-
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.
VGTech: DMC5 Console Comparison - Release Version
- Thread starter chandoog
- Start date
Exactly. It's a super small performance edge, and I doubt it will last after patches. Pro and X will likely get even closer as time goes on, but you can bet resolution won't improve on Pro at all.
I'm not too sure about that for a few reasons, to be honest. To quote what I've said in the past...
If you value performance as a priority why did you go for the Pro version of RE2 Remake?
I'm only ever going to play this game on PC, but once a game drops under 60 you generally lose the ability to discern a 5 frame gap. You just know you're not at a locked 60 anymore.
With Gsync/Freesync you can't even tell you're dropping frames until you hit the 40s. That's why variable refresh rate is a must have feature for next gen consoles, IMO.
But what's wrong with people's choices about PS4 Pro over X1X?
Last edited:
Looks great to me, sorry that it's "utterly dreadful" to you. I'm usually pretty sensitive to post FX filters like chromatic aberration and sharpening but I can't see anything wrong on my TV.
OP
OP
Haven't you heard, PS4 Pro version is difficult on the eyes to play and completely ruins the image ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
You sound like you have your sharpening on your TV at 100. I haven't experienced any of that noise.
To be clear, i only use my X for gamepass and nothing else. Resident Evil for me personally belongs to be played on PlayStation. Looking back at the fps comparison on DF. Both versions are almost 99% of the time locked 60fps in gameplay, where DMC has more drops in gameplay on all versions. Both are 2 tottaly different games.
I have both my gaming monitor and OLED calibrated professionally, but thanks. The game uses a sharpening filter, so when no AA is deployed, it's overly obvious. Same when you only use a lower quality AA, it has less of an effect on removing it. Higher FXAA+TAA removes it, but still keeps the close and mid range detail sharp, while eliminating pixel crawl, over sharp and keeping detail.
Last edited:
Karak noted something off with the Pro IQ too. Maybe it's noticeable to some and not others. Definitely a strange one.....
Calibrated professionally well damn excuse me. It must be amazing then.
Must be why the game looks utterly terrible to you because the PS4 Pro version is beneath your professional TV calibrations.
Ok mate. Ok. It's not like I work with gaming tech every day, I mean, it's not like I know what I'm looking for. As for my tv calibration, I didn't spend over £3k on a tv just to have it set up by some settings on google. It cost barely anything to do, and it means the whole thing is set up correctly. Why wouldn't I, when development is my bread and butter?
Here I am, giving actual reasons to why the engine works in a certain way, but all you're doing is throwing out shade in the style of an 11 year old kid. Come on man. It's nothing personal. But seeing as I write glsl shaders/fragment/vertex programs in my sleep, you would think I would notice something as blatant as chromatic abberation coupled with over sharpen filter mixed in with a heavy use of vignette.
OP
OP
dude .. we get it .. you develop games.
Still doesn't change the fact that your earlier comments about RE games being "difficult to the eyes" and "utterly destroyed" on PS4 Pro are entirely hyperbolic.
Ok, let me rephrase.
As an artist, I want my work to be presented in as perfect a way as possible. Imagine something you make being messed with, you know? You make your wife a nice meal and she covers it in ketchup. It would piss you off, right?
So here you have art that's created to a set pipeline and that pipeline is that it uses an sharpen post process effect. This is common, a lot of game shave done this. But it destroys image quality. However that's not the way the game is supposed to be displayed. It's supoosed to be displayed AA on, AA which softens the pixel crawl and edge enhancement while retaining the original detail in the image at close and medium distances. Sadly a byproduct of this is that you lose some higher frequency detail, and that is most noticeable at long distance. That's why you have alpha foliage planes losing detail, or texture being harder to read.
Now, the Pro uses FXAA only(opposes to the X which uses FXAA+TAA, or just TAA, I can't tell for sure), however it uses such a low sample amount it's basicaly the same image as using none.
Now then, the issue stems from the original problem. You have an over sharpen filter. So, anything with high frequency detail now turns to noise when displayed at a native high resolution. So hair, the detail on Leon's clothing, specular highlights, anything sharp and small such as alpha masked lines (fences for example) just turn to noise. Add in that, to their overly aggressive chromatic aberration implementation, and you have a recipie for poor visuals.
Now most people play on a 1080p display. They won't see this. Most people play on a smaller set, 40" and below. They won't see this.
As I said, I'm not in this for console wars. I think that side of things is pathetic. It's a joke. People need to grow up. But I AM in this for technical discussion and analysis. And as such I usually side with X because it will have either the best overall result, OR, it will have a subpar result compared to the Pro; and that an equally interesting discussion to have.
All you seem to be doing is patting yourself on the back with your never ending list of development accomplishments. Other than that you're simply throwing out hyperbolic statements and highly subjective opinions disguised poorly as facts.
So you're saying because you work with gaming tech everyday there's no way you can be wrong? Yeah I guess Rockstar and CDPR weren't wrong with their HDR implementations cos they work with gaming tech everyday.
You don't have to work in gaming to notice things like sharpening filters and chromatic abberation, we notice these things here in games on the regular. You're not special mate at all.
chandoog you get me.
Actually when it comes to the hdr implementation of RDR2 and W3, one was released earlier than any HDR standard coming out, and this hdr authoring wasn't even a thing. It was early days. As for RDR2, I have no idea why t was the way it was, but when setup correctly, the HDR wasn't as bad as most people said it was, it was just different. I do feel however that the way they handled HDR in RDR2, more so the complete lack of communication on the problem, was awful.
I'm not saying I'm special. I am however saying that when you view these things with a technical eye, rather than a gamer with a 30" 1080p tv in his bedroom, you appreciate details on a different way.
I'm not saying I'm special. I am however saying that when you view these things with a technical eye, rather than a gamer with a 30" 1080p tv in his bedroom, you appreciate details on a different way.
That's absolutely false. IQ on the X is far from ideal and Pro version at least is not that soft. About the artifacts on the pro, CBR is not too far off to dithering artifact or similar but suddenly such issue has became fucking noisy ando dreadful because people physiologically knows is less pixels natively. But lets take RDR2 on the X: has far more dithering artifacts and low buffer effects caused to higher res but no one here would say the IQ it's better on Pro because seems it's cleaner. Seems more a mind attitude to me.
Last edited:
The pro version of RDR2 from what I recall still uses a wonky resolution and as such renders rectangular pixels for upscaling. It can't have a better dithering effect than the X, simply because dithering is 1,0,1,0 by very definition and is basedly solely on resolution. The higher the resolution, the better the dithering.
Are you referring to the Witcher 3 as the one that released earlier? I still don't agree with this because, games like The Last of Us and Wipeout Omega look great in HDR, Witcher got HDR after those games came out. Nier on Xbox One X is another game that has fake HDR and I dunno what's going on with Monstee Hunter.
Red Dead is an odd one, it's pretty much SDR as EvilBoris pretty much confirmed it.
I get what you mean. Like a sound designer hearing things a different way when he knows how they did the sound, like in Killzone they used a stapler to get the reload sound. Once you know how it's done it can affect your enjoyment. I can understand that, I just feel you were a bit hyperbolic in your original post.
Well now's your chance dude, be courageous and tell us that the Pro version of RDR2 has better IQ than the X because I could seriously do with the chuckles
Maybe I was, and can admit to that. Maybe it was too strong a way of saying it. But to my eye, it totally destroys the visual side of things, like when you actually DO have your sharpness set to 100 lol.
Haha yeah sharpening halo rings around everything is a definite eyesore. It's worse when games/movies do it intentionally. The Dark Knight was guilty of this.
OP
OP
Your entire post is too long to quote but just to correct this.
For the RE engine games, I believe Pro uses just TAA. XBX uses TAA + FXAA.
Pro does not use FXAA.
Movies I'm actually easier to please with. Except for Dolby vision on Star Trek Netflix. That can go eat a bag of dicks. I swear the noise on that is actual Lego pieces, it's so bad.
I absure you dithering is far more visible on the X than the Pro. And the blurriness of low buffer is more visible on the X. Now back to RE engine though you are a developer you even misunderstood FXAA to TAA because the X versions has just FXAA added to the final IQ compared the Pro. TAA is the same on both. But chats aside, I'm not sure how it's remotely preferable a blurred IQ at higher res to a sharper IQ because there are some noisy artifacts. Lot of graphic effects on console have similar problematic.
Last edited:
The dithering is easier to see maybe because the pro version of RDR2 is blurred?
Wow one mistake while detailing several others, where I got acronyms the wrong way around. I'll just get my coat, eh? See you all at the job centre folks.
OP
OP
Or probably their CBR combined with TAA minimise dithering. If I'm not wrong Pro hardware has more efficient algorithm to improve the TAA effect with the CBR uses.
You call the RE engine a dreadful show on Pro just for some artifacts and the X IQ preferable which is even more blurried at higher res. Like the fuck. Never seen a game more blurried on the X until RE engine and now find it preferable...
And no offense but a developer who doesn't knows the difference between FXAA / TAA and claim what is it preferable for the IQ, it's a bit strange.
Last edited:
RE2 on pro>X
Own it on both, compared it on both, I'll take a little shimmering over the blur X has. If its the same with this game I'll get it on Pro.
Own it on both, compared it on both, I'll take a little shimmering over the blur X has. If its the same with this game I'll get it on Pro.
Depends on what is more important to you.
The X has 4k resolution, the Pro is 1800p, but has the more consistent 60 fps framerate according to this video.
There's nothing wrong with that either, but I never implied there was
Obviously you barely care to understand the true point of the conversation just for the sake of the console war.
That's weird I assumed Dolby were authoring the Dolby Vision content themselves like IMAX do. Haven't really looked into it, but DV is supposed to be reference material.
Not on Netflix, it's pretty universally panned there, sadly. :(
Honestly I think it's great that 3 of the 4 versions is in a good enough state where performance isn't too much of a problem. The OG Xbox One just needs to be taken behind the shed and shot.
It is kind of amusing that you'll jump on other people or throw a fit for people preferring the Xbox version, while throwing out equally hyperbolic comments, but say others are participating in console wars.
It is kind of amusing that you'll jump on other people or throw a fit for people preferring the Xbox version, while throwing out equally hyperbolic comments, but say others are participating in console wars.
I get the point, you don't like the blurriness of the RE2 X image and therefore can't agree that it is technically superior to the Pro version, this is because the Pro version of RDR2 was blurry and we all know that version was inferior to the X. It's a great argument.