DigitalFoundry is Killing Gaming

I miss the real gaming days when it was all about fun instead of counting pixels and comparing framerate. The days when we had tons of enemies on screen without a worry about performance. Now DF scared most developers to be careful what they push on screen, and to compromise for the weakest link because they are afraid of boycotts. I care less about resolution or a few dips in framerate, I just want to experience Gaming in its true form without compromise.

i don't think there is one developer in the world that is sweating what df has to say about anything.

I actually enjoy the comparisons and the chaos that ensues afterwords

Another lame alt

I don't think it's their fault really. This type of discussion has been going on for ever. I do agree that it's unfortunate if devs would feel like they have to meet certain numbers (aka 1080p + 60FPS) instead of thinking about what makes sense for their game. For example it could be better for the experience to spend more of the resources on NPCs, particle effects, destructibility and so on. Hopefully devs are not inimidated.

@Sushiglutton: yea i was surprised when Geurilla Games said that the frame drops in KZ:SF multiplayer would be unnoticeable unless you go look at DigitalFoundry's analysis lol

No. gamers just need to grow up.

I have a PS4 and Xbone and have proved it several times. Playing BF4, COD, NBA2k, FIFA, and NFS Rivals on both. I can honestly say on a 36 inch 1080p Samsung, they look the same for the most part. On PS4 COD is a tad cleaner but it was hardly noticable. However the framerate dropped more. Everything else was basically the same with one exception. BF4 on the Xbone clearly looks worse in multiplayer. Other than that, you would have to be a picky brat to notice any real difference. They are closer than early 360 / PS3 games like Bayonetta and RDR.

Most people will not be able to tell the difference.

Why not do an analysis on game performance... I agree to a certain extent with allocating resources to what you want the game to function like.

1080p @60FPS really should be a goal though even if it does not quite make it, they should at least try to get as close as possible. I don't expect games to run flawlessly at 60FPS 100% of the time. I expect a lot of games to be more open from now on and less heavily optimised corridor types games, so you have to leave room to allow for frame drops as developers really can't be expected to test every situation out to make sure it at least gets 30FPS if it is only just about displaying 30FPS.

Anything less than 30FPS should be frowned on in any circumstance, if does not maintain 30FPS 99.9% of the time then they should start stripping things out. My opinion anyway.

I tried to play red dead redemption the other day on PS3 and the frame rate really lets the game down a lot if i see any of that on the new consoles they can keep it.

It keeps showing how superior the pc is, thus making Xboxone and PS4 hype useless. Since graphics is the only thing going for them.

Graphics is not the only thing going for consoles though. Factor in the exclusive games. I have to admit if it was a choice between PC and consoles and exclusive games did not exist, I would not bother with the consoles. The system is only as good as the games that are released, but you also have to factor in the multiplat games that don't get released on PC. Then you have the terrible ports (which I hope is going to stop).

People saying PC is best are delusional, just like console owners saying their system has better graphics than PC are delusional, you are not looking at all aspects of it and just picking on one area.

Cod ghosts on ps4 doesn't have frame drops... Df said it's caused by going above 60fps with a locked in game 60Hz refresh

Then do it. It isn't hard. Yesterday I took a job for a stack of low grade metal and a bunch of ammunition. The job was to facilitate the raiding of a base of real jerks on a Rust Server. I pulled if off by setting up a huge but extremely vulnerable construction near them, and used as a base of operations for guerrilla style harassment. When I got them so angry that they all came to root me and the folks I had subcontracted, the folks who hired me hit their base hard. When the group returned home and were confronted with the devastation, the leader of the group who hired me exploded a whole bunch of C4, and took out a third of their group.

Now the freaking griefers are scattered and running scared.

This is what gaming is all about. Looking at the situation, making a plan, putting it into action, and seeing if you can pull it off. It is the thrill of success, and the hunger that follows on the heels of failure. You got to try again and do it better this time.

System wars, kotaku, DF, and all that jazz is just the gossip drama soap opera gamers enjoy when they need a break. After that break we all get back in the game and have a blast. Don't let the side show get you down,

Don't be butthurt.

Digital Foundry is all cows have.

This. So much, this.

You mean the days of Blast Processing and Sega DOES what NintenDON'T. Yeah nice try clown. Specs have been important to me since the 8 Bit era when Double Dragon was 1 Player on the NES and 2 Players on the Sega Master System.

Where was everyone complaining last gen? Oh wait.

This. People care about it here. Personally, if I enjoy the game, that's all I care about.

DF has lost credibility, therefore I have no use for them

Great Post sir. I think too many people take things waaay too seriously.

You mean they no longer tell you what you want to hear.

@AdobeArtist: Bingo

Or maybe not a blind fool.

However, if you are blind you should probably not be spending money on a video game console

DF didn't start that shit, gamers themselves did. DF just found a way of making money off the desperation of gamers to 1up each other.

If people didn't use DF as such a viable source for "ownage" all the time then they wouldn't be around or be as popular as they are now

Sorry for expecting an improvement in performance when I put down $400 for a new console. I should just be like the Xbots and happily swallow every spoonful of shit Penello feeds me.

Nope they're just showing the general public how pathetic and weak the bone is. Its the first time since MS entered consoles market that they released something as weaksauce

The people who don't like them are the ones that solely own the console with the lesser version. They haven't lost credibility or anything. They show you what they see, if you don't like it, play the games and don't go to their site and ignore the threads here pertaining to DF. I personally love it and it helps me to ensure that I get the best version of the game on consoles. (if I'm not buying on PC)

Who needs a graphics comparison? PS4 will always look better.

Lems pay more for inferior hardware.

da ****?

Wait, i dunno if we're on the same page. When i looked up digitalfoundry, I found what appears to be a manufacturer trying to make a hardware alternative to FRAPS, which sounds like a very good idea since video recording software tends to lead to a lot of framerate dips.

Hard to like them when you are a lem and they keep telling you how inferior the xbone is

How can a site that aids gamers making an informed decision be a hindrance to gaming?

Sorry, but that's vacuous

And how is that new? The spanish mag i used to get in early 90s, always had comparisons between megadrive, Snes, turbografx16 and neogeo specs and game screens.

Maybe you shouldn't go there...or come here. Personaly, i love comparisons and enjoy my games.

Dirty lem you're reaching.

Lmao, Xbox dONE. Lems just cant catch a break, lmao, I'm loving it!

I just ignore comparisons 99% of the time. I can't count the amount of times during the 360/PS3 generation where all these comparison say one version looks better than the other by comparing foliage or facial hair textures (basically stuff you'll never notice when actually playing the game). I find differences in these to be absolutely pointless to highlight. I even saw the same carry on with BF4 between the PS4 and X1 versions.

In the previous generation, 99% of the time the games looked the same or any differences not being worth writing home about. Of course there are exceptions from time-to-time, but the constant instances of the above scenario occurring has made me become jaded with these comparisons. These things are more used in fanboy wars then anything else.

oh right, the "i have both systems and buy the same games for both without any apparent reason", sorry, no one's buying it, you act like a butthurt lem 100% of the time.

so you have both consoles and play every game in both?

i used to think that 60fps was overrated

i have to thank DF

@AdobeArtist: didn't DF present BF4 on the PS4 as being in 1080p at the time when it wasn't yet? Same as IGN's review and comparison doing the same. Lying like this is what causes the loss of cred.

I'm sorry. Digital who?

DF is killing Xblowx and Xbutts are aching

Yep, but don't let facts get in the way of a good Sony Fan circle jerk.

Ryse, best looking game hands down and I don't need fanboy sites to tell me.

Gaming is a tech-based hobby. You can't divorce the software from the hardware, so sites like DF are very necessary, especially because so many gaming sites are afraid to mention stuff like framerate or resolution due to fear of upsetting devs/publishers/Microsoft. A high framerate and good image quality makes my enjoyment of a game that much more enjoyable, whereas a low framerate and shit image quality detract from my enjoyment (Dark Souls is a perfect example--it's a great game that is bogged down by annoying framerate drops and glitchy physics).

If that kind of stuff really bothers you, get into board/card gaming; there's a renaissance going on atm in that field.

Gaming publications have always been counting pixels, sprites, colours, polygons, textures, resolution, etc. Even as far back as the 8-bit era, you always had magazines comparing the graphical capabilities of different systems.

Anyway, I just see graphics as a kind of bonus, something that can enhance the experience, rather than the core of the experience. Primitive graphics are not a deal-breaker for me at all, since I still play retro games to this day. The frame-rate, on the other hand, can be a deal-breaker if it's low and inconsistent.

I have all the platforms and like to know which system has the advantage performance wise, so I love what they do. I mean, usually PC wins, but if a friend wants me to get it on a console to play with them its nice to know how much worse its going to be.