• 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.

Digital Foundry to stop counting Pixels in 2022.

Edgelord79

Gold Member
As the newer image reconstruction methods gain wider use on consoles with the move to current gen only games it's going to become harder for them to count pixels, anyway. We're going to have to rely on 2,000% zoom more than finding countable edges.
Exactly. Having to zoom in that much makes pixel counting utterly irrelevant in this case
 

TransTrender

Gold Member
Didn't watch the video, but what's their business model going forward? Counting pixels is what drives their audience to watch.
 

bender

Candy Corn Aficionado
The issue here is due to reconstruction and dynamic ranges what they present are hardly facts. They are good estimates

Showing the lower and upper bounds of that dynamic range you were able to notice is far more useful than the subjectivity of someone's eye.
 
Last edited:

Darsxx82

Member
If they don't, others will. In fact, VGtech is practically dedicated to counting resolution and the people will be there.

I do not understand the decision except for the saving of time that it supposes. Because the resolution data is important to know to what ends a hardware is performing, which is what matters in this type of analysis. their analyzes will now be less interesting because they are incomplete.

If they believe that with this they are going to reduce the console war and it is a blow to the toxic fanboy ..... rather the decision is a victory for those toxic fanboys I think.
 

Spukc

Gold Member
John brings up the switch and that they will continue counting pixels in Switch games because the resolution is so low.

omg
Don’t
Insult my fave plastic box John. /unsub
 

SlimySnake

Member
Showing the lower and upper bounds of that dynamic range you were able to notice is far more useful that the subjectivity of someone's eye.
I think as the technical analyst, it's their job to cover stuff like this. Otherwise, how are they any different than say the Gamespot reviewer whose job it is to offer the subjective analysis?

I got a lot of flack for a thread I created on DF's Deathloop analysis where he said something along the lines of 'it isnt trying to push graphics boundries and thats ok because it is pushing game design, art and overall polish.' And I was like I dont come to you for an analysis on game design and art style. Like WTF.

DF needs to figure out what they want to be. And I will be honest, if they want to ditch framerate and resolution analysis and focus only on the tech and how each game looks compared to other games in terms of lighting, character rendering and ray tracing then fine, lets compare Deathloop to Ratchet and ask just why the fuck two next gen only games look a gen apart. Lets discuss just why one game looks significantly better than the other and critique the devs for failing to hit the mark. Let's NOT dismiss mediocre looking games because they are polished and have good gameplay. That's not their job.

If Horizon is being compared with Zelda in game reviews by industry critics then DF should compare Zelda's graphics to Horizon and be critical about it. GT7 comes out next year. If they want to do pixel counting then fine, but for every 2D tree in GT7, I want a rant from Richard, a meltdown from John and a snide remark about lack of ray tracing in gameplay from Alex. Ten Points from Griffyndor. Rate the games. Give every game's graphics a score. So when GOW comes out 8 months after Horizon and looks a gen behind, we can say yes, it falls short of other games on the platform.
 

IntentionalPun

Ask me about my wife's perfect butthole
Really should focus on upscaling artifacts.

They drive me nuts personally, and would love to know on a per-game basis how bad they are.
 

StreetsofBeige

Gold Member
I think as the technical analyst, it's their job to cover stuff like this. Otherwise, how are they any different than say the Gamespot reviewer whose job it is to offer the subjective analysis?

I got a lot of flack for a thread I created on DF's Deathloop analysis where he said something along the lines of 'it isnt trying to push graphics boundries and thats ok because it is pushing game design, art and overall polish.' And I was like I dont come to you for an analysis on game design and art style. Like WTF.

DF needs to figure out what they want to be. And I will be honest, if they want to ditch framerate and resolution analysis and focus only on the tech and how each game looks compared to other games in terms of lighting, character rendering and ray tracing then fine, lets compare Deathloop to Ratchet and ask just why the fuck two next gen only games look a gen apart. Lets discuss just why one game looks significantly better than the other and critique the devs for failing to hit the mark. Let's NOT dismiss mediocre looking games because they are polished and have good gameplay. That's not their job.

If Horizon is being compared with Zelda in game reviews by industry critics then DF should compare Zelda's graphics to Horizon and be critical about it. GT7 comes out next year. If they want to do pixel counting then fine, but for every 2D tree in GT7, I want a rant from Richard, a meltdown from John and a snide remark about lack of ray tracing in gameplay from Alex. Ten Points from Griffyndor. Rate the games. Give every game's graphics a score. So when GOW comes out 8 months after Horizon and looks a gen behind, we can say yes, it falls short of other games on the platform.
DF changed. I'm just not sure when it transitioned.

Way back I remember those old 360 and PS3 articles. They were much more about counting and comparing specs, and not so much into subjective opinions.
 
They know their investigation and findings in cross-platform comparisons have been weaponised and used as fodder for console wars.

It's been the most toxic leading up to and as of now this current-gen (PS5/SeriesX), John even admitted this.

If they can follow through with their claims it will be refreshing but of course the wars will find a way regardless.
 

Cherrypepsi

Member
I pretty much agree with this

It's becoming more and more irrelevant especially with how good reconstruction and uspcaling techniques have become.

If you want the numbers, VGTech has proven to be a reliable source for that.
 

Portugeezer

Member
DF changed. I'm just not sure when it transitioned.

Way back I remember those old 360 and PS3 articles. They were much more about counting and comparing specs, and not so much into subjective opinions.
For years now, a lot of their content isn't even game comparisons.

They know their investigation and findings in cross-platform comparisons have been weaponised and used as fodder for console wars.

It's been the most toxic leading up to and as of now this current-gen (PS5/SeriesX), John even admitted this.

If they can follow through with their claims it will be refreshing but of course the wars will find a way regardless.
Build up last gen was more toxic, and DF milked that shit so they can cry me a river. This gen is just petty because the consoles are pretty close.
 

The_Mike

Member
Hm. They reported this after both kretos, theapp99 and Bryan having vacations from this forum.

A coincidence?

Christian Bale Idk GIF
 

SlimySnake

Member
For years now, a lot of their content isn't even game comparisons.


Build up last gen was more toxic, and DF milked that shit so they can cry me a river. This gen is just petty because the consoles are pretty close.
This. Lets not forget they made their name on the early PS360 face/offs.
 

bender

Candy Corn Aficionado
I think as the technical analyst, it's their job to cover stuff like this. Otherwise, how are they any different than say the Gamespot reviewer whose job it is to offer the subjective analysis?

I got a lot of flack for a thread I created on DF's Deathloop analysis where he said something along the lines of 'it isnt trying to push graphics boundries and thats ok because it is pushing game design, art and overall polish.' And I was like I dont come to you for an analysis on game design and art style. Like WTF.

DF needs to figure out what they want to be. And I will be honest, if they want to ditch framerate and resolution analysis and focus only on the tech and how each game looks compared to other games in terms of lighting, character rendering and ray tracing then fine, lets compare Deathloop to Ratchet and ask just why the fuck two next gen only games look a gen apart. Lets discuss just why one game looks significantly better than the other and critique the devs for failing to hit the mark. Let's NOT dismiss mediocre looking games because they are polished and have good gameplay. That's not their job.

If Horizon is being compared with Zelda in game reviews by industry critics then DF should compare Zelda's graphics to Horizon and be critical about it. GT7 comes out next year. If they want to do pixel counting then fine, but for every 2D tree in GT7, I want a rant from Richard, a meltdown from John and a snide remark about lack of ray tracing in gameplay from Alex. Ten Points from Griffyndor. Rate the games. Give every game's graphics a score. So when GOW comes out 8 months after Horizon and looks a gen behind, we can say yes, it falls short of other games on the platform.

I don't mind subjective takes. Hell, we all know that John likes motion blur. I just prefer the basis of an analysis to be data points as the foundation. Different aspects of graphics technology bother people. Screen tearing is a no-go for me. I'm usually okay with 30FPS. I never notice frame pacing. Someone else is probably the polar opposite of me, but if we have data sets about games, it will let us decide what platform to choose if any at all.

With the popularity of the XSS and Switch and design goal differences in XSX (wide-slower) and PS5 (narrow-faster), I think the resolution discussion is still a useful tool.

*shrug*
 

JimboJones

Member
Makes sense with higher resolutions and more and more games going with temporal or Ai upscaling solutions.

Interested to see what metrics they will use for image quality going forward though.
 

sncvsrtoip

Member
strange, I would still like to have information what resolution is game running on ps5 and what on xsx as this can be important for my decision on which console will play multiplatform game
 

Excess

Member
As a PC guy, I actually like to know this stuff. I like knowing if it's dynamic res, DLSS, etc.. Just because it's negligible to the eye, it does not mean it's not worth discussing, unless you're one of those people who create threads about it on NeoGAF to score points or deflect criticism.
 
This is bullshit.

DF acts like checkerboarding is perfect and not noticeable. It is. To me. I hate it.

No thanks. Other channels do better and quicker work for raw numbers anyways. I’ll only watch DF for their banter now then.

Good job becoming useless to those that actually own all consoles.
 

th4tguy

Member
Their analysis videos lately have been so bad and devoid of anything interesting. They feel more like low key reviews and I’ve lost a lot interest. This just kind of transition isn’t that surprising.
 
As the newer image reconstruction methods gain wider use on consoles with the move to current gen only games it's going to become harder for them to count pixels, anyway. We're going to have to rely on 2,000% zoom more than finding countable edges.
But if you are interested on the technical side of things this is one of the data you want to have. And it isn’t only about pixels… there are many other parameters of interest. I hope that they won’t become a simple review channel as I am not interested in hearing their opinion about games.
 
Last edited:

xPikYx

Member
Finally they've come up with this conclusion, seriously there is no point anymore, too many upscaling techniques, and in the end, games look good anyway, important is the result
 

Tschumi

Member
Again, just wanna point out that there's documented evidence on this forum of me saying that NeoGAF's console wars are partially built off DF setting the terms of game evaluation (and those terms being purely technical and dry), and that any game we would consider 'pretty' would have to be native 4k+ and 60 fps.

So, DF clearly agreed with me (indirectly of course i'm not that delusional) that they've created a storm of fanboyism on a largely irrelevant metric and have decided to stop evaluating it it.
 
Well… that’s a mistake. I won’t be bothering to watch anymore!

This is just stupid. Pixel count matters. Returnal on my 49” tv looked noticeably more blurry because it was 1080p and uses unreal’s TAA. Upscaling can only do so much esp. since upscaling techniques vary in quality so much.

Like seriously wtf pixel counts are what started DF lol.

Are they not going to tell you what a switch game is rendering at even?
 
Last edited:
DF lost the plot anyways always whining when a game doesn’t have TAA… man they really prefer blur over sharpness. With that said it kinda makes sense from their weird perspective.

When you bitch about native 4k plus 4x msaa (forza) you’re kind of useless anyway as an opinion piece.
 

Hoddi

Member
I won't complain. Resolution was useful data 15 years ago but nowadays it's just fuel for nerds to call 1680p vs 1620p a 'win'. Especially now that the two main consoles are borderline identical.
 

Dlacy13g

Member
While I applaud the notion, I feel like this is a bit of window dressing on their part. Pretty confident their highest viewed videos are the comparison videos more times than not. So while they say they want to get away from it, I am guessing they will still find a way to highlight those things without directly doing so and thus still fuel the views of the warrior class that they thrive on.
 
Sounds to me they don’t want to admit that an Xbox Series S game is running 540p ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

I think frame rate analysis is more important than resolution anyway
 

Hoddi

Member
Sounds to me they don’t want to admit that an Xbox Series S game is running 540p ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

I think frame rate analysis is more important than resolution anyway
Yer, if a game is running at 540p on the S then it will also only be running at ~1080p on XSX/PS5. That's a Pyrrhic victory at best.

Those are honestly my favorite threads.
 

20cent

Member
In a world where mathematics are racist and any answer is correct it's completely understandable to judge computer graphics on feelings instead of pixels
 

Ev1L AuRoN

Member
It makes sense. Games nowadays have such advanced reconstruction tech, dynamic resolution etc. that it is silly to still count pixels.

PS5 and XSX games are very clean, I think that pixel counting can be useful in some cases where the game is noticeably blurrier or to analyze new methods of upscaling and image reconstruction.
 

dcmk7

Member
There nothing wrong with saying XSS goes to a native 533p or whatever resolution it is and explaining it uses whatever reconstruction technique to achive a higher pixel count, The problem arises when someone is like, "XSS is 533p lolz"

It aint. The player does not see 533p, it looks more like 900-1080p
They don't say that, they say it's significantly below 533p. Might even be 300-400p mark for all we know.. they haven't revealed the actual number as of yet.
 
Top Bottom