlemccormick
Banned
I swear to christ some of you just need to summarize your posts as "HYPOCRACY" and "HIVEMIND" so that we can see your argument for what it truly is: a waste of time.
We've gotten to the point where agreeing with the article's subjective conclusion means you're an anti-Xbox fanboy.
You are on an enthusiast forum.
If you go on avsforum you'll find people who only buy BluRays for the best picture quality possible. If you go on HydrogenAudio you'll find people who buy music based on the clarity of the masters. If you go on NeoGAF, you'll find people who like to discuss the technical details of video games. Shocker.
We've gotten to the point where agreeing with the article's subjective conclusion means you're an anti-Xbox fanboy.
You are on an enthusiast forum.
If you go on avsforum you'll find people who only buy BluRays for the best picture quality possible. If you go on HydrogenAudio you'll find people who buy music based on the clarity of the masters. If you go on NeoGAF, you'll find people who like to discuss the technical details of video games. Shocker.
BouncyFrag
Member
If Destiny can hit and hold a good frame rate it bodes well for X1 multiplats to offer a quality experience even if the ps4 version will be better.
Kazuma Kiryu
Member
I had a feeling this was going to happen, hardly surprising news.
SerTapTap
Member
Have we seen an Xbox One game keep framerate AND resolution parity with a PS4 version by dropping other technical aspects yet? Model detail, shadows, AO, AF, AA? I know Watch Dogs on Xbox One had worse Ambient Occlusion or something but was also 792p IIRC?
I wonder if gamers would complain more or less if these settings were tweaked instead of framerate/resolution. They're generally held up as "the big ones" and lots of PC gamers will readily drop shadows and other effects before touching framerate or res, but I kinda suspect developers don't want people to take screenshots of Xbox One and PS4 and be like "hey look! this model is worse!" etc. That was pretty common last gen, lots of games had crappier textures on PS3 I believe?
I wonder if gamers would complain more or less if these settings were tweaked instead of framerate/resolution. They're generally held up as "the big ones" and lots of PC gamers will readily drop shadows and other effects before touching framerate or res, but I kinda suspect developers don't want people to take screenshots of Xbox One and PS4 and be like "hey look! this model is worse!" etc. That was pretty common last gen, lots of games had crappier textures on PS3 I believe?
I think that the PC version had heavier mobs. Not sure what they're doing on the XB1/PS4.
It's annoying as all heck.
One poster declares "HA WE WON!" while another decrees that "IT'S ALL ABOUT HAVING FUN I DON'T CARE ABOUT THIS".
Just clogs the thread up with nonsense.
Anyway, the resolution increase is great but the timing of those drops is indeed peculiar as there doesn't seem to be much going on to bog down the framerate. I would like to see how both versions hold up with four Witch Doctors casting against rooms full of mobs.
Have this preloaded and ready waiting for me at home!
Umm the original df article said the ps4 did not perform as well as the Xbone at 900p.
The new patch fixed the framing issue that made the performance issue noticeable but this do article clearly says they haven't fully tested it.
So where are you guys getting "rock solid 60 fps"?
It could very possibly dip as well. This article is comparing the 1080p xbone to 900p xbone.
900p xbone was the one version df claimed rock solid 60 fps so far.
We have to wait for the real comparison.
The new patch fixed the framing issue that made the performance issue noticeable but this do article clearly says they haven't fully tested it.
So where are you guys getting "rock solid 60 fps"?
It could very possibly dip as well. This article is comparing the 1080p xbone to 900p xbone.
900p xbone was the one version df claimed rock solid 60 fps so far.
We have to wait for the real comparison.
hardcastlemccormick
Banned
The original DF article said that the game itself ran perfectly at 60 FPS, but that certain geometry in the game wasn't animating at 60 FPS.
It's possible that there's a difference since the patch, but it's unlikely.
Whelp seems a decent improvement. It was very unlikely they be able to jump from 900p to 1080p without something taking a hit somewhere else: and in this case it's the fps.
The game overall isn't going to be the most taxing (a few sections aside) and is one I'd expect to be pretty close to parity.
Sounds like MS should be sending their hit squad around more often though : seems often developers can only get do far with the architecture/tools at this point without some assistance.
The game overall isn't going to be the most taxing (a few sections aside) and is one I'd expect to be pretty close to parity.
Sounds like MS should be sending their hit squad around more often though : seems often developers can only get do far with the architecture/tools at this point without some assistance.
Pseudo judo
Member
If the frame rate drops to low 50's in only the most taxing scenes then the bump up to 1080P is worth it.
A side by side, X1/PS4 comparison during similar system pushing scenes would go a long way in knowing what exactly the losses and gains equate to visually.
A side by side, X1/PS4 comparison during similar system pushing scenes would go a long way in knowing what exactly the losses and gains equate to visually.
Gamerblood
Banned
TE=BruiserBear;1261 0441 4]Did it ever occur to you that Phil Spencer might not have been the guy that called up the Diablo developers and said "let's get your game to 1080p guys"? Did it ever occur to you that there are lots of people that work in the Xbox division, and some of them may even have disagreements over which is more important, framerate or resolution?
Did it also ever occur to you that maybe that quote from the developer about hitting 1080p wasn't really an exact quote, but was more just his way of expressing that Microsoft wanted to help them hit 1080p with the new SDK changes they implemented?[/QUOTE]
With all businesses or corporations The head takes the brunt of the responsibility. He made a statement a few days ago, that framerate is most important. The devs said MS felt 900p was unacceptable, yet Diablo Was locked at 60fps.
I like clear concise messaging from the top down. If it's true MS forced them to bump the resolution, and the game is no longer locked. It's clearly a contradiction with the messaging with the company.
Did it also ever occur to you that maybe that quote from the developer about hitting 1080p wasn't really an exact quote, but was more just his way of expressing that Microsoft wanted to help them hit 1080p with the new SDK changes they implemented?[/QUOTE]
With all businesses or corporations The head takes the brunt of the responsibility. He made a statement a few days ago, that framerate is most important. The devs said MS felt 900p was unacceptable, yet Diablo Was locked at 60fps.
I like clear concise messaging from the top down. If it's true MS forced them to bump the resolution, and the game is no longer locked. It's clearly a contradiction with the messaging with the company.
SerTapTap
Member
How many titles have worked with MS's engineers now to bump up res? I know Destiny did. Impressive effort from Microsoft if they're really doing a significant portion of the work here. Is that unprecedented? I don't recall it happening before, seems like a sensible way to help dev relations at the same time as making games look better on your console.
rokkerkory
Member
1080p with some bumps and hiccups in the 5x fps range is OK.
Gives good hopes for further improvements in future.
Gives good hopes for further improvements in future.
The original article also stated the PS4 version was as solid as the XO version
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2014-diablo-3-performance-analysis
DF still havent finished their face-off article so we will have all this to go through again...
ps3ud0 8)
That must have been one of the worst DF articles I've ever read.
Chaotic A2 overground encounters? What? No one cares about story/campaign performance. You will be playing this for maybe 4-5h if you haven't played the story before. The majority of this game is playing in parties and clearing Rifts and Bounties. Even while leveling up. As long as they don't test the performance in those cases it means nothing.
This is how a normal 4 player Rift looks like in most of the encounters (just a quick find on YT - I don't know who the guys playing are but it is a decent representation of how the game looks most of the time for everyone who's never seen it):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=Xrc5NuG-EpI&t=495
This is the time when you want a solid framerate to be able to dodge and react quickly. All this talk about some dropped frames in desolate and barren areas while running around with a Barbarian and pummeling enemies without any full screen spell effects is REALLY conclusive. Thanks, DF!
Chaotic A2 overground encounters? What? No one cares about story/campaign performance. You will be playing this for maybe 4-5h if you haven't played the story before. The majority of this game is playing in parties and clearing Rifts and Bounties. Even while leveling up. As long as they don't test the performance in those cases it means nothing.
This is how a normal 4 player Rift looks like in most of the encounters (just a quick find on YT - I don't know who the guys playing are but it is a decent representation of how the game looks most of the time for everyone who's never seen it):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=Xrc5NuG-EpI&t=495
This is the time when you want a solid framerate to be able to dodge and react quickly. All this talk about some dropped frames in desolate and barren areas while running around with a Barbarian and pummeling enemies without any full screen spell effects is REALLY conclusive. Thanks, DF!
Pseudo judo
Member
Lol, there has to be a better description for them then that.
soulassssns
Banned
Agree with this.
Vroadstar
Gold Member
"Huge" double standards that are prevalent here? care to elaborate?
Last time I checked this is GAF not N4G....
hardcastlemccormick
Banned
LiquidMetal14
hide your water-based mammals
Given the lack of severe drops, I see very little wrong with this. I would expect this to be a solid 60 but the drops don't look bad.
You know, it's great for what they do but they need to stop milking this stuff. Just give us the one definitive article with analysis.
You know, it's great for what they do but they need to stop milking this stuff. Just give us the one definitive article with analysis.
No, he doesn't want to clarify, because a mod has already told you to quit talking about hypocrisy and double standards. Either discuss the technical details of the article, or move on.