Is there any surprise though, we have so many apologists in the gaming media, consumers are normally way down the pecking order when it comes to "Games Journalists" checklist.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Digital Foundry vs. Dead Rising 3
- Thread starter Hanmik
- Start date
- Status
Is there any surprise though, we have so many apologists in the gaming media, consumers are normally way down the pecking order when it comes to "Games Journalists" checklist.
Shouldn't this be a reflection of what some game studios think of us? They outright lied about being locked at 30FPS, the media just relayed their message. They at least think we're stupid.
Yes, exactly what I had in mind. Really fits the theme.
Exactly.
They could have done better, but expectations have to be kept low, for what has always been a franchise that's plagued with issues.
Only if your hardware isn't up to the task.
sure also...i would put a better gpu in it ..but this certainly not give DR3 the right performance to reach 30fps at 720p ..this developers did a flop..just and only that...
this is a developer problem so i blame them
Chance Hale
Member
you guys seriously need to get your eyes checked.
this is the DR2 video posted earlier
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T4wLgdmzHLM&feature=youtu.be&t=1m20s
some pics from DR and DR2.
This is what a current gen DR looks like and that's not taking into account the larger area with no load times, unified lighting etc.
For a game like DR, a sandbox where the # of zombies onscreen can vary greatly, and the havoc caused by your weapons and vehicles cannot be kept under control by the developers, framerate dips are always expected.
Either you have a game that barely uses the GPU in normal situations, so that you have enough spare power to handle more crowded moments, or you always push the console and accept the fact that framerate will drop when you have a lot is going on.
From all the recent videos we've seen , performances are just fine and they were until digital foundry put a number onscreen.
I think everyone has forgotten how bad Dead Rising 1/2 actually look, I certainly didn't remember them being at that level despite being some of my favorite games. Doesn't excuse the performance issues but Dead Rising 3 is a massive step up none the less. And I'm still hopeful that this isn't final release and the framerate will be fixed, but as said that is just hope
From a technical perspective, the game is an utter disappointment, there is no way around it. However, I would also credit that partially to the developer and the fact that the game started as a 360 game.
Nevertheless, framerates that consistently drop below 30fps should be absolutely unelectable this gen.
Nevertheless, framerates that consistently drop below 30fps should be absolutely unelectable this gen.
Dalibor_San
Member
This is a joke right? Please say it is...because if it isn't then you are every Corporations wet dream!
To be fair, some developers may seem a little more competent than others. Crytek, Turn10.
Whether this is due to more time with the HW, tools, or just efficiencies, some developers don't have the same resources as others..
Should resources be an issue to make great games? no and shame on MS for not giving the developers the right tools make what they need more easily.
Fess
Member
Have they reviewed an old build? A few days ago Capcom boasted that they were locked at 30fps. I planned to buy this but no way, I'm voting with my wallet here, no more sub 30fps, definitely not if they're lowering the resolution too. They're aiming too high. Scale it back to the level the hardware is capable of.
People are comparing to the best of current gen, not the worst, or merely average. Eg, you compare the visuals with something like The Last of Us, Uncharted 2/3, GOW3, Halo 4 etc, not Dead Rising 2 or Dynasty Warriors. I appreciate the former games are linear or less sandbox, have less characters on screen etc, but given that the hardware is 3x more powerful, and there's considerably more ram etc, the idea is that even without proper optimisations and being a launch title, the graphics should still at least be better than the best of current gen, just on a brute force, raw performance basis.
Why do you keep bringing up the PS4.
WHERE DID I MENTION THE PS4?
And why should people eat crow when they haven't made claim otherwise. Who's "people"? I don't give a fuck what "people" say. That's not part of the conversation right now. The conversation we're having is you putting sole blame on the developers
And there is a sub 1080p game on PS4. Ever heard of Battlefield 4? It's 900p.. So what? Do you expect me to criticise that in a DEAD RISING THREAD?
Impeccable
Member
I don't think I have seen one sane person say Ryse looks bad, sorry.
is the first time im hearing problem to reach 30fps at 720 not having an AMAZING graphic to handle
When one game is only 720p it isn't a faulty HW, but when you see multiples games at this resolution there's clearly a problem here!
This is unequivocally brutal news. Just how positive do you expect people to be?
In an OT for a game I agree with you, or the OT for the console. Those are for fans of that game or that console to talk without having people dropping too many negative comments in that don;t have that game or console.
But in general open threads that are about the discussion of some aspect about the console or it's content everything is open which is as it should be.
SniperHunter
Banned
Total failure
720p at 20 fps....it should be running at 60 fps
720p at 20 fps....it should be running at 60 fps
Man, this has got to be the same Hindle that used to hang around the comments on Eurogamer.
IAmRandom31
Banned
The moment the specs were known people were trying to warn future consumers of this product of what the reality would be.
This is simply what you would expect from a 7770 out there trying to visually match up again the higher priced, much more powerful GPU hardware with much higher memory bandwidth. People kept saying, 30% more powerful, 50% more capability, 3x memory bandwidth, etc. etc. These numbers cannot be ignored, they do not magically go away or get erased by silly eSRAM.
Some did not want to listen though. Kept holding onto that thread of hope for secret sauce, extra GPUs, 16 extra processors somewhere, untapping the potential of audio chips, etc. etc. Now, the games are actually being seen and it is incredibly disappointing.
I mean one system has Killzone and Res0gun at launch, the other has .. this and Ryse ( definition of a static screen besides the scripted events )? In early 2014 PS4 gets Infamous, DriveClub ( looking oh so sexy now ), The Order, The Witness, Transistors, Planetside 2, etc. etc. and the X1 may have a 720p version of Titanfall?
Does anyone really expect games like MGSV or The Witcher 3 or Dragons Age 3 to be anything but 720p on the X1 next year at this point?
Nah a 1.3Tflop GPU is actually the low end of the scale in the AMD product line. Not much goes lower. About a 100$ GPU.
This is simply what you would expect from a 7770 out there trying to visually match up again the higher priced, much more powerful GPU hardware with much higher memory bandwidth. People kept saying, 30% more powerful, 50% more capability, 3x memory bandwidth, etc. etc. These numbers cannot be ignored, they do not magically go away or get erased by silly eSRAM.
Some did not want to listen though. Kept holding onto that thread of hope for secret sauce, extra GPUs, 16 extra processors somewhere, untapping the potential of audio chips, etc. etc. Now, the games are actually being seen and it is incredibly disappointing.
I mean one system has Killzone and Res0gun at launch, the other has .. this and Ryse ( definition of a static screen besides the scripted events )? In early 2014 PS4 gets Infamous, DriveClub ( looking oh so sexy now ), The Order, The Witness, Transistors, Planetside 2, etc. etc. and the X1 may have a 720p version of Titanfall?
Does anyone really expect games like MGSV or The Witcher 3 or Dragons Age 3 to be anything but 720p on the X1 next year at this point?
Nah a 1.3Tflop GPU is actually the low end of the scale in the AMD product line. Not much goes lower. About a 100$ GPU.
ppl should talk apple when apple is the topic...
if a developer dont reach 30fps at 720p with a 1.3tf console...is aproblem of them ...not of th e hw
Game performs so badly vs other titles shown this has got to be more down to the game than the console.
I mean I'm definitely in the PS4 is more powerful camp but this is simply a rushed launch game that I presume started life heading for current gen by the look of it that gives no idea of XB1 capabilities.
Definitely a disappointment though that an early game should look this bad. They should have given it more time a'la Driveclub rather than rushing for launch - at least IMHO.
I mean I'm definitely in the PS4 is more powerful camp but this is simply a rushed launch game that I presume started life heading for current gen by the look of it that gives no idea of XB1 capabilities.
Definitely a disappointment though that an early game should look this bad. They should have given it more time a'la Driveclub rather than rushing for launch - at least IMHO.
Go on.
There are fans of the franchise in this thread that have actually said they'll buy the game for the gameplay despite the graphical issues. So no, its no joke.
im not angry for the 720 man.....im angry coz arent at 30fps or 60
and this clearly is a problem of the developer....coz honestly im not seeing incredible stuff around this game..that could excuse that
Just trying to compare something here.
what does pikmin 3 run at?(resolution & framerate)
didn't that also start as a wii (last gen) game until it got moved to wii u but ended up looking better than anything released on the wii?
How is "bu..bu..it started as a 360 game" a valid excuse?
what does pikmin 3 run at?(resolution & framerate)
didn't that also start as a wii (last gen) game until it got moved to wii u but ended up looking better than anything released on the wii?
How is "bu..bu..it started as a 360 game" a valid excuse?
andromeduck
Member
this game needs to be delayed, it's going to be ruinous for the XB1's image if it releases in its current condition
GrizzleBoy
Banned
you guys seriously need to get your eyes checked.
this is the DR2 video posted earlier
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T4wLgdmzHLM&feature=youtu.be&t=1m20s
some pics from DR and DR2.
This is what a current gen DR looks like and that's not taking into account the larger area with no load times, unified lighting etc.
For a game like DR, a sandbox where the # of zombies onscreen can vary greatly, and the havoc caused by your weapons and vehicles cannot be kept under control by the developers, framerate dips are always expected.
Either you have a game that barely uses the GPU in normal situations, so that you have enough spare power to handle more crowded moments, or you always push the console and accept the fact that framerate will drop when you have a lot is going on.
From all the recent videos we've seen , performances are just fine and they were until digital foundry put a number onscreen.
Always nice to see a little bit of rationality in the midst of hysteria
Majority of the fanbase are not going to look at DR3 and think "meh, may as well just play DR2" (especially with the damn time limit).
Not saying the frame drops aren't disappointing, but I don't think they're world ending either.
Triggerhappytel
Member
Yes, but maintaining a stable minimal framerate of 30fps should have been their first priority. I'm sure most people would have been quite happy with the same number of zombies on screen as DR2 but a vastly improved technical performance.
Of course it will be fun, but it would be even more fun with a stable frame rate. Excessive screen tears and/or frame drops makes me feel a bit sick with more game genres.
LordBaztion
Member
Wasn't expecting much from Capcom Vancouver in the technical side, eventhough, considering Dead Rising 2, don't expect much from this game.
Do you think people will care that the game runs at 15-25fps then? I agree that resolution and graphics can be ignored if the gameplay is unique and really fun but bad framerate kills any good game.
But given more power they could have easily reached 30FPS no doubt.
Mr. Pointy
Member
So it's the Xbox 20fps now?
It would take very very severe technical issues to get a fan not to buy something on their account. This is a low bar, no?
This result is embarrassing honestly. I won't not buy a game because the framerate sucks but this is really unacceptable this gen. The hardware is powerful enough to give me a standard 30 fps (I hope). If it needed more time in the oven they should have delayed it.
I remember when fun and performance did not contradict each other. Bad frame rate, textures popping in, now that actually DOES detract from the experience.
this and only this..100 times at day
Chance Hale
Member
25-30(mostly the latter), 720P
And a lot of the reason Pikmin 3 looked better than anything on the Wii was because the wii was gamecube 2.0, one would hope it would be a step up from the last game. In any case, it was mostly the lighting that was so impressive, and Dead Rising 3 going from the videos that have been released has some nice lighting as well. Although the style and scale of the two is completely incomparable anyway.
you guys seriously need to get your eyes checked.
this is the DR2 video posted earlier
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T4wLgdmzHLM&feature=youtu.be&t=1m20s
some pics from DR and DR2.
This is what a current gen DR looks like and that's not taking into account the larger area with no load times, unified lighting etc.
For a game like DR, a sandbox where the # of zombies onscreen can vary greatly, and the havoc caused by your weapons and vehicles cannot be kept under control by the developers, framerate dips are always expected.
Either you have a game that barely uses the GPU in normal situations, so that you have enough spare power to handle more crowded moments, or you always push the console and accept the fact that framerate will drop when you have a lot is going on.
From all the recent videos we've seen , performances are just fine and they were until digital foundry put a number onscreen.
Reading this, I'm surprised dead rising even functions as a game. With all the shit they try to pull, how is it not broken all the damn time?!
Lord Panda
The Sea is Always Right
Absolutely. Dead Rising 3 runs at the same resolution as Dead Rising 2 (anyone know the native res of Dead Rising 1 for the X360?) which I can probably overlook due to the added effects and polys being thrown about on screen - but that abysmal frame rate ... that's quite another story.
Wish this game wasn't an exclusive as it would have been interesting to see it running on the PS4.
Backfoggen
Banned
You don't mean tech-wise right?
DR3 appears to be a poor representation of what the game is. I can't say 100% but it just does not look as compelling as the first two to me based on what I have seen and read thus far.
It seems to be way too big and serious looking to have the same kind of charm that the first two games did. There was just a cool feeling that went along with playing the first two games, that sense of being stranded in a mall/casino, nothing really compelling outside beyond a courtyard type setting (DR1) or a simple strip of shops/food/casinos (DR2). Though they were considerably large environments, given the nature of the situation, you would tend to feel kind of isolated in a sea of zombies with some surviors/psychopaths here and there, retreating to your security office base as the only means of comfort. That's part of what made the game so damn fun to me.
Also, DR fans are used to crappy framerates? I don't recall the original DR on Xbox 360 being too bad. DR2 was horrible on PS3 and 360 however (especially PS3, it was unacceptable). But I play Off the Record on PC now and the framerate is great.
If DR3 comes out for PC I would pick it up at a discounted price, but I can't say I'm as interested in it as I was the first two and OTR.
Seriously, the art direction and overall design is just extremely bland, with a gritty overtone. It makes for an environment that looks like runny poops. No thanks.
It seems to be way too big and serious looking to have the same kind of charm that the first two games did. There was just a cool feeling that went along with playing the first two games, that sense of being stranded in a mall/casino, nothing really compelling outside beyond a courtyard type setting (DR1) or a simple strip of shops/food/casinos (DR2). Though they were considerably large environments, given the nature of the situation, you would tend to feel kind of isolated in a sea of zombies with some surviors/psychopaths here and there, retreating to your security office base as the only means of comfort. That's part of what made the game so damn fun to me.
Also, DR fans are used to crappy framerates? I don't recall the original DR on Xbox 360 being too bad. DR2 was horrible on PS3 and 360 however (especially PS3, it was unacceptable). But I play Off the Record on PC now and the framerate is great.
If DR3 comes out for PC I would pick it up at a discounted price, but I can't say I'm as interested in it as I was the first two and OTR.
Seriously, the art direction and overall design is just extremely bland, with a gritty overtone. It makes for an environment that looks like runny poops. No thanks.
Your a bit late, BF4 is 900p.
Either way the real point is that the significantly more expensive machine is significantly weaker than the significantly cheaper, more powerful machine.
The fact that DR3 runs at 720p, has graphical issues and an awful framerate on a 500 dollar machine is the real story.
IAmRandom31
Banned
Yeah, DriveClub was not coming along as the devs originally planned so they did the rational thing, delayed the product to make it better and more toward their original vision.
Here we have a game that clearly could of used a few more months of optimization, but they either chose to .. or were forced to, keep to their original deadline. In the end, you want the best products possible, and clearly this is not the best DR3 possible.
- Status