Ridiculous. Even used "fake news" to sweeten the pot.
Way to keep my money far away from anything you ever put out going forward, 34BT.
Way to keep my money far away from anything you ever put out going forward, 34BT.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
34BigThings Denies Digital Foundry’s Redout XB1X Analysis (Update: Digital Foundry Apology)
- Thread starter lupianwolf
- Start date
- Status
I find it hard to believe that it runs at 1080p constantly in even the least stressed situations, especially when another pixel counting site counted correctly that it was a dynamic resolution going well over 1080p.
You say you believe it runs at 1080p more often than not because DF said it was 1080p, but DF were wrong about it being 1080p all the time so why would you believe them over not only vgtech but the developers themselves?
At the end of the day DF absolutely unquestionably got this wrong, published an article with incorrect information, and it is absolutely has caused loss of reputation and money for the developer. That is grounds for legal action.
Inappropriate response from CEO. It's OK to call out DF if you think they are wrong and can provide evidence to the outlet to allow them to make a correction, but this response just feeds into the toxicity of "gamers posting on the internet".
I bought this yesterday for XB1X (before the storm) as it was on sale and I noticed that it was now XBX1 Enhanced. Thanks to DF for pointing out some issues. My own personal experience was that of disappointment in the performance and I was expecting more from the visuals. Hopefully 34BigThings can work on those areas that DF highlight.
I bought this yesterday for XB1X (before the storm) as it was on sale and I noticed that it was now XBX1 Enhanced. Thanks to DF for pointing out some issues. My own personal experience was that of disappointment in the performance and I was expecting more from the visuals. Hopefully 34BigThings can work on those areas that DF highlight.
I dont understand this defence via hyperbolic example of something you have no idea about by making up bullshit case of what is potentially happening.
Because their CEO's statement was written in a childish, unprofessional manner reminiscent of your avatar.
DF is a pretty reputable source. Going scorched earth on them and then using bad math to boot is just a poor look. There were far better ways to handle this than the way it was.
I dunno if DF's analysis was correct or not (it probably was due to them being extremely reputable) but this company's lack of professionalism has seriously killed any desire I had in this game. It looked cool in the video too so shame.
Absolutely, I don't think this is quite the case here however. With so many games and patches coming out these days I think it's more a matter of Digital Foundry stretching themselves a little thin trying to cover so much. In many many of their recent videos they discuss their "preliminary" and initial findings and then never come back to the game again. Though regardless the clarity difference between 1080p and 1944p is nearly four times the difference and should be instantly noticeable regardless of TAA and motion blur here.
Digital Foundry has already stated their analysis was wrong in the thread for the analysis. Despite this they didn't remove the video and have caused further damage to the game and the developer.
This reminds me of the fiasco Just Add Water had to deal with after the release of the Oddbox on Steam. Stuart Gilray didn't really know how to handle it and just ended up making things worse. Smaller devs are passionate, but they need PR people for exactly this sort of situation.
The thing that still boggles my mind is this - if people rely on digital foundry to know about this kind of stuff, why does it even matter?
Like, if you're having to go to a technical analysis expert to split hairs over what a game is running at, doesn't that mean it's not even that noticeable in the first place?
Like, if you're having to go to a technical analysis expert to split hairs over what a game is running at, doesn't that mean it's not even that noticeable in the first place?
Eg:
on this forum read by tens of thousands of people -33k members. who knows how many non members/lurkers just read reset.
the subject re: Redout says "
"Digital Foundry Analysis: "Redout: What's Up With The Xbox One X Version? Better on PS4 Pro!""
https://www.resetera.com/threads/di...e-xbox-one-x-version-better-on-ps4-pro.14683/
if I can't be bothered clicking. On the surface level, my impressions is the the XB1X version is shit and I won't be buying it.
on this forum read by tens of thousands of people -33k members. who knows how many non members/lurkers just read reset.
the subject re: Redout says "
"Digital Foundry Analysis: "Redout: What's Up With The Xbox One X Version? Better on PS4 Pro!""
https://www.resetera.com/threads/di...e-xbox-one-x-version-better-on-ps4-pro.14683/
if I can't be bothered clicking. On the surface level, my impressions is the the XB1X version is shit and I won't be buying it.
Being reputable doesn't really mean anything when they've just essentially thrown your game to the angry resolution wolves based on incorrect work on their behalf.
Makes you wonder what else they've gotten wrong over the years.
we've got the developers themselves saying DF are wrong, and VGTech also confirming the developers statement that it's a dynamic resolution with a minimum of 1080p, yet you still want to believe DF "because they're reputable"?
This is the exact reason why they are looking at taking legal action! Even now there will be some people who will not change their mind and will defend DF and attack the developers when it is proven that DF are wrong.
That thread title is the same title as their video which gets the most viewers out of everything Digital Foundry does. They haven't changed that video title or removed the video itself despite them being aware it is inaccurate and damaging the games image.
Digital Foundry usually does a great job, there are instances they've missed dynamic resolutions (Rather they've missed small drops from 1080p rather than 1080p to 1944p) but there has also been points where they've missed a full 900p to 1080p. It happens but I do believe they need to be more careful as a lot of people take their work as the absolute truth.
I'd like to see Digital Foundry compare the lava level on this game between the two systems; because VGTech has framerate data on that level showing the game bouncing all the way down to 50fps as well; maybe have even touched the upper 40's for a second or so as well on PS4 Pro. It'd be interesting to see where the Xbox One X performance goes in that scenario.
Well they did call it a "a low effort port".
"low effort" is basically the definition of 'lazy'.
Well they did call it a "a low effort port".
"low effort" is basically the definition of 'lazy'.
I didn't like the title of the video when I first saw it, and I still don't. John and everyone else there seem like standup guys, and I think the clickbait stuff is beneath them, to be honest.
what a weird question. If people are going to watch a technical analysis video - of course they'd care? Otherwise, they might as well just watch angry joe or something.
Precisely the issue at hand. The backlash a dev, more so indie, might get from this can have adverse effects. A couple's hundred sales of their games being lost as this article/video from DF gains views can really be damaging to the devs.
If DF really did get this wrong (sounds like they did?) they should apologize, certainly.
But the response from 34BigThings sounds exceedingly childish. I mean, instead of saying "You made a mistake in your analysis, please fix it" you straight up call them liars? And fake news? Really?
But the response from 34BigThings sounds exceedingly childish. I mean, instead of saying "You made a mistake in your analysis, please fix it" you straight up call them liars? And fake news? Really?
DF isn't basing this solely on resolution. The detail settings are lower thank the Pro and the frame rate is constantly dipping down to as low as the 40s, whereas the Pro is locked at 60.
The video title would still be correct even if the resolution was corrected.
I think he might have a case to be angry if he wakes up and suddenly his twitter feed is filled with hate. A certain degree of anger at the issue is certainly not unjustified.
Whats easier, buying all the platforms, purchasing the game for all platforms, capturing footage for all the different versions and comparing them, or watching a DF video?
Well that is exactly what the XB1X version is compared to the Pro version whether it's dynamic resolution or not. The fact that it varies between 1944p and 1080p is only one reason. Sub 60 fps often and worse assets are 2 others. It's a bad patch.
Why would they change the video title? According to that thread their are a couple factors that lead to them saying the Pro version is better.
Whoever is running that Twitter account is acting like a child. This developer is likely mad that DF exposed their poor efforts on their X patch. Yes DF did make a mistake in not being able to find the dynamic resolution in place. But the results they found is there for everyone to see, the game struggles to run at 60 FPS, and had drops all the way in to the 30's, with the same graphics preset as the base xbox one, which is lower than the PS4, all while running at 1080p for all the shots DF pixel counted.
When did I say that I believe DF over VGTech or the devs?
DF was wrong in not spotting the dynamic res scaler, and I believe they didn't spot it because it probably runs at 1080p more often than not. VG Tech simply gave a min/max resolution, hence why I said more context needs to be given.
99% was clearly an example, hence the use of the word "IF". It was just an EXAMPLE that more context needs to be given, than simply giving a min/max resolution.
My post was in response to someone calling DF "very wrong", when in reality, they could be not far from the truth at all.
Okay, so they've made a mistake. They should apologise and remove the video.
But that doesn't change my opinion of threatening legal action at the first sight of a mistake being unprofessional. They could've cooperated with DF or even contacted them before going to the public immediately, possibly.
The term "fake news" and how it's becoming part of the every day lexicon for corporations and the general populace at large bothers me greatly...
That said, I think threatening legal action was way over the top. Mistakes happen from time to time in all professional journalism and DF took the steps necessary to correct this.
That said, I think threatening legal action was way over the top. Mistakes happen from time to time in all professional journalism and DF took the steps necessary to correct this.
And correcting someone about your game's resolution doesn't really mean anything when you've essentially just written a Trumpian-esque manbaby rant.
It seems like a pretty bad oversight from DF to not catch what VGTech found. But Di Donato did his company no favors by handling it the way he did. The statement is like the height of unprofessionalism.
So is the statement that Di Donato wrote.
He could have come out looking good, instead he looks like an unprofessional man-child who doesn't even understand the thing he's talking about.
VGTechs analysis shows the Pro version isn't locked at 60fps, with dips down in to the high 40s in at least one of their captured videos.
Well, that's debatable. They stated the game was 1080p and ran at sub 60fps, both of those statements are true to fact, based on their specific analysis, media and data. What they didn't account for was that other parts of the game they didn't test, might run at a higher resolution, thus the resolution was actually dynamic.
Now we don't know how much gameplay DF actually tested. They might have tested an hour or so's worth, random at that. If in all that footage they only encountered 1080p, you can't blame them for concluding the game was 1080p. DF cannot be expected to resolution test an entire game, that would be a ludicrous expectation. All we can expect is that they test short snippets of gameplay from throughout the game, which they nearly always already do.
At that point, it doesn't really matter if your game can run at a higher resolution, since for all intents and purposes, the vast majority of the time (in DF's specific testing) it ran at 1080p. So for their testing, and as far as they're concerned, it was 1080p. The employees at DF are only human, with so many spare man hours. Of course they'll miss things from time to time, but importantly, they generally update their articles when highlighted to such discrepancies or issues.
So do you honestly believe they would have run with that title if they knew it actually does run at a higher resolution? They haven't for other videos where it hasn't been so clear cut which is better. One X runs worse and has lower settings but hits higher resolutions.
Straight up calling DF liars and threatening legal action against them isn't really "a certain degree of anger"
Beyond that, the XB1X version IS inferior. Worse frame rate, lower details. Like others have said, even if the resolution analysis was incorrect, the port still has a multitude of issues compared to the PS4 Pro.
what an awful response, no doubt DF can make mistakes, specially with dynamic res, since the game actually renders at 1080p at times like the dev confirmed, looking at this and the common drops bellow 60FPS it's not hard to imagine that the game is expending considerable amounts of time at 1080P, and never actually hitting 4K (as confirmed by the dev, the max res is not 4K)
they shouldn't be allowed to advertise a game like this as "4K60"
they shouldn't be allowed to advertise a game like this as "4K60"
Maybe there was nothing to speak up about until now. I don't understand. If DF was wrong in the past, wouldn't a developer have spoken out the same way?
The devs invited criticsm with their reaction to the situation. Going on Twitter and shouting "Fake News" and threatening to sue is not a good look.
All they had to do was state that DF was wrong and that they are working with DF to correct the record. And everybody would be on thier side. It comes down to how you conduct yourself as a representative of a professional business.
Don't get me wrong DF is definitely in the wrong here and the Redout devs have every right to be upset but have some decorum. I'm sure the DF people are honest and aren't out to ruin anybody's business
Rarely hits higher resolution so yes I do think they would have that same title. Something is off with the One X version no matter if it sometimes rarely hits a higher resolution than 1080p, the title is absolutely fine.
They didn't say it ran at 1080p the vast majority of the time, they just simply stated it ran at 1080p full-stop... two very different statements, one of them I'm not even sure they actually said.
Is there a quote from them saying that somewhere or are people just taking it upon themselves to push stance?
Also every level in the game and every race you have, you're going to have different performance given the amount of racers near you and the amount of FX going off at a given time... it absolutely does matter.
Title is fine but what they're actually talking about for a portion of the video isn't accurate.
I've been watching this game for 6+ months. I would have bought it if the resolution was not amazing (maybe not fps) but I will not buy it after this bullshit.
Your own quote says "all our pixel counts resolve" which is a factual statement.
Your own quote says "all our pixel counts resolve" which is a factual statement.
Do you have a source that it is 1080p the majority of the time?
While I agree this video has been quite damaging to the game and developers image. They would have undoubtedly lost sales from this video, and for a small dev that's a big deal regardless how small. They have every right to legal action here.
DF is doing some great work but they are often unprecise, which is an issue given how seriously they are taken. If this was a mistake they should redact hard like a newspaper, this game and developer is being damaged by oversight. The 4K update is really sexy and the upped res is very noticeable, not sure how they thought it was 1080p.
I remember few other times were people made some analysis for the frame rate and resolutions (i remember with Xenoblade Chronicles 2 a lot of people were confident that the res was 900p docked and DF said 720p).
And with the Switch it happened also with ARMS that the resolution even at the testpunch was higher than what DF were saying, but then if i remember correctly they changed their idea with the review of the final release because Nintendo said that the game runs at 1080p 60fps.
So i think people are wrong to take for good anything from DF.
And with the Switch it happened also with ARMS that the resolution even at the testpunch was higher than what DF were saying, but then if i remember correctly they changed their idea with the review of the final release because Nintendo said that the game runs at 1080p 60fps.
So i think people are wrong to take for good anything from DF.
That's what I've seen in this thread. And DF not having any of the shots they analyzed be above that is a pretty telling sign. Regardless, dynamic resolution with worse settings and a way worse framerate does not equal a good version, so the title would be valid.
The One X is a more powerful system than the Pro, why exactly does it have worse settings and run at a worse framerate?
This is exactly how I feel. Their response is ridiculous. There are many other issues with the X patch other than resolution, and to call out DF like that is nuts. Also, I'm wondering how often it sits at 1080p given that DF didn't see anything above that.
Right, but I as a reader automatically take that to mean that DF concluded this based on their specific testing, which is generally quite comprehensive. If they missed the fact that it was dynamic, they can correct that with the relevant information in their article, but ultimately what it tells me is that the dynamic resolution likely rarely climbs to the much higher resolutions, and that the majority of the time it is instead 1080p, hence the reason DF likely missed it.
If it turns out the game runs at a much higher resolution the vast majority of the game, then I agree DF would have dropped the ball in a bigger way, but I guess we'll learn soon once they update.
Yeah, that was terrible. Don't know who's in charge there, but they need to work on their delivery and professionalism. They are hurting themselves more than helping at the moment.
What a bad behavior. Instead of making comments like 'We gonna investigate this' looks like he embrace all the toxic youtube comments. If DF made a mistake so make a healthy conversation and a proper apologie will be send.
Legal action its a bit far. What type of company post things like that?
Legal action its a bit far. What type of company post things like that?
Agree. I can understand some 'random' internet guy (facebook, twitter and youtube toxic community) making that kind of toxic post, but a dev making this looks insane.What a terrible posture.
I really cannot agree here. The reputation of Digital Foundry and the trust people put in them gives a lot of weight to statements they make. Every time the article is read prior to the correction is somebody being misled and receiving an incorrect view understanding of the technical state of the game, and (in general) the more time that passes the larger the majority proportion of readers who will miss the update. An urgent response is incredibly important, because the longer one waits the less impact any update will have (because article view counts aren't going to be distributed uniformly over time, they'll typically be skewed towards when the article was written). Particularly for an independent developer, this initial period can result in some very significant damage and an article update isn't enough to undo this (particularly when people who have already read the article may not go back and re-read it; likewise if the YouTube clip contains the same information and it isn't removed and reuploaded with the correct information).
Their statement certainly has some very unprofessional phrases, but I don't see how seeking a legal recourse is one of those. When you're viewed as the top source of technical analysis for video games, you've a responsibility to ensure the statements you're putting out are accurate and correct. If Digital Foundry had spent more time fact checking, the situation would have been avoided as we see from VGTech, but it's either negligence or a rushed analysis which has resulted in such a response. With their reputation, it's absolutely not acceptable that to make mistakes of such a manner; if that means they need to spend more time analysing games or be more cautious in their phrasing (including everything that they are drawing their sampling from to avoid any misrepresentation of how significant that is) then so be it.
However, with that said, based upon the article and the YouTube video, the complaint itself is only one of many so I do not think the article title or YouTube video title is now invalidated as there were far more issues than just the misleading statement (which even in the original article was slightly downplayed) so it is possible there's another motive (than just that one statement) for responding swiftly and harshly, but that doesn't mean it's unprofessional to expect the most well-respected technical analysis website to ensure the statements it makes are unambiguous and factual.
I think even DF knows the days of getting accurate pixel counts are coming to an end. There's too many tricks of the trade now from dynamic scaling to the ID buffer that identifying the ground truth resolution is getting more difficult and alone, really doesn't mean as much as it used to. Higher general pixel counts are lessening it's importance too.
The dev may have not handled this in the right way, but the concerns they've raised are valid.
The dev may have not handled this in the right way, but the concerns they've raised are valid.
Last edited:
Well see, I wouldn't take it to mean that at all unless they expressly say as much.
Typically in the past they would never gloss over a detail like that. In most of the video analysis they have with games that feature dynamic scaling they'll say something like "we've analyzed X amount of frames and a few that land on y, and rare instances of z while on average it sticks closer to p", like I'm pretty sure even in the recent Witcher 3 analysis they went over it with a fine tooth comb like that. They knew going in it is a dynamic scaling game, it seems like something they'd lookout for and maybe take analysis from more than one level.
- Status