DigitalFoundry: Hands-on with PS4 1080p 30fps...!!

Never had an issue with Killzone 2 and the input lag. In fact, it was kinda cool because it made the guns and movement feel like you were truly weighed down by heavy guns and equipment.

But I hope PS4 games can mostly reach 1080p 60 FPS.. that would kinda suck if most games are 30 FPS.

Are Xbone games mostly 1080p 60 FPS? That could be a huge swing for Xbone.
 
Nah, 720p60 without AA.


Absolutely, but I'll be honest, I have not seen one single PC game to date with visuals that impressive. Of course it could be done, but it hasn't happened yet. Crysis 3 is about the closest thing but it doesn't have the same density of geometry in the backgrounds.

I look at that demo and find it hard to believe that anyone could shit on that. It's just wonderful looking.

KZ Shadowfall's backgrounds are 500-600kish polygons that's not an insane number even by current gen standards...
 
Most Microsoft demo's were running off PC hardware. The few that weren't, almost without exception were running 30fps or lower. I believe the exception to this is Forza. However, if I'm reading things correctly, Forza's track designs heavily limit the distance the engine would have to draw. If so, that's a bit of a cheat, well, just a smidge anyway.

The draw distance in the Forza track they were demoing was pretty damn far.
 
KZ Shadowfall's backgrounds are 500-600kish polygons that's not an insane number even by current gen standards...
Fair enough. I suppose it's the complete package that impresses me. It looks absolutely marvelous to my eyes and unlike anything I've seen before.
 
Ya know how Pachter said its painful to read how little people here know about how the industry works?

I feel even worse for anybody who works on graphics having to read absolute shit-spewing nonsense like this.

WOW!

Really? In what way? Please, how many car games are out there? A shit ton! Look, how many of those are running on pc at 60 FPS? A shit ton! How many car games besides Forza (which has been using same tools and Engine forever), have there been that run at true 1080p 60fps on consoles?

Not many!

Ryse according to everyone sourcing their opinions including me, says that game was running at 30, which I really don't give a shit. But what I do know being as I'v built gaming pc's for over 12 years, is that Crytek developed that game originally for 360 with Kinect in mind. But they couldn't probably get a steady framerate because their engines outside of Crysis 2, are not optimized well. This is known through out the pc community as fact my friend, remember the old 8800 Ultra's and Crysis 1? Hardly anyone could run it at full frame rate. They also had problems with Kinect, hence why what we say was all button prompt's even though I thought they were just different finisher's after his shield counter, and shield bash.

Why don't you look at what I cited in this thread, before you spew your own shit. Microsoft is using over 3gb of their DDR3 memory, and multiple versions of their Windows 8 kernel.
We've heard from other sources that Microsoft is not where they want to be at this point in the pre-launch development of Durango. A reliable source—one who was not part of our reporting about the Respawn game—tells us that Microsoft is as much as six months behind in producing content for the new console, despite an expected late-2013 launch. Another tells us that Microsoft recently cancelled several internal next-gen projects because they were not coming together as hoped. These sources have told us that, comparatively, Sony is in better shape and further along with hardware and software development for PlayStation 4.

We'd also heard from an industry insider that Microsoft was aggressively trying to sign exclusive games for Durango. Given the lack of internal development at Microsoft—their internal studios, while talented, are outnumbered by those of Sony and Nintendo—and given some of the apparent recent stumbles and slowdowns internally, signing an exclusive Respawn-EA game would suit the Durango quite well.

http://kotaku.com/about-microsoft-being-six-months-behind-with-the-next-486212937




PS4 is using UNIx which is more comparable to OS'S like Ubuntu, Linux, and Mac OSX which is a variant of Linux.

AM I spewing shit there buddy? It's pachter outside of sales and number's who knows nothing of the innards of a pc, or how pc manufacturer's and vendor's impact the console trends for their hardware.

Seriously don't go calling people out just because in one post I kind of Generalized and opinionated my response.

If you want to go into flame bait I'm not going there. But I can back up my statement's with experience and sources, can you?

Outside of Digital Foundry who cleared up the confusion on who and what was running on what.

Here's what Jonathan Blow thinks and probably under contract knows but can's disclose about the status qua of Xbox One;
Turns out, however, that they are wrong. Developer of upcoming PS4/PC/iOS title The Witness Jonathan Blow tweeted (tweets ordered for clarity):

It is not true as the article says that “all E3 demos run on hi-end PCs”. The Witness was running on PS4 dev hardware, and it looked to me like all the other PS4 games were running on dev kits as well.

Dev hardware is the hardware that will be in the final retail box, but in a less consumer-oriented package.

Dev kits almost always have more RAM yeah. Better CPU+GPU, no…

All the indies I know were running on the PS4.

We worked very hard to get our game running on the actual PS4 hardware and operating system in time for the show. As did many other devs.

Sucker Punch’s Jason Connell added:

Yup, we were definitely on a dev kit. [For inFamous: Second Son]

Blow commented:

That is kind of crazy considering consoles are supposed to be on the shelves with these games in 5-6 months.

During Microsoft’s press show I was impressed by how good the games looked given the console’s specs. But if they weren’t running on those specs then it becomes pretty questionable.

I actually don’t want XB1 to fail because we need competition to keep things healthy.

And finally:

I’m seeing a lot of forum comments saying “it is no big deal, most E3 demos are on PCs”. False. I wonder if this is “reputation management”.

Yea, buddy I just spew shit?

Just because It says Junior on my title doesn't mean I don't know this Industry.
 
Are Xbone games mostly 1080p 60 FPS? That could be a huge swing for Xbone.
There were only three titles that ran at 1080p 60FPS on actual Xbone hardware in E3. They were Forza, KI, and FIFA. Racing sims, fighting games, and FIFA are already 60fps this gen, so that's not much of a stretch.
 
Most Microsoft demo's were running off PC hardware. The few that weren't, almost without exception were running 30fps or lower. I believe the exception to this is Forza. However, if I'm reading things correctly, Forza's track designs heavily limit the distance the engine would have to draw. If so, that's a bit of a cheat, well, just a smidge anyway.
I'd hate to assume Sony's first party studios design choices, but it looks like they really should have "cheated" as much as they could themselves. Nothing wrong in doing so.
 
Everyone who seriously can't see the difference between 30 and 60 FPS is either ignorant or blind. Go play Counter Strike, set the FPS to 30 and then to 60 and tell me you don't see a difference. It's like night and day especially while shooting. Every action, platforming and racing game has to be 60 fps otherwise it just feels laggy. Last game I didn't buy because of this was Sonic & All-Stars Racing Transformed, it's unplayable for me. Way to many developers opt for the crazy effects and better resolution in favour of the FPS, it's silly to say the least.
 
The fact that the models are the same doesn't mean that it was running in real-time.

He mentioned real time.


"We also strived to create a seamless experience when it came to the game. The idea was to make sure that you never saw any visual discrepancies or breaks in continuity between gameplay and cinematic. Our game models and our cinematic models are one and the same and everything is rendered real-time in the engine as you play the game. The trailer we presented is a great example of that. What you saw is running in-engine, in-game with no gimmicks. These visuals are what you can expect of the final game when you play it."

http://blog.eu.playstation.com/2013...s-the-order-1886-exclusive-for-playstation-4/
 
Holy shit, why are some of you making assumptions about the performance of an entire generation of games based on the fact that some alpha builds of launch titles are a little choppy at E3?

WTF did you expect?

Launch is right around the corner. If builds aren't currently 60fps or if the developer hasn't explicitly said that they're targeting 60fps then the game is going to be 30fps. Frame rates don't magically double halfway through development.

Your comment about assumptions is the main point I was trying to make earlier. Right now, looking at Microsoft's software lineup with its emphasis on 60fps, one might assume that indeed 60fps is their target framerate this generation. In fact, they came out and boasted that Halo 5 would hit 60fps. That's a huge statement about their priorities.

Sony seems comfortable with targeting 30fps. Their main shooter will be 30fps. Their big launch driving game will be 30fps. That being said, these games may blow Microsoft's away in terms of visual fidelity.
 
The amount of uneducated posts I have read in this thread is too high. There are a whole lot of people who have no clue whatsoever. I guess, this is why devs always complain.
 
Sony, gimme an option to play @ 720p for a more stable famerate pls. Fuck your 1080p with its sub30 gameplay.

And this... All day every day... i know consoles are supposed to be accessible but give me a fucking resolution toggle. Please... you cant see me but I am begging you. Please.
 
You know, I do love GAF, but occasionally it can be a somewhat frustrating community to work with. XD

Seriously folks, this is a demo of, "unfinished, launch, software."

Just the fact that they had everything up and running on actual PS4 hardware was impressive. By this time, it's not uncommon for devs to be running their demo's on extra beefy PC's, or worse, don't have the games playable at all.

This is why E3 attendance tends to be limited to journalists and insiders. Most the games on display tend to have problems like this before release.
 
I've posted this before but no one seems to pay any attention.

SCEE Liverpool houses FPQA (First Party QA). Even when games are submitted to FPQA, they can go through a lot of changes including performance. I know this for a fact as I used to work there. I still have friends working there now.

No PS4 titles are in FPQA yet.

At best they're all probably still in Alpha. Games submitted to FPQA are generally considered "feature complete" and the time used is for polish and bug fixes. Feature complete is not the same as performance complete (for want of a better expression).

When in FPQA you should be able to play the game fully but performance can still continually evolve during this period. At the minimum daily builds will be submitted to FPQA.

So again, everyone needs to act like Fonzie and be cool.
Great info. Thanks for sharing. I honestly have no clue how all this works so it's great to hear from someone who does.
 
Holy shit, why are some of you making assumptions about the performance of an entire generation of games based on the fact that some alpha builds of launch titles are a little choppy at E3?

WTF did you expect?

Come on now, you know why lol. Some of these guys have been wanting something to jump the gun at, especially now that Sony has not gone the DRM route, despite some claiming it was a sure thing, and to think otherwise was naivety.
 
They cheated with the CG trailers, got caught and that had a bad press for months.

I'm not talking about cheating with presentation demos, I'm talking about technical tricks in the development of the game.

Launch is right around the corner. If builds aren't currently 60fps or if the developer hasn't explicitly said that they're targeting 60fps then the game is going to be 30fps. Frame rates don't magically double halfway through development.

Your comment about assumptions is the main point I was trying to make earlier. Right now, looking at Microsoft's software lineup with its emphasis on 60fps, one might assume that indeed 60fps is their target framerate this generation. In fact, they came out and boasted that Halo 5 would hit 60fps. That's a huge statement about their priorities.

Sony seems comfortable with targeting 30fps. Their main shooter will be 30fps. Their big launch driving game will be 30fps. That being said, these games may blow Microsoft's away in terms of visual fidelity.


You do realize that most of E3's demos run on builds on indicative of where they currently in their development?
 
Those of you arguing for 720p...

720vs1080.png


1080p literally has more than twice the detail. Even with AA you can't even come close to recovering all of that.
 
The E3 build of Drive Club was said to be at about 35% complete, no? It's kind of strange to see people are going ape shit about the rough state of a game that's sitting at 35% complete.

Not to mention that final framerate optimizations are usually done at the tail end of development from my understanding. Way too early to worry.
 
Dead Rising 3 on the Xbone runs at sub 30 frames especially with lots going on screen. Launch games always under perform as the console optimisations haven't been discovered yet and won't be for a few years.
 
I'd hate to assume Sony's first party studios design choices, but it looks like they really should have "cheated" as much as they could themselves. Nothing wrong in doing so.

Well, if the final version is hitting 60fps, with all the bells and whistles and greater draw distances to boot, than it doesn't make sense to cheat.

You don't make major design philosophy decisions, based on what looks good in an early demo.
 
Well... good thing Im getting both consoles. Im so used to PC gaming I cant do without 60FPS anymore. Im ok with third person shooters being 30 locked, but first person? No thanks.

If MS is requiring a 60/1080p, Ill stick with the Xbox One. Im getting both regardless, but whichever is 1080/60 will be my main system, other just for exclusives. Such a shame really, Im the type of guy that things Mario Galaxy looks fucking amazing because its 1080p 60fps on my computer. Id MUCH rather have that then fancier graphics. Mario looks amazing as does Crysis.. I cant handle jaggies or lag
Yeah, no. If you care about performance than you will get a PS4 over an X bone since it's more powerful and only in the most unusual circumstances will a multi plat run better on the bone.
 
He mentioned real time.

I will hold my final judgement to when the game comes out, but I'm pretty damn sure it won't look anything like that trailer. Unless of course there is some catch like not being able to move the camera àla god of war, which doesn't seem to be the case.
 
Absolutely, but I'll be honest, I have not seen one single PC game to date with visuals that impressive. Of course it could be done, but it hasn't happened yet. Crysis 3 is about the closest thing but it doesn't have the same density of geometry in the backgrounds.

I look at that demo and find it hard to believe that anyone could shit on that.
It's just wonderful looking.


It's not that hard.
 
So in this thead we jump to conclusions about hardware and software not even available?

Well...sigh.

Happens with the x1 on a hourly basis why can't it happen to the ps4

Are we going to see a separate thread detailing the state of these ps4 games? Doubt it!
 
Can someone please point out the last time a game's preview differed in any significant way to the final product? A lot of people here are saying the game's unfinished, yet it's releasing this fall. It's highly likely that whatever portions they show at this point are pretty much done, or so close it's barely noticeable. The 'it's not finished yet!' defense gets brought up every time, yet I can't remember the last time a game was so improved from E3 version to release that the framerate/visuals were notably better. Especially when the game in question is due by the end of the year.
 
I will hold my final judgement to when the game comes out, but I'm pretty damn sure it won't look anything like that trailer. Unless of course there is some catch like not being able to move the camera àla god of war, which doesn't seem to be the case.

Here's what was said

"We also strived to create a seamless experience when it came to the game. The idea was to make sure that you never saw any visual discrepancies or breaks in continuity between gameplay and cinematic. Our game models and our cinematic models are one and the same and everything is rendered real-time in the engine as you play the game. The trailer we presented is a great example of that. What you saw is running in-engine, in-game with no gimmicks. These visuals are what you can expect of the final game when you play it."

http://blog.eu.playstation.com/2013...s-the-order-1886-exclusive-for-playstation-4/

Wording is a big confusing but what I took from it is that when the game ships, all the cutscenes are in real time. Yet the trailer we got was rendered in the in-game engine, but maybe not real time. Yet I don't think there'll be any significant difference considering that last sentence.
 
Top Bottom