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

Digital Foundry vs. AC4 PS3/360/WiiU/PS4/XB1/PC (Take shelter)

Take-Shelter.jpg

Ah shit whats the name of this movie been meaning to see it
 
PS4 version is stacking up nicely to PC, all things considered. Though those supersampling examples are totally gorgeous. Looking forward to building a new PC next year so I can join in on that fun.
 
Wait am I see this right but the 360/PS3 versions look better than ACIII and run at a solid 30 FPS?

Pretty impressive they could get more out from the systems this late in the gen.
 
so apparently i got a tag for commenting in this thread. can a mod/someone explain it to me? lol

Canes are associated with the blind. (especially white ones with red tips)
Green is associated with Xbox.
 
Albert p said:
I will ask two questions of the detractors, honest questions.

1. What piece of information would you want that I could provide that would convince you there is not a huge delta in performance?
2. If it comes out after we launch that the difference between 3rd party games is maybe single-digit FPS between the two platforms, will I get an apology or concession?

Still waiting
 
Xbone looks terrible in vid, damn, ps4 looks better then PC imo.

No, it really doesn't look better than PC. It's not too far off relative to the messes on either side though. I think I'd rather have the Wii U's soft picture than the Xbox's aliasing and mess of colors, if the Wii U had a solid framerate.
 
We're only at launch at the visual differences to the Wii U version are significant.

It really will be a Wii situation all over again in a year.

I still smell a lot of confirmation bias from a lot of people. In my opinion (and mind you I've been more of a PC gamer than Nintendo gamer for the last decade or so) the gap at launch is nothing close to the current Wii to PS360 gap. It MAY not be drastically far off from the Wii to PS360 gap in 2006, but with the absurd architecture (PS3 especially) those consoles likely began farther from their peaks than PS4/xbone are doing. Hell, programmable shaders were pretty much in their infancy.

All this shitting on Wii U for the sake of shitting on Wii U is a horse that's been dead for several months now.
 
There seems to be a lot of denial among XB1 fans. In terms of overall image output XB1 is as close to Wii U as it is to PS4. Grouping XB1 and PS4 together and Wii U separately doesn't make a lot of sense, it's really 3 distinct tiers. If anything for a lot of games the XB1 visuals are closer to Wii U than PS4.
 
Playing it on my PS4 now. I have to say Ubi must be using some black magick on this port because it looks stunning and to think that this is only a cross-gen title.....

Now, if only they'd stop with the crazy-ass trophy requirements to plat this title. :/
 
Has anyone actually compared the Wii U version of this game compared to the 360/PS3 versions themselves? I remember comparing Trine 2 on the Wii U and 360, and while the Wii U one was a director's cut, it simply looked much better. At that time, I heard (I never got to read it then) Digital Foundry wrote a piece saying essentially that it was worse on the Wii U before the developers of Trine contradicted them and then Digital Foundry said "it looked marginally better".

I've never really been able to make comparisons myself though as I find having the right TV setup can make all the difference at times, and I never am quite sure whether to trust Digital Foundry. This is because they seem to always repeat the same things over and over again basically, which the public already believes... Did they exist during the GameCube days by any chance? I'm not saying I'm surprised by the results either way though.

What DF basically always says (b/c apparently framerate matters more than glitches and stuff...)
360 > PS3 at beginning of gen, now 360 >= PS3 >>> Wii U, PS4 > XB1, etc.
 
Has anyone actually compared the Wii U version of this game compared to the 360/PS3 versions themselves? I remember comparing Trine 2 on the Wii U and 360, and while the Wii U one was a director's cut, it simply looked much better. At that time, I heard (I never got to read it then) Digital Foundry wrote a piece saying essentially that it was worse on the Wii U before the developers of Trine contradicted them and then Digital Foundry said "it looked marginally better".
They weren't wrong. The Wii U version did have a gamma issue that the developers later fixed.
 
The only retail game where a developer actually put in effort to make the Wii U version at least look and run as well as it could was Most Wanted U. No one else has done this so there is no reason to expect the Wii U version to have that much effort in it. Add the low sales on top of that and this is what you get. That said each game that Digital Foundry said is worst on the Wii U has played and looked more than good enough for me.

Most eshop games have more effort put into them than retail games. That's not surprising since it was the same way on the Wii.
 
It depends on TV, on mine default limited is that fuzzy crap image you see here. Soon as I switch it to Full it looks clean and everything pops.

I bet you these comparisons people dont even switch it to Full they go by "Default" settings and Ps4 like ps3 will always lose on that "pop" image quality factor, textures and resolution that ps4 wins of course

"Pop" is certainly one of the worst terms coming out of this whole sharpening debacle. I remember it being used in the past, but the black crushing on 360 was less pronounced.

Anyway, guide to perfect pop on Xbone:

- Play sub 1080p game with sharpening filter active
- Turn on full range RGB on limited range TV set
- Set TV mode to "dynamic"
- Crank up TV image sharpening and contrast to the max
 
so... are the Ps360 versions running V-sync? Because i'm assuming WiiU is. Do people take that into consideration when labeling the WiiU version worse than the old twins? Not much of a pc gamer but i've been told running V-sync on pc games can sometimes halfen your framerate. In which case i think WiiU games should just have the option to disable the function so we can leave this ps360>WiiU shtick behind us.
 
Skip III, it sucks. IV is a marked improvement...so far. I'm only a few hours into it.

My only real grip is that on foot missions almost always consist of tailing someone. I'm around 50% or so in the story and I can't stomach these tailing missions anymore.

They give you a ton of tools to avoid detection and it's cool, but at this point I CBA'd anymore getting creative with the toolset.

This time the off-animus story is very amusing tho.

On topic, I have been playing on a ps4 and the game looks gorgeous despite the obvious last-gen assets and effects. Truth be told, while playing I am often telling myself I'd be happy if devs focused on IQ from now on. I'm sorta sad we will soon inevitably see the first of many grainy, shitty IQ games running at sub-HD on next-gen just so marketing can push amazing bullshots rendered on quad-titan setups.
 
so... are the Ps360 versions running V-sync? Because i'm assuming WiiU is. Do people take that into consideration when labeling the WiiU version worse than the old twins? Not much of a pc gamer but i've been told running V-sync on pc games can sometimes halfen your framerate. In which case i think WiiU games should just have the option to disable the function so we can leave this ps360>WiiU shtick behind us.

PS360 versions are running with v-sync.
 
This is going to keep happening and shouldn't be surprising. XboxOne's GPU was nerfed to put more silicon budget into the on die 32 MB cache because they chose to DDR3. Why they chose DDR3 isn't clear...maybe they anticipated cost of GDDR5 to be too high or maybe they were so focused on apps. Regardless of the cause, the GPU was hacked down both in raw TF output and in ROPS. It is always going to struggle with 1080p.
 
i think these DF faceoffs is gonna hurt microsoft more than anything this generation, at least among the hardcore crowd.

i'm seeing them being quite an eye opener for many gamers around me.
 
Top Bottom