I really appreciate what these guys do but sometimes it's all a bit too doom and gloom.
The time they must take to individually inspect each frame, to stop and analyse each scene, to measure and count each step, to zoom and assess clarity, to focus and examine reflections...the list goes on. I really appreciate all that hard work. However, I don't understand why they beat down so much on games that aren't 60fps i.e. are designed to be 30fps, games that can't absolutely stick to 60fps or are not at least 1440p. It's clinically tiresome. Comment on it by giving a little more perspective and leave it at that.
Watching the latest Resident Evil 2 Remake video they point out a difference in reflections between the XBOX ONE X and PlayStation 4 Pro versions. Most won't notice or care. What's the point? Moreover it's completely irrelevant in context to the game. Can anyone honestly say that subtle difference between versions matter?
How many of the greatest games ever made are completely stable, don't have image quality issues and are of suspect resolution? Probably the overwhelming majority of them, right! That would be a great video series...a breakdown of the best Game of the Year for the last 15 years or so to determine how each has used technology to benefit and influence the industry.
I guess the bottom line is I would like Digital Foundry to keep doing what they are doing, their work is valuable to a good portion of this community for instance, but try and make it a little more personable. Softer in tone. Not so clinical.
Dark1x, my favourite member of the team, works really hard to personalise content (DF Retro is a great example of his core abilities as a presenter and editor and the recent Ace Combat video is an extremely good example of top-tier work) but I just wish the rest of the team would follow his example and give a little more wiggle room. If only because some of the greatest games ever developed are not technically perfect.