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

Digital Foundry vs. Dead Rising 3

Status
Not open for further replies.
Demon Ice said:
Yeah as I understand it the scaler itself does the sharpening after it upscales the image. The sharpening is visible in the direct capture screenshots posted in this thread.
Click to expand...

It was also present in DF's BF4 comparison, but not in Jackfrag's. It's hard for me to tell if it's actually something with the scaler or how DF is specifically capping this stuff.
 
Papercuts said:
It was also present in DF's BF4 comparison, but not in Jackfrag's. It's hard for me to tell if it's actually something with the scaler or how DF is specifically capping this stuff.
Click to expand...

nah, the sharpening is still there...but in the DF videos it was COUPLED with the FUBAR contrast..so it looked crazy different
 
onQ123 said:
And people tried to make me out to be crazy or something when I said this game looked bad about 2 months ago.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=82851453&postcount=20
Click to expand...

That...actually looks pretty good in comparison to what we have now.

YoungBlade said:
I know, but why are they blurred and sharpened?
I don't get it damn it.
Click to expand...

From what we can see so far, there's a scaler in the box that upscale any 720p games to 1080p output but at the expense of sharpening the edges (thereby adding jaggies), crushing the black colors, and increasing the colors to rather extreme level.
 
coldfoot said:
Never mind the fact that I am only arguing against your double standards and lowered expectations, here's what you said about Dead Rising 3's performance 2-3 months ago:



Now we've shown that 2-3 months ago you were convinced that DR3 didn't have any frame rate issues, let's reaffirm your dislike for bad frame rates:


But, exactly what is a bad frame rate for Senjutsu? Maybe he's OK with 20's dipping into teens and doesn't like single digits? To get to the bottom of that, we need to look at this GTA4 and what Senjutsu thought of it:


Let's see what DF says about the frame rate on GTA4 on 360:

So a game that can drop to sub-20 in some areas is almost unplayable according to Senjutsu.

Except if it's DR3, where the 20's and sub-20 frame rates go from almost unplayable to perfectly acceptable.
I rest my case
Click to expand...

Kevin-Garnett-Reaction-at-2013-Dunk-Contest.gif
 
Demon Ice said:
Yeah as I understand it the scaler itself does the sharpening after it upscales the image. The sharpening is visible in the direct capture screenshots posted in this thread.
Click to expand...
Ok, I noticed the same thing on Killer Instinct. WTF, are they blind? It looked godawful. If it turns out that I was playing KI on the PC at E3 I'm going to be pissed.
 
SomewhatGroovy said:
With anything like this, I want to understand how much of these hiccups is due to development and how much of it is due to hardware. Also, s the game consistently streaming and, would this contribute to profound dips in frame rate or would this be at certain check points only?

Thanks.
Click to expand...

Ok...now, I'm not a resident techphile here at GAF, so I'm going to be putting a lot of things in layman terms. I'm sure someone can point to some of the more hardware/devtool focused discussions to add some clarification or further your interest in the subject.

Hardware

Hardware itself is, in my personal opinion, the least contributing factor to the issues with Dead Rising 3. That does not mean that it isn't a significant factor. It is the baseline after all. However, it is also of my personal opinion that these issues would not be as severe if it weren't for outstanding factors. If this were to have started from scratch on the system and be released 2 years from now, which is in my mind minimal development time for a substantial title, it could probably run at 1080p/30fps locked. Possibly higher with a basement ceiling of 30fps, but let's just keep things close to the chest to avoid a controversy.

So what in the hardware is the issue? That would lie primarily with the 32MB eSRAM and 8GB DDR3 RAM. While eSRAM is fast at 140-150 GB/sec and capable of simultaneous reading and writing, the data moving through it is restricted to the small capacity. Essentially, it creates an additional bottleneck to the 8GB 2133MHzDDR3 RAM (which can only read and write at a given time and only at 68.3GB/sec). Essentially, in theory, the eSRAM can provide a boost to the read and write capabilities of the Xbox One when needed at a given moment, but the slow DDR3 and small capacity eSRAM provide difficulties for developers on how to distribute the data to which process. Another issue worth noting is that only certain pathways seem to enable the eSRAM to simultaneously read and write.

As I said, this is using simple language with limited understanding, so hopefully you're still bearing with me. I may have mixed up how RAM and eSRAM work and the way information flows between them, so I welcome corrections from HardwareGAF. Edit: Thanks to Chobel for providing the homework to get me out of opposite world regarding eSRAM and DDR3.

While this ties in more with the next section, in an attempt to draw parity with Sony's system, Microsoft made changes with the hardware that now encouraged developers to go further and possibly bite off more than they could chew in the amount of time available to them. With the changing environment already creating problems with optimization, developers had to contend with issues with the tied in software in development.

Finally, this was a game intended for development on Xbox 360 hardware/architecture that was transferred at an unknown stage of development onto the Xbox One. The architecture is the chief issue, but this also has strong ties to the software element of game design regarding development kits.

For more information on Xbox One architecture: http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-vs-the-xbox-one-architects

Development Kits

To aid Capcom Vancouver in developing their exclusive title to the Xbox One, Microsoft provides development kits to the team, which is software that allows game development for the Xbox One in this case.

http://www.kotaku.com.au/2013/10/rumored-xbox-one-launch-issues-lead-to-lots-of-questions/

There seems to have been quite a few issues with the development kits, reportedly as quite buggy. Iterations/updates of the software that released with new Xbox One SDKs didn't provide any improvements to the situation.

There is also the transition of working with final Xbox 360 development kits to ever-changing Xbox One development kits. I'm not a game developer, so I don't know what changes aside from the hardware end that would obviously have an effect on the options available in the software. However, it's bound to be jarring to have, with the very same project, go from software optimized for a system over 8 years to software that changes potentially on a weekly/monthly basis for new hardware.

Time

An obvious issue that ties in with the other two is that there was a strict deadline for this product to be released when Microsoft made that call for the Xbox One. Reading the above issues, on how changes are occurring rather often and probably disrupting development, imagine now with that deadline fast approaching. That doesn't make for tequila shots and penthouse strippers in my mind.

In between all of this and running up to the date, you have to make time for the press, meetings, conventions, creating vertical slices or creating demos, and whatever else needed to be done in between actual development.

In-Game

So why are the issues taking place in certain instances? So far I've observed it in areas with large draw distance and crowds. It also escalates in vehicles and large amounts of particle effects, or just effects if that isn't the right term.

Upon loads, checkpoints/saving, cutscenes (which look to mask loadtimes from the DF footage), and quickly covering distances, that's where quite a few noticeable dips come to play. Everything taking place on screen at once is a problem to put quite simply.

Yet we are also seeing dips where nothing seems to necessitate or feature any of the above reasons, so something behind the scenes is also causing issues.

However, this all falls back on to the above reasons in varying ways, as well as some concluding statements below on Capcom Vancouver's chief mistake in development choices.

Conclusion

Honestly, it's hard to put this on solely Microsoft or Capcom Vancouver. At this stage, most of the blame is on Microsoft for buggy development kits, unconventional architecture, and rushing the project to meet this holiday to be a launch exclusive. Blaming them for changing the hardware itself is a factor, but not really a fault of the company.

However, Capcom Vancouver decided effort > execution. Instead of perhaps reducing draw distance, segmenting the world in a more manageable way, or cutting down on the zombies present on screen at a time or some other factor in order to stabilize framerate, they kept reaching with more = better. Now you have bandwidth not being able to support all the data coming through at the necessary speed to communicate with the CPU, hence the framerate issue.

Another issue is that this is now made worse by CV having possibly lied about the game featuring "locked 30fps" in September: http://www.videogamer.com/xboxone/dead_rising_3/news/dead_rising_3_now_frame-locked_at_30fps.html. It looks to be that a demo available back then was damn close to that, but we don't know exactly how that slice was presented. For all we know, it was an optimized demo benefitting from being a closed environment rather than an entire game. Video in question: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ttO1i8_Anxw

Otherwise, how are these latest videos of what seems to be the final build of the full game now suffering from unstable framerates? Maybe they never did lock it down and were just buying time with the demo so that they can fulfill their promise of reaching that target at launch, possibly with a Day 1 patch. http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/129398-Dead-Rising-3-Locked-at-720p-30-FPS-Capcom-Confirms Unfortunately, that possibly won't be clear to us for another week, and is not helping Microsoft's position.

A position which, this late in the game, should not exist.

Edit: To state the obvious, this is only an exploration on the possible issues behind the latest look at Dead Rising 3, with my personal conclusion to the crux of the issue. The only facts here are regarding the Xbox One architecture, the claims by Capcom Vancouver, and the quantifiable data and observations in the Digital Foundry article and footage. The rest derive mainly from an investigative report from Jason Schreier of Kotaku and my own responses and conjecture to what I observed in the DF footage in relation to the other supported elements.

Of course, some of you may find the hardware to be the bigger issue, or the time crunch at launch to be it, or maybe that I don't understand how the awesomeness of thousands of zombies on screen negates any technical issues. If you do, feel free to discuss it.
 
coldfoot said:
Never mind the fact that I am only arguing against your double standards and lowered expectations, here's what you said about Dead Rising 3's performance 2-3 months ago:



Now we've shown that 2-3 months ago you were convinced that DR3 didn't have any frame rate issues, let's reaffirm your dislike for bad frame rates:


But, exactly what is a bad frame rate for Senjutsu? Maybe he's OK with 20's dipping into teens and doesn't like single digits? To get to the bottom of that, we need to look at this GTA4 and what Senjutsu thought of it:


Let's see what DF says about the frame rate on GTA4 on 360:

So a game that can drop to sub-20 in some areas is almost unplayable according to Senjutsu.

Except if it's DR3, where the 20's and sub-20 frame rates go from almost unplayable to perfectly acceptable.
I rest my case
Click to expand...

Coldfoot should be a trial lawyer :)
 
Anyone who thinks this framerate looks good is judging the game as though its an Xbox 360 or PS3 game, and even then I'd raise an eyebrow. Its bona fide poor for a next-gen game, surely? Especially at 720p, and with issues regarding texture streaming, and generally no great graphical quality.

Technically messy games shouldn't get a free pass just becase they made the design choice of being fully open-world
 
Hmmm... I've never played a DR, but isn't this basically Dynasty Warriors with zombies instead of soldiers? Why do lots of people in the west love this game, but dump on Dynasty Warriors?

Not to say I like Dynasty Warriors, because I don't think it's fun at all. But this looks equally as dull to me.
 
ArkkAngel007 said:
Ok...now, I'm not a resident techphile here at GAF, so I'm going to be putting a lot of things in layman terms. I'm sure someone can point to some of the more hardware/devtool focused discussions to add some clarification or further your interest in the subject.

Hardware

Hardware itself is, in my personal opinion, the least contributing factor to the issues with Dead Rising 3. If this were to have started from scratch on the system and be released 2 years from now, which is in my mind minimal development time for a substantial title, it could probably run at 1080p/30fps locked. Possibly higher with a basement ceiling of 30fps, but that let's just keep things close to the chest to avoid a controversy.

So what in the hardware is the issue? That would lie primarily with the 32MB ESRAM with the Xbox One. While ESRAM is fast, the data moving through it is really limited as it is only 102GB/sec. Essentially, it creates a bottleneck that presents a unique problem to developers in comparison to just developing with the 8GB 2133MHzDDR3 RAM (which has information travel in both directions at a time and only 68.3GB/sec). Essentially, in theory, the ESRAM can provide a boost to either the read or write capabilities of the Xbox One when needed.

As I said, this is using simple language with limited understanding, so hopefully you're still bearing with me. I may have mixed up how RAM and ESRAM work and the way information flows between them, so I welcome corrections from HardwareGAF.

While this ties in more with the next section, in an attempt to draw parity with Sony's system, Microsoft made changes with the hardware that now encouraged developers to go further and possibly bite off more than they could chew in the amount of time available to them. With the changing environment already creating problems with optimization, developers had to contend with issues with the tied in software in development.

Finally, this was a game intended for development on Xbox 360 hardware/architecture that was transferred at an unknown stage of development onto the Xbox One. The architecture is the chief issue, but this also has strong ties to the software element of game design regarding development kits.

Development Kits

To aid Capcom Vancouver in developing their exclusive title to the Xbox One, Microsoft provides development kits to the team, which is software that allows game development for the Xbox One in this case.

http://www.kotaku.com.au/2013/10/rumored-xbox-one-launch-issues-lead-to-lots-of-questions/

There seems to have been quite a few issues with the development kits, reportedly as quite buggy. Iterations/updates of the software that released with new Xbox One SDKs didn't provide any improvements to the situation.

There is also the transition of working with final Xbox 360 development kits to ever-changing Xbox One development kits. I'm not a game developer, so I don't know what changes aside from the hardware end that would obviously have an effect on the options available in the software. However, it's bound to be jarring to have, with the very same project, go from software optimized for a system over 8 years to software that changes potentially on a weekly/monthly basis for new hardware.

Time

An obvious issue that ties in with the other two is that there was a strict deadline for this product to be released when Microsoft made that call for the Xbox One. Reading the above issues, on how changes are occurring rather often and probably disrupting development, imagine now with that deadline fast approaching. That doesn't make for tequila shots and penthouse strippers in my mind.

In between all of this and running up to the date, you have to make time for the press, meetings, conventions, creating vertical slices or creating demos, and whatever else needed to be done in between actual development.

In-Game

So why are the issues taking place in certain instances? So far I've observed it in areas with large draw distance and crowds. It also escalates in vehicles and large amounts of particle effects, or just effects if that isn't the right term.

Upon loads, checkpoints/saving, cutscenes (which look to mask loadtimes from the DF footage), and quickly covering distances, that's where quite a few noticeable dips come to play. Everything taking place on screen at once is a problem to put quite simply.

Yet we are also seeing dips where nothing seems to necessitate or feature any of the above reasons, so something behind the scenes is also causing issues.

However, this all falls back on to the above reasons in varying ways, as well as some concluding statements below on Capcom Vancouver's chief mistake in development choices.

Conclusion

Honestly, it's hard to put this on solely Microsoft or Capcom Vancouver. At this stage, most of the blame is on Microsoft for buggy development kits, unconventional architecture, and rushing the project to meet this holiday to be a launch exclusive. Blaming them for changing the hardware itself is a factor, but not really a fault of the company.

However, Capcom Vancouver decided effort > execution. Instead of perhaps reducing draw distance, segmenting the world in a more manageable way, or cutting down on the zombies present on screen at a time or some other factor in order to stabilize framerate, they kept reaching with more = better. Now you have bandwidth not being able to support all the data coming through at the necessary speed to communicate with the CPU, hence the framerate issue.

Another issue is that this is now made worse by CV having possibly lied about the game featuring "locked 30fps" in September. It looks to be that a demo available back then was damn close to that, but we don't know exactly how that slice was presented. For all we know, it was an optimized demo benefitting from being a closed environment rather than an entire game.

Otherwise, how are these latest videos of what seems to be the final build of the full game now suffering from unstable framerates? Maybe they never did lock it down and were just buying time with the demo so that they can fulfill their promise of reaching that target at launch, possibly with a Day 1 patch. Unfortunately, that possibly won't be clear to us for another week, and is not helping Microsoft's position.

A position which, this late in the game, should not exist.

Edit: Again, if I'm wrong about some of the technical things in here, please correct me so I can edit and credit. Someone came up with an an awesome water pump analogy for on the Xbox One pathway (in comparison to the PS4, but easy to understand), and I can't remember it for the life of me.
Click to expand...

I see what you are saying but this is trying too hard to make excuses for the console's weak hardware.

Yes, of course, perhaps in 2 YEARS, like you said, performance would be better. But the XB1 is the only console to ever be released where we routinely here the defence 'Oh but the graphics drivers aren't ready, wait another 6 months'.

It's crazy.
 
Jomjom said:
Hmmm... I've never played a DR, but isn't this basically Dynasty Warriors with zombies instead of soldiers? Why do lots of people in the west love this game, but dump on Dynasty Warriors?

Not to say I like Dynasty Warriors, because I don't think it's fun at all. But this looks equally as dull to me.
Click to expand...

Nah, DR is a very unique series. The actual point of the game isn't running around killing zombies.
 
Jomjom said:
Ah I see. I guess the DF video probably isn't very representative of the actual game.
Click to expand...

Well, it is just a tech breakdown, not a review. :P

It's really a more arcadey game, based around a time limit and escorting NPCs to safehouses while staying on track to complete optional side missions/bosses as well as complete main missions, as you can outright fail the 'story' and be left with no ending. This leads to having perfect runs and route planning, which is a lot of fun. The real worry I have with the game is how the time limit is now locked to a specific nightmare mode, and there being a normal no limit mode.
 
ArkkAngel007 said:
Edit: Again, if I'm wrong about some of the technical things in here, please correct me so I can edit and credit. Someone came up with an an awesome water pump analogy for on the Xbox One pathway (in comparison to the PS4, but easy to understand), and I can't remember it for the life of me.
Click to expand...

Few corrections:

eSRAM Maximum theoretical bandwith is 204GB/s, but in reality when measured by MS it is 140-150 GB/s.

Both DDR3 and eSRAM represent some kind of bottleneck, DDR3 is slow memory (for GPU) so eSRAM must be used whenever a dev can, but 32MB of eSRAM is small. So managing what goes to DDR3 and what goes to eSRAM is not something easy for devs.
 
Coulomb_Barrier said:
I see what you are saying but this is trying too hard to make excuses for the console's weak hardware.

Yes, of course, perhaps in 2 YEARS, like you said, performance would be better. But the XB1 is the only console to ever be released where we routinely here the defence 'Oh but the graphics drivers aren't ready, wait another 6 months'.

It's crazy.
Click to expand...

In all fairness we did get a lot of 'the games will come' and 'cell is harder to program for/optimize for' at the start of PS3's life cycle. It's only hit its stride since 2008 or so. It was mercilessly flogged on GAF for a while. The reasoning was different sorta, but the principle was the same.

The thing that offends my senses is that they somehow took what should've been a very simple system to code for (x86) and made it more complicated and a PITA than it needed to be all in the name of the almighty dollar. Big backfire it seems, although we won't know for sure for years yet how the dust will settle.
 
Coulomb_Barrier said:
I see what you are saying but this is trying too hard to make excuses for the console's weak hardware.

Yes, of course, perhaps in 2 YEARS, like you said, performance would be better. But the XB1 is the only console to ever be released where we routinely here the defence 'Oh but the graphics drivers aren't ready, wait another 6 months'.

It's crazy.
Click to expand...

You're missing the point. It's not excusing the hardware of the system.

He asked why we're seeing what we're seeing, so I gave him the explanation that covered everything from hardware to development.

Here's my advice: Stop looking at anything not equating to "PS4 is better" or "The Xbox One can't do 1080p) as support for Xbox One. That is a given fact and needs no further explanation. I went in and explained why Dead Rising 3 is in the shape that is it, which the very first point was, oh my goodness, the actual Xbox One hardware.

Advice 2: Read beyond the first few lines before making conclusions. While the post wasn't for you, posts like yours make me feel like it's a wasted effort to bother posting anything that isn't a gif or meme here.
 
This thread may one day die. But it will not be the end. It will not even be the beginning of the end. It will be remembered as the end of the beginning..
 
ArkkAngel007 said:
You're missing the point. It's not excusing the hardware of the system.

He asked why we're seeing what we're seeing, so I gave him the explanation that covered everything from hardware to development.

Here's my advice: Stop looking at anything not equating to "PS4 is better" or "The Xbox One can't do 1080p) as support for Xbox One. That is a given fact and needs no further explanation. I went in and explained why Dead Rising 3 is in the shape that is it, which the very first point was, oh my goodness, the actual Xbox One hardware.

Advice 2: Read beyond the first few lines before making conclusions. While the post wasn't for you. Posts like yours make me feel like it's a wasted effort to bother posting anything that isn't a gif or meme here.
Click to expand...
It's all just speculation. We won't be able to know for sure without seeing the source code or having a developer explain the situation.
 
So what exactly was the time frame for development of DR3? I remember a rumor a while back that MS had been caught off guard and expected 'next gen' to start sometime next year...if its true then they effectively lost 6 months to a year in development time which may explain some of the problems.
 
coldfoot said:
Never mind the fact that I am only arguing against your double standards and lowered expectations, here's what you said about Dead Rising 3's performance 2-3 months ago:



Now we've shown that 2-3 months ago you were convinced that DR3 didn't have any frame rate issues, let's reaffirm your dislike for bad frame rates:


But, exactly what is a bad frame rate for Senjutsu? Maybe he's OK with 20's dipping into teens and doesn't like single digits? To get to the bottom of that, we need to look at this GTA4 and what Senjutsu thought of it:


Let's see what DF says about the frame rate on GTA4 on 360:

So a game that can drop to sub-20 in some areas is almost unplayable according to Senjutsu.

Except if it's DR3, where the 20's and sub-20 frame rates go from almost unplayable to perfectly acceptable.
I rest my case
Click to expand...

black-guys-reaction-gif.gif
 
Chobel said:
Few corrections:

eSRAM Maximum theoretical bandwith is 204GB/s, but in reality when measured by MS it is 140-150 GB/s.

Both DDR3 and eSRAM represent some kind of bottleneck, DDR3 is slow memory (for GPU) so eSRAM must be used whenever a dev can, but 32MB of eSRAM is small. So managing what goes to DDR3 and what goes to eSRAM is not something easy for devs.
Click to expand...

Thanks for actually taking the time to look through the whole thing (or at least the dicey bits).

I know DDR3 is slower, but this wasn't a comparison thread to the Playstation 4, so I didn't think it really wasn't necessary to go into that side of things, hence why I just left it at the bandwidth. I'll make it clear though that it is considered slow, especially with the given point you presented.

But eSRAM can only just read or just write at a given time, correct? That was my chief concern.
 
Whiteshirt said:
It's Ryse that looks technically decent.

Forza has better models but god awful aliasing and LOD issues. Add baked lighting for more disappointment.
Click to expand...

I can't bring myself to overlook the animation of Ryse to judge its technical quality on its real merits :P

Any word on what games DF will be analysing from both consoles' launch lineups? Would like to see more about these problems with Forza. Looks good to me, but I know shit all about the intricacies of these things
 
Damn, those frame rate drops sounds just like current gen. Was hoping this would be avoided going into the new generation of consoles. I guess not. Might just be that the game is rushed for launch.
 
I refuse to buy any game that is 720p30 this gen. This is insanity. If there is some console title that i I can't get for PC and it runs like this I'll rent at best.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

  • Poll
Uncharted 4 vs 007 First Light Digital Foundry comparison
2 3 4 5 6
264
3K
Vick replied
Pathtracing on Playstation 5 (Linux) - Digital Foundry
2
55
1K
winjer replied
Digital Foundry: Halo Campaign Evolved First Look - Xbox/PC/Ally X - OG vs New Game, Performance + More
30
829
SardineBreath replied
Digital Foundry: FSR 4 For RDNA 3: Steam Machine Benchmarks + Gameplay, RX 7800 XT + 7900 XTX Tested
1
53
Dorfdad replied
  • Locked
Is Digital foundry going blind?
24
863
Hadoukens replied
Top Bottom