But how big of a difference would there have really been? Like I said before, maybe an unlocked frame rate option, maybe some differences in AA, but they would look nearly identical, like other multiplatform games this gen.
Digital Foundry: Performance Analysis: Destiny on Xbox One
- Thread starter ElTorro
- Start date
But how big of a difference would there have really been? Like I said before, maybe an unlocked frame rate option, maybe some differences in AA, but they would look nearly identical, like other multiplatform games this gen.
Stoffinator
Member
You must have your system standing up? I noticed the console makes a lot of noise when standing. But laying down it is whisper quiet.
Yeah, that last example I'm too sure about but it's a substantial difference in the sharpness of the shadow.
The other two examples though are clear examples lowered shadow resolution.
Holographix
Banned
In any of the cases you mentioned it makes better business sense to improve the software on the hardware that will net you a larger return. In OG Xbox's case, it being significantly behind PS2 in sales made it an easy business decision to tell the developers to not focus too much effort on improving it since only a small fraction of the consumers use that platform.
This generation, the most powerful platform, is the most popular one and was the cheapest option for consumers (it's now at parity), it makes complete business sense to want to maximize that audience since it can provide 2x return vs. the other platform (even higher due to co-marketing campaign).
Compare to last gen with PS3 and Xbox 360 where developers didn't bother learning the PS3 architecture even though the power gap was less than this gen's competing platforms. It was a business decision since they deemed it not worthwhile (at least at the start) to spend any additional resources for the more complicated, more expensive, least popular (at the time), platform. Hence multiplatform games performing almost always better on the Xbox platform.
Then by all means, get yo' rage on.
If they wanted the game to be 60FPS, it would be. They'd just pare back other stuff until it worked on both. I can't imagine that there's enough extra headroom in the PS4 to offer it up for free.
Games are made in different ways by various different people. As I said in my previous post, some games between consoles of the same gen will have more differences than others. This has happened every gen. I don't remember people being so demanding about having their version look better than one on the other console of the same gen until now though. It's snobbish.
As I said before, would you guys feel happier if the Xbox One version stayed at 900p (like the beta)? It's silly IMO.
Holographix
Banned
Honestly, the game doesn't offer up extremely complex or advanced visuals, it's all art direction. They should be able to reach rock-steady 30fps and possibly near perfect 60fps if they really wanted to. They already stated in an interview that they were aiming for parity, which pretty much confirms they weren't trying to maximize performance on every console.
It's honestly disappointing to hear a developer say they're aiming for parity.
Zombie James
Banned
Who knows? We have 384 extra stream processors, 16 extra ROPs, and half a teraflop just sitting there doing nothing.
WhiskerFrisker
Member
I don't think you can just banning a technical site. DF is doing its job; technical analysis of a game. It's then put up for discussion on Gaf.If people want argue, that's their prerogative. People argue all the time. Banning DF won't stop that.
I agree with banning DF lol. The E3 tech analysis stuff was the worst. But in terms of just simply how games "look" on both systems there will always be differences. I've come to find out that they simply will look semi different for the same games out of the box. Not sure how to explain it but the PS4 shows a brighter, more "ready" look to games.. The same games on X1 are generally darker and kinda hide the details a little.
I'm sure I could probably duplicate the PS4 look on X1 it if I fiddled with settings or something but the point remains.
Birgitte2004
Member
The Xbox One version was not running like shit.
So what difference does it make if they raise the One version up to the PS4 version?
Posts like this one are so hypocritical it's comical.
Then you are making a business case then. That's cool, but isn't really what I (or the people I'm replying to) are really discussing. People are saying if the machine is 40% more powerful, it should produce 40% better visuals/performance. This is completely detached from a business POV and should have applied equally to the OG Xbox (which I'd imagine was a decent amount more than 40% more capable than the PS2). I'm sure everyone here isn't getting up in arms because Bungie hasn't made a choice that'll lead to them making the most money. People simply want what's best for them on an individual basis, and would still want that even if the Xbox One was outselling the PS4 2:1.
No, its laying between my PS3 and TV receiver. Makes almost no noise while playing destiny.
Handy Fake
Member
I can see Bungie's view on this, to be honest. It's still a lovely looking game by any stretch of the imagination, and if they targeted a singular look for it and achieved it, then fair enough. One wonders if by having the game as it is, it makes adding expansions and DLC to it that much easier across the slew of platforms, taking into account hardware ability.
Saying that... I think parity concerns being raised on the thread are very valid, if at some times a little over the top.
Saying that... I think parity concerns being raised on the thread are very valid, if at some times a little over the top.
ethomaz
Banned
That is the issue... you can't... the opposite you can do trying to deal with TV setthings to make the PS4 image looks darker like the Xbone.
There are a lot of thread about this Xbone's issue.
Quoted for troof!
yeah mines the same - I really do worry when folk say their PS4 is whisper quiet
My point it that it shouldn't matter what version runs better, most of the time you are playing the game you should be enjoying it, not wondering "OHH I wonder if Bungie is taking advantage of that extra 40%" every second. Destiny is a game about going around with your friends and blasting monsters and having fun, not trying to one up another consoles graphics. People should just enjoy the game, unless we no longer play games and only play percentages, numbers, and digital foundry.
I'm sorry. You (and quotes above) are right.
But it's not about "I don't like what I see" in relation to DF. I just like games and gaming with other people. But all this argueing goes that far - when people meet in party-game-chats, one of the first conversations is about this. Even people I've never spoke to before start with this.
So I wanted to make some people calm down. Didn't work.
Again - didn't want to harm anyone.
PS4 is not 2x Xbox One on Tomb Raider
E. Xbox One is artificially locked at 30FPS, if it was unlocked it would surely average higher than 30 FPS, probably closer to 40 FPS.Given that information and the fact Destiny has the same performance profile on Xbox One it is not unreasonable to think that without the FPS lock Destiny would average around 40 FPS on Xbox One as a minimum. Going one step further to then say the PS4 should be able to achieve around 55 FPS as a minimum is another reasonable thought to have.
So in answer to the original question where a poster asked how much extra work (or not) would it have required to hit 60 FPS the answer is not a lot, a stable 60 FPS though would be much harder.
Synth said:
I do not think anybody is saying that. What they are saying is that if there is headroom available on the PS4, and there are easy to change settings that can improve IQ then why not use them? AA and AF are two very easy to change settings so why not just make them a bit higher on PS4 when you have the performance headroom to spare?
JohnnyFootball
GerAlt-Right. Ciriously.
The same question should be asked as to why PS4 owners should get a version that is less capable than what it could be due to a parity choice.
Im not saying that I am asking that question, but those feelings work both ways.
BotoxAgent
Member
lol, don't forget to sit an extra 3 feet back
ethomaz
Banned
It is because the gap this gen is bigger than last gen... so people will talk.
And to be fair there are a lot of places here in GAF to discussing gaming without any tech spec "deal" but this thread is about that... so it is fair to expect the discussion we are having here.
I do think DF do a good job... not way deep like some guys want but it covers the superficial view pretty well since before last gen.
PS. My Junior talk was about that my question was silly... you are junior so you are not here last gen to me ask that
Windom Earle
Member
The difference in bandwidth between DDR3 and GDDR5 is NOT nitpicking. And the whole ESRAM thing has been discussed to death (including developer opinions) and I am not even sure what you are trying to prove here. Saying that both consoles have the same amount of ram is true on paper, but misleading and ignorant in reality. Also I never commented on the implications on game design so I don't know where this is coming from. I do think that it's easier to make more complex (open world games) with the PS4's memory architecture though.
Zombie James
Banned
Because someone from Bungie came on GAF and told us they were going to take advantage of each console's strengths the last time parity got discussed. Again:
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=122612599&postcount=554
I can't wait to hear an explanation.
Yeah, i mean nothing was stopping Sony from sending their tech giys to help Bungie get the most out of the PS4 version. MS did that so why didn't Sony? Especially for a title being treated as a first party game.
Wishmaster92
Member
Pretty much.
Commanche Raisin Toast
Member
Indeed! Beautiful game that everyone should be able to enjoy.
So pretty my wife started playing even though she hates shooters. (At first she mistook it for No Mans Sky)
ethomaz
Banned
Or it was just PR
Wait people want DF banned just because it points out x1's flaws most of the time? Is that damage control? Just don't enter those threads if you're going to get that upset over it, besides, you don't care because you like the x1 brand, so don't let it get to you.
If DF gets banned before poly though I may have to take a step back
If DF gets banned before poly though I may have to take a step back
Destiny and COD will be the 1st and 2nd best selling title of 2014. So if they both run at 1080p on Xbone, it is going to help MS a lot.
It will be hard to nit pick when the games that you want to play shows no difference between consoles. Many will just stick with the xbox eco-system.
Sony needs to step up and free up more memory or do some thing. They have reserved 3+ GB RAM for that OS.. which doesnt do much.
It will be hard to nit pick when the games that you want to play shows no difference between consoles. Many will just stick with the xbox eco-system.
Sony needs to step up and free up more memory or do some thing. They have reserved 3+ GB RAM for that OS.. which doesnt do much.
Holographix
Banned
Making games on the OG Xbox look better made no business sense, even if it was more powerful. Making games look better on PS4 makes business sense sicne you are appealing to the majority of consumers that will buy your product. PS4 being 40% more powerful does mean that, all else being equal, it should look/perform better -- there's no disputing that, it's been proven time and time again that PS4 should produce better visuals and perform better. In both a business and hardware point of view it makes sense for PS4 to have the better performing/looking game and having the most attention from developers.
AgentP
Thinks mods influence posters politics. Promoted to QAnon Editor.
So in other words 30fps with these graphics should be cake walk, it just took extra months of effort on the XB1 while the PS4 sat idle with no effort or work put into its version? PS4 could probably hit 60fps and if uncapped is probably close to it. If they are not going to use the GPU budget on effects or better AA, they should have an unlocked frame rate option like Infamous, Tomb Raider and Killzone.
forgot that - lol I suppose the response will be it was MS who did the extra work
GifGafIsTheBestGaf
Member
it seems that pop in is here to stay, it aint bad or game breaking but it sucks when you notice bushes and shit appearing out of nowhere
Leafhopper
Banned
That would mean the people actually play games that follow the Digital Foundry bible, though.
Dictator93
Member
Nah DF should be put on probation for writing subpar technical articles.
I think people are taking the whole 40% more powerful thing far too seriously.
Yeah, the PS4 is more powerful, but it doesn't simply run the exact same code. They work a very long time getting a unified engine to work on all 4 systems so they can make a new map with new assets and have consistent performance all around etc.
It isn't the case of going into settings and turning up the lighting or draw distance for the PS4. It is very likely that after the beta they weren't going to work on optimising the graphics any more and just fixing bugs and gameplay changes, while MS wanted to use time to bring it to 1080p. They couldn't just go to the PS4 and turn up a setting, and even if they could, being annoyed at Bungie has nothing to do with what Destiny actually looks like, but the saltiness of the Xbone having the same graphics in a big AAA game.
I'm sorry if Xbone having the same res and graphics makes your PS4 feel inadequate.
othersshouldfail.gif
Yeah, the PS4 is more powerful, but it doesn't simply run the exact same code. They work a very long time getting a unified engine to work on all 4 systems so they can make a new map with new assets and have consistent performance all around etc.
It isn't the case of going into settings and turning up the lighting or draw distance for the PS4. It is very likely that after the beta they weren't going to work on optimising the graphics any more and just fixing bugs and gameplay changes, while MS wanted to use time to bring it to 1080p. They couldn't just go to the PS4 and turn up a setting, and even if they could, being annoyed at Bungie has nothing to do with what Destiny actually looks like, but the saltiness of the Xbone having the same graphics in a big AAA game.
I'm sorry if Xbone having the same res and graphics makes your PS4 feel inadequate.
othersshouldfail.gif
Melchiah
Member
Considering the past differences between the multiplatform titles, they could have also increased the framerate on the PS4. The system's capabilities are obviously underutilized, when a launch game like Killzone manages to outshine it.
Fixed 30fps is better than a fluctuating 45-30... It also allows them to make animations perfect for online syncing etc. without making the experience too varied when there are too many mobs etc.
Both of these notions make frequent appearances in this thread.
Melchiah
Member
I guess it depends on the person. The fluctuating framerate in KZ and Infamous never bothered me.
PS4 is not 2x Xbox One on Tomb Raider
Given that information and the fact Destiny has the same performance profile on Xbox One it is not unreasonable to think that without the FPS lock Destiny would average around 40 FPS on Xbox One as a minimum. Going one step further to then say the PS4 should be able to achieve around 55 FPS as a minimum is another reasonable thought to have.
So in answer to the original question where a poster asked how much extra work (or not) would it have required to hit 60 FPS the answer is not a lot, a stable 60 FPS though would be much harder.
Yea, but a lot of people take the Tomb Raider example as, if the Xbox One running something at 1080/30 implies the PS4 can run it at 1080/60, which is basically what was being stated here. The Xbox One probably wouldn't be comfortably playing Destiny at 40fps, else it would likely never have been sitting at 900p, so the PS4 version would also probably not comfortably hold around 55fps.
Whilst somewhat true, there's still an assumption that there's a ton of performance headroom available, and that the game wouldn't need significant optimisations in order for it to have those resources free without impacting the game in any other way. The Xbox One version is likely significantly better optimised than the PS4 version at this point, due to having assistance from the platform holder to make it run as well as possible. Sure the PS4, is almost certainly capable of doing better, but for free, without any help from Sony? that's an assumption.
I am amazed at some of the responses in this thread. Everyone was blowing their load over this game last week, now they are both the same resolution team Sony has meltdown! Even though nothing has changes and they were perfectly happy with it last week!?!!?!??
Seriously? There were plently of people stating displeasure with possible parity in other threads. Everyone was not happy last week. Do actually you read threads on here?