Support NeoGAF

[recklesscognition]

Is this shot from Videogamer.com of the PS4 version (http://screenrant.com/spider-man-ps4-want-to-see/?view=all) a decent comparison pick or not fair comparison? I believe it was from the June reveal.

 

[Inuhanyou]

This is a "game changer" for open world games ( which have a very bad image quality in general on console ) .

FF15 will be like night and day from its PS4 and XB1 incarnations. Even if they just do what horizon is doing and use checkerboard rendering, and then scale that down to 1080p, its gonna produce a significantly cleaner image than native 1080p, let alone the 1080-900p of PS4 or 900p to 720p of the XB1 version

Is this shot from Videogamer.com of the PS4 version (http://screenrant.com/spider-man-ps4-want-to-see/?view=all) a decent comparison pick or not fair comparison? I believe it was from the June reveal.

Not a fair comparison because we don't know the situation of the pics of Spiderman just yet.

 

[farisr]

Ah I see. But the sum doesn't match the full 1080p one.

That's because the full 1080p version has like 12 minutes at the beginning and end (music, coming up next livecast) that's not the actual conference.

They did cut out one part though, the part where the CoD guy's mic wasn't working, everything else is there.

 

[Jonathan Blow]

It is a standard as in if devs set the resolution to 3200x1800 or whatever, it will be downsampled to 1080p automatically. That's all they need to do. Clearly Jonathan Blow doesn't seem to care much about it.

Actually, no, we care a lot about it. We are trying to carefully make decisions based on what is going to provide the highest image quality.

For example, we think doubling MSAA will give us a better result than rendering double the number of pixels and downscaling -- it's faster, and leaves more performance on the table for other features.

Examples of other features are things I mentioned in the posting, like having a longer streaming distance before the high-res meshes turn into low-res LODs. I think that kind of LOD popping has a much bigger effect on visual quality than some extra pixels that just get downscaled again anyway. So if we are able to put some of the GPU power into that, we feel it is the better choice.

HOWEVER, we might not be able to increase the LOD radius very much, because that also requires memory, and we are already pushing the boundaries of the console's memory. In that case we might have GPU power to burn, in which case maybe we might render at a resolution higher than 1080p, with 4x MSAA also, and then downscale.

But if I announce that right now, and then we end up not doing it, we will get a lot of people yelling at us for betraying them. So what I announced is the minimum that we can definitely do. And, as I said in the posting, none of this is completely final, and we will announce the final tech specs when the patch is done.

It seems like people appreciate this kind of posting and getting solid details on what a PS4 Pro patch means. That's great ... and some people are wondering why most developers don't do this. Well, it's because sometimes there's no way to win. If you announce one set of specs, people will try to punish you for not doing enough. If you announce another set of specs, and fail to meet them, people will try to punish you harder at that time.

If you want more of this kind of honest communication, please chill and give developers at least a little bit of the benefit of the doubt. We are working hard on this stuff. If people just go and look for random things to get mad about, then you're basically just punishing developers for communicating at all, so they won't.

 

[SmoothRunningGun]

I'm interested in better frame rates. I'm looking at you bloodborne.

 

[SlimySnake]

Actually, no, we care a lot about it. We are trying to carefully make decisions based on what is going to provide the highest image quality.

For example, we think doubling MSAA will give us a better result than rendering double the number of pixels and downscaling -- it's faster, and leaves more performance on the table for other features.

Examples of other features are things I mentioned in the posting, like having a longer streaming distance before the high-res meshes turn into low-res LODs. I think that kind of LOD popping has a much bigger effect on visual quality than some extra pixels that just get downscaled again anyway. So if we are able to put some of the GPU power into that, we feel it is the better choice.

HOWEVER, we might not be able to increase the LOD radius very much, because that also requires memory, and we are already pushing the boundaries of the console's memory. In that case we might have GPU power to burn, in which case maybe we might render at a resolution higher than 1080p, with 4x MSAA also, and then downscale.

But if I announce that right now, and then we end up not doing it, we will get a lot of people yelling at us for betraying them. So what I announced is the minimum that we can definitely do. And, as I said in the posting, none of this is completely final, and we will announce the final tech specs when the patch is done.

It seems like people appreciate this kind of posting and getting solid details on what a PS4 Pro patch means. That's great ... and some people are wondering why most developers don't do this. Well, it's because sometimes there's no way to win. If you announce one set of specs, people will try to punish you for not doing enough. If you announce another set of specs, and fail to meet them, people will try to punish you harder at that time.

If you want more of this kind of honest communication, please chill and give developers at least a little bit of the benefit of the doubt. We are working hard on this stuff. If people just go and look for random things to get mad about, then you're basically just punishing developers for communicating at all, so they won't.

This is why i love gaf. lol You cant just call out developers like you can on other forums.

thanks for the post. its VERY detailed and gives us a good understanding of your options. MOST of us do want honest communication, but sadly there is always going to be a vocal minority on every board and usually its loudest voices that get heard. Just keep doing this and remember 90% of the people appreciate your detailed breakdown.

 

[Esiquio]

Actually, no, we care a lot about it. We are trying to carefully make decisions based on what is going to provide the highest image quality.

For example, we think doubling MSAA will give us a better result than rendering double the number of pixels and downscaling -- it's faster, and leaves more performance on the table for other features.

Examples of other features are things I mentioned in the posting, like having a longer streaming distance before the high-res meshes turn into low-res LODs. I think that kind of LOD popping has a much bigger effect on visual quality than some extra pixels that just get downscaled again anyway. So if we are able to put some of the GPU power into that, we feel it is the better choice.

HOWEVER, we might not be able to increase the LOD radius very much, because that also requires memory, and we are already pushing the boundaries of the console's memory. In that case we might have GPU power to burn, in which case maybe we might render at a resolution higher than 1080p, with 4x MSAA also, and then downscale.

But if I announce that right now, and then we end up not doing it, we will get a lot of people yelling at us for betraying them. So what I announced is the minimum that we can definitely do. And, as I said in the posting, none of this is completely final, and we will announce the final tech specs when the patch is done.

It seems like people appreciate this kind of posting and getting solid details on what a PS4 Pro patch means. That's great ... and some people are wondering why most developers don't do this. Well, it's because sometimes there's no way to win. If you announce one set of specs, people will try to punish you for not doing enough. If you announce another set of specs, and fail to meet them, people will try to punish you harder at that time.

If you want more of this kind of honest communication, please chill and give developers at least a little bit of the benefit of the doubt. We are working hard on this stuff. If people just go and look for random things to get mad about, then you're basically just punishing developers for communicating at all, so they won't.

Good post, and welcome to GAF. Agree that you don't want to make promises that you can't keep, and to just announce the minimums that you know are meet-able. Gamers can feel "betrayed' easily, haha.

 

[jett]

Actually, no, we care a lot about it. We are trying to carefully make decisions based on what is going to provide the highest image quality.

For example, we think doubling MSAA will give us a better result than rendering double the number of pixels and downscaling -- it's faster, and leaves more performance on the table for other features.

Examples of other features are things I mentioned in the posting, like having a longer streaming distance before the high-res meshes turn into low-res LODs. I think that kind of LOD popping has a much bigger effect on visual quality than some extra pixels that just get downscaled again anyway. So if we are able to put some of the GPU power into that, we feel it is the better choice.

HOWEVER, we might not be able to increase the LOD radius very much, because that also requires memory, and we are already pushing the boundaries of the console's memory. In that case we might have GPU power to burn, in which case maybe we might render at a resolution higher than 1080p, with 4x MSAA also, and then downscale.

But if I announce that right now, and then we end up not doing it, we will get a lot of people yelling at us for betraying them. So what I announced is the minimum that we can definitely do. And, as I said in the posting, none of this is completely final, and we will announce the final tech specs when the patch is done.

It seems like people appreciate this kind of posting and getting solid details on what a PS4 Pro patch means. That's great ... and some people are wondering why most developers don't do this. Well, it's because sometimes there's no way to win. If you announce one set of specs, people will try to punish you for not doing enough. If you announce another set of specs, and fail to meet them, people will try to punish you harder at that time.

If you want more of this kind of honest communication, please chill and give developers at least a little bit of the benefit of the doubt. We are working hard on this stuff. If people just go and look for random things to get mad about, then you're basically just punishing developers for communicating at all, so they won't.

Wow I didn't expect you to chime in here. Thanks for the explanation! You're 100% right that people shouldn't make assumptions. Unfortunately sometimes we forget devs like you read this place and we aren't as nice as we could be. Let me reassure you that most of us truly appreciate the kind of informative post you made on your website, it's just sometimes our emotions run high...for no real reason.

One assumes downsampling is the end-all, be-all, but it sounds like this whole process is a real juggling act for you guys, more than I expected. I honestly didn't figure devs would be looking into making further "pro upgrades" on 1080p displays, given how razor-focused Sony was on 4K at their meeting.

 

[panama chief]

Actually...

Thanks for clearing that up. Also, proper timing. Hahahahaha that guy called you out and got slapped with pure knowledge.

 

[Koobion]

Especially when using a 1080p screen, having that extra power over the regular PS4 would naturally provide a better framerate (until it caps), even in an unpatched game, wouldn't it? In the same way that the Xbox One S gets slightly better fps?

 

[Neuromancer]

Thanks for the post, Jonathan Blow. Makes a lot of sense.

 

[Risk Breaker]

Actually, no, we care a lot about it. We are trying to carefully make decisions based on what is going to provide the highest image quality.

For example, we think doubling MSAA will give us a better result than rendering double the number of pixels and downscaling -- it's faster, and leaves more performance on the table for other features.

Examples of other features are things I mentioned in the posting, like having a longer streaming distance before the high-res meshes turn into low-res LODs. I think that kind of LOD popping has a much bigger effect on visual quality than some extra pixels that just get downscaled again anyway. So if we are able to put some of the GPU power into that, we feel it is the better choice.

HOWEVER, we might not be able to increase the LOD radius very much, because that also requires memory, and we are already pushing the boundaries of the console's memory. In that case we might have GPU power to burn, in which case maybe we might render at a resolution higher than 1080p, with 4x MSAA also, and then downscale.

But if I announce that right now, and then we end up not doing it, we will get a lot of people yelling at us for betraying them. So what I announced is the minimum that we can definitely do. And, as I said in the posting, none of this is completely final, and we will announce the final tech specs when the patch is done.

It seems like people appreciate this kind of posting and getting solid details on what a PS4 Pro patch means. That's great ... and some people are wondering why most developers don't do this. Well, it's because sometimes there's no way to win. If you announce one set of specs, people will try to punish you for not doing enough. If you announce another set of specs, and fail to meet them, people will try to punish you harder at that time.

If you want more of this kind of honest communication, please chill and give developers at least a little bit of the benefit of the doubt. We are working hard on this stuff. If people just go and look for random things to get mad about, then you're basically just punishing developers for communicating at all, so they won't.

That is great to hear What I read made it sound like it was going to be pretty much the same, which tbh didn't really make much sense. Sorry, crunch-time-tired here.

Thanks for the post and welcome!

 

[Stumpokapow]

Jon: We occasionally get celebrity impersonators so I've taken the liberty to update your "user tag" to indicate you are who your username suggests to avoid any confusion in that matter. If you'd prefer it read Thekla, Inc. or Number None in lieu of listing your games, let me know.

 

[Alexious]

Actually, no, we care a lot about it. We are trying to carefully make decisions based on what is going to provide the highest image quality.

For example, we think doubling MSAA will give us a better result than rendering double the number of pixels and downscaling -- it's faster, and leaves more performance on the table for other features.

Examples of other features are things I mentioned in the posting, like having a longer streaming distance before the high-res meshes turn into low-res LODs. I think that kind of LOD popping has a much bigger effect on visual quality than some extra pixels that just get downscaled again anyway. So if we are able to put some of the GPU power into that, we feel it is the better choice.

HOWEVER, we might not be able to increase the LOD radius very much, because that also requires memory, and we are already pushing the boundaries of the console's memory. In that case we might have GPU power to burn, in which case maybe we might render at a resolution higher than 1080p, with 4x MSAA also, and then downscale.

But if I announce that right now, and then we end up not doing it, we will get a lot of people yelling at us for betraying them. So what I announced is the minimum that we can definitely do. And, as I said in the posting, none of this is completely final, and we will announce the final tech specs when the patch is done.

It seems like people appreciate this kind of posting and getting solid details on what a PS4 Pro patch means. That's great ... and some people are wondering why most developers don't do this. Well, it's because sometimes there's no way to win. If you announce one set of specs, people will try to punish you for not doing enough. If you announce another set of specs, and fail to meet them, people will try to punish you harder at that time.

If you want more of this kind of honest communication, please chill and give developers at least a little bit of the benefit of the doubt. We are working hard on this stuff. If people just go and look for random things to get mad about, then you're basically just punishing developers for communicating at all, so they won't.

Thanks for the great post, Jonathan. Is it fair to say that checkerboard rendering, which is the big new technique everyone is talking about since yesterday, is not necessarily the best use of PS4 Pro's additional power in all games?

 

[Karspankey]

Super excited to see what an open world game, such as Watch Dogs 2, looks like on 1080p screens. A lack of jaggies can go such a long way for games like it and GTA V (which will likely be patched).

 

[Not Spaceghost]

So unless I am horribly misunderstanding it attempts to downsample 4k to native 1080p

Doesn't this mean devs can skimp out on traditional AA solutions as im sure the downsampled image quality will look about the same as standard MSAA and probably better than FXAA.

Though I am probably horribly wrong in my assumption.

 

[Electret]

Jonathan Blow mic drop

Excellent information. Thank you for sharing. We really appreciate it.

 

[Rain City Gamer]

Actually, no, we care a lot about it.....

Great insight here! Thanks for the post.

 

[Fisty]

Glad to see devs who have no real obligation to update for Pro jumping on board.

I hope devs realize that we don't need supersampling or 60fps updates if they're not feasible. As a future Pro owner I would be very satisfied with "simple" things like extra MSAA or better draw distances.

 

[jett]

So unless I am horribly misunderstanding it attempts to downsample 4k to native 1080p

Doesn't this mean devs can skimp out on traditional AA solutions as im sure the downsampled image quality will look about the same as standard MSAA and probably better than FXAA.

Though I am probably horribly wrong in my assumption.

They could do that, but as Jonathan Blow explained, a developer would prefer to use that extra GPU power to render natively at 1080p with even higher graphical detail, such as having better LOD at a distance. Rise of The Tomb Raider for instance is going to offer three different graphical settings and leave it up to the user to choose whatever they like the most.

This thread is just a hypothetical. None of the games in the OP could end up doing downsampling, for one reason or another.

Especially when using a 1080p screen, having that extra power over the regular PS4 would naturally provide a better framerate (until it caps), even in an unpatched game, wouldn't it? In the same way that the Xbox One S gets slightly better fps?

Maybe. We don't really know how the Pro behaves with unpatched games.

 

[anothertech]

I love supersampled images and gaming. lol

I hope a lot of devs make use of it on the Pro.

 

[S1kkZ]

looks like a lot of work has to go into the "pro" patches/updates.
i hope this doesnt increase cost (especially for smaller developers) too much.

and: i got the impression that a good performing standard ps4 version, makes life a lot easier when porting to the pro. maybe i am naive, but i hope this could actually lead to better performing standard ps4 games (yeah, not gonna happen, i know).

 

[anothertech]

This thread just became amazing

Thank you for your honest input Mr. Blow. Love hearing truth and viewpoints from devs like that.

 

[Jonathan Blow]

Thanks for the great post, Jonathan. Is it fair to say that checkerboard rendering, which is the big new technique everyone is talking about since yesterday, is not necessarily the best use of PS4 Pro's additional power in all games?

I think it depends on the particular game and engine. Different rendering pipelines are structured differently; for some pipelines, the cost of adding checkerboard rendering would be very low, because they are already computing a lot of the information that checkerboard rendering needs. For other pipelines the cost might be higher. In our case we're just not sure of the total cost yet, but we think it is probably high enough that we may prefer to do a straight upscale. But we're not completely sure.

(It is true that, as Sony has announced, the PS4 Pro provides hardware support for checkerboard rendering that makes it faster than it would otherwise be. I think in some places I have seen the rumor that checkerboard is completely free, but I would consider that an exaggeration: the cost is going to vary per game. Unfortunately due to NDAs I can't provide details; I can't say anything more about Sony technologies than what they have announced. It is definitely true that if you had a game running on the original PS4, and the developer wants to do the most straightforward thing to make the game look better on the Pro, that developer could enable checkerboard rendering and the game will look better and run faster; so it's "free" in that sense. But if you are going to get picky about how you are spending the GPU memory and bandwidth of the new machine, then there are tradeoffs here, like with anything.)

 

[zsynqx]

They look like bullshots for normal ps4 games, so if that's the kind of IQ we can expect from the pro then no complaints from me.

 

[Ranger X]

OH NOES, I see pixels everywhere!!

**gone buying a 4k TV**

 

[GutsOfThor]

I have 50" 1080p 120hz Sony Bravia. Would getting a PS4 Pro benefit me in any way or should I just stick with the og PS4?

 

[ArkhamFantasy]

I have 50" 1080p 120hz Sony Bravia. Would getting a PS4 Pro benefit me in any way or should I just stick with the og PS4?

Sure it would benefit you, they have more than twice as much power to play with.

 

[Inuhanyou]

I think it depends on the particular game and engine. Different rendering pipelines are structured differently; for some pipelines, the cost of adding checkerboard rendering would be very low, because they are already computing a lot of the information that checkerboard rendering needs. For other pipelines the cost might be higher. In our case we're just not sure of the total cost yet, but we think it is probably high enough that we may prefer to do a straight upscale. But we're not completely sure.

(It is true that, as Sony has announced, the PS4 Pro provides hardware support for checkerboard rendering that makes it faster than it would otherwise be. I think in some places I have seen the rumor that checkerboard is completely free, but I would consider that an exaggeration: the cost is going to vary per game. Unfortunately due to NDAs I can't provide details; I can't say anything more about Sony technologies than what they have announced. It is definitely true that if you had a game running on the original PS4, and the developer wants to do the most straightforward thing to make the game look better on the Pro, that developer could enable checkerboard rendering and the game will look better and run faster; so it's "free" in that sense. But if you are going to get picky about how you are spending the GPU memory and bandwidth of the new machine, then there are tradeoffs here, like with anything.)

JOHNATHAN!!!!

Thank you very much for the insight!

And also thank you for confirming built in hardware accelerated checkerboard rendering too, now we have some kind of idea as to how things are structured.

It does seem like this feature is the equivalent of the 'free' 2xMSAA MS promised for 360, but without any of the drawbacks, and instead just depends on whether or not the dev wants to attempt that or finds another solution simpler for their particular needs.

I think a lot of us will just be happy that you guys are trying your best regardless of how you decide to implement your Pro modes

 

[III-V]

Actually, no, we care a lot about it. If you want more of this kind of honest communication, please chill and give developers at least a little bit of the benefit of the doubt. We are working hard on this stuff. If people just go and look for random things to get mad about, then you're basically just punishing developers for communicating at all, so they won't.

Please forgive them. The communication is really open and refreshing.

You've got to remember that these are people of the land. The common clay of the new West.

You know… morons

 

[iratA]

I don't care what anyone says, I loved the order. Now I want a sequel to see how good they can make it look on the pro.

You sir, just stole my heart with that comment.

 

[KillGore]

Damn, those pics

 

[HomerSimpson-Man]

I don't care what anyone says, I loved the order. Now I want a sequel to see how good they can make it look on the pro.

I'm still gobsmacked how rediculious good looking The Order is. Man if there was a PS4 Pro mode, it must be as if god himself nutted into your eyes with divine visual bless.

 

[Loudninja]

We can also confirm that PlayStation 4 Pro upgrades for those running on 1080p displays is limited to super-sampling (the 4K image downscaled to full HD, resulting in excellent anti-aliasing), though Guerrilla's managing director Hermen Hulst mentioned that more consistent performance is also a possibility.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2016-ps4-pro-horizon-zero-dawn-performance-analysis

 

[Bl@de]

As somebody who loves downsampling and supersampling I approve of this new trend for consoles. Finally I can play my exclusive games with proper image quality

 

[Byakuya769]

I'm really annoyed that I can't get my 2015 xbr850. Bravia to play YouTube in 4K.

 

[CrayToes]

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2016-ps4-pro-horizon-zero-dawn-performance-analysis

"more consistent performance"

Uhhhh what exactly is he trying to say about OG PS4 performance?

 

[Peltz]

Honestly, I'm surprised to hear that The Witness runs at 900p on OG PS4. It's been a few months... But I remember it looking very clean on my 1080p display.

Maybe I'm just easy to please though. A little aliasing never really bothers me.