1. Halo Infinite was "1st card citizen" developed on PC workstation with NVIDIA RTX card before AMD's RDNA 2 silicon.
2. Both Windows 10 version 2004 and Xbox Series X shares the same DirectX12 Ultimate API.
There's no major reason for Xbox Series X to be bound by CPU constrained XBO/X1X "DirectX12.X" API variant.
3. RDNA 1, RDNA 2 and Turing GPUs have supports for Shader Model 6's wave32 compute format which GCN does not support natively.
The "DirectX12 Ultimate API" convergence between PC and XSX is also hardware-based with AMD following NVIDIA's RTX lead.
4. Microsoft's GeForce RTX 2080 equipped PC workstation used to compare against XSX for Gears 5 wasn't an accident.
Man stop that is total bullshit.
The story had entered planning stages in 2015.[17] An announcement trailer was released on June 10, 2018.[18] The developer said that all of the scenes in the Halo Infinite trailer were running in the engine.
The game has been in development since 2015,the first trailer which was say to be in game came in june 2018,the RTX line of card came in september 2018 well after the halo trailer was not only showcase but even more time after it was made,remember the trailer was shown on june 2018 but it took time to develop.
After that first line NOTHING but fu**ING NOTHING you say there adress my point,stop arguing so much irrelevant bullshit what the fu** does windows 10 and windows from 2004 have in common? Yeah maybe the windows name.
Fact is games are made for the lowest common denominator that is a fact,and by the way you were lying the RTX came well after the Halo infinite trailer reveal stop inventing shit to defend MS lemming.
@tormentos: So, according to your argument no game can take advantage of newer hardware whilst its in development.
NO that is not my argument.
My argument is that the lower common denominator is the target,and after that you pump the rest,halo infinite can very well have ray tracing on the series X beecause it support it,i am not saying you will not take advantage of the hardware,and in fact gears been 4k ultra 60FPS is already taking advantage of the hardware,if it wasn't it would run like the xbox one X.
But making a game to spect on xbox series X without holding anything back is different,because from the very begining that hardware is the common denominator.
DX has been great for developers for years it was something that holded back stronger hardware,even to this day when you see a new GPU come and is compare to the old ones what do you see?
A benchmark of a old game running on several hardware including the new one,now new features may be that new GPU that would improve performance,but since the game wasn't code to take that advantage you will not see it,nor will you see any new effect it may have unless coded.
My argument is that the lower common denominator is the target,and after that you pump the rest,halo infinite can very well have ray tracing on the series X beecause it support it,i am not saying you will not take advantage of the hardware,and in fact gears been 4k ultra 60FPS is already taking advantage of the hardware,if it wasn't it would run like the xbox one X.
But making a game to spect on xbox series X without holding anything back is different,because from the very begining that hardware is the common denominator.
DX has been great for developers for years it was something that holded back stronger hardware,even to this day when you see a new GPU come and is compare to the old ones what do you see?
A benchmark of a old game running on several hardware including the new one,now new features may be that new GPU that would improve performance,but since the game wasn't code to take that advantage you will not see it,nor will you see any new effect it may have unless coded.
That is not how things work. A game which is software can be design to utilize a variety of hardware to their "full" potential. The people who frequent this concept of holding back most likely have never develop any software in their life. A game that is in development can adopt new technologies that wasn't present on the initial design or software. Games are not developed in a vacuum. Your initial game design almost NEVER is the final product. Software goes through hundreds to thousands of iterations and gaming is not an exception. Using the analogy of running old software on newer hardware is not the same as running a game that was initially design for a specific hardware and then later updated to utilize newer hardware. If we are to rely on your incorrect assertion, there would be no games on either system at launch that can effectively take advantage of the newer consoles because these consoles weren't finalized prior to the start of their development.
There have been similar uses of fast non-flash based nvram in the enterprise (Workstations/HPC/Datacenters), for streaming and handling large data-sets (computed/pre-computed, latter being more exploited in the console) immediately on assets that can't fit (be wasted) in main memory of the GPU at a given time. It's just that the feature is now finally disseminated into the mass market console/consumers environment for the first time which is rather exciting.
That is not how things work. A game which is software can be design to utilize a variety of hardware to their "full" potential. The people who frequent this concept of holding back most likely have never develop any software in their life. A game that is in development can adopt new technologies that wasn't present on the initial design or software. Games are not developed in a vacuum. Your initial game design almost NEVER is the final product. Software goes through hundreds to thousands of iterations and gaming is not an exception. Using the analogy of running old software on newer hardware is not the same as running a game that was initially design for a specific hardware and then later updated to utilize newer hardware. If we are to rely on your incorrect assertion, there would be no games on either system at launch that can effectively take advantage of the newer consoles because these consoles weren't finalized prior to the start of their development.
No they don't man if you make a game to use ray tracing what will happen on xbox one?
See if you make a game for a lower denominator and as you add extras you add ray tracing that would be no problem,now even more than ever,the xbox one can't match or come even close to the SSD even on xbox series X,it doesn't have ray tracing or VRS,so you need to get your lower denominator up and running first them uping thing as you go.
That is funny because if you see the pics of Gears of war 5 man the changes between consoles is rather small,and you can see that even on the lower denominator,what changes some settings and resoltion and frames,this come with power standard basically unless your game is locked.
You see gears on xbox one vs xbox series X and it doesn't look twice as good,but the power difference is almost 12 times.
Exclusives always show the best your hardware have to offer but i am not talking about exclusive games that don't go to other platforms,but more in the line of those that are not held back by the lower denominators.
Killzone may not be a great game on launch but it was a very looking game on 2013,it wasn't tie to the PS3.
No they don't man if you make a game to use ray tracing what will happen on xbox one?
See if you make a game for a lower denominator and as you add extras you add ray tracing that would be no problem,now even more than ever,the xbox one can't match or come even close to the SSD even on xbox series X,it doesn't have ray tracing or VRS,so you need to get your lower denominator up and running first them uping thing as you go.
That is funny because if you see the pics of Gears of war 5 man the changes between consoles is rather small,and you can see that even on the lower denominator,what changes some settings and resoltion and frames,this come with power standard basically unless your game is locked.
You see gears on xbox one vs xbox series X and it doesn't look twice as good,but the power difference is almost 12 times.
Exclusives always show the best your hardware have to offer but i am not talking about exclusive games that don't go to other platforms,but more in the line of those that are not held back by the lower denominators.
Killzone may not be a great game on launch but it was a very looking game on 2013,it wasn't tie to the PS3.
Not trying to be rude but what you are saying not only ignored what I wrote in my comment but shows that you are not familiar with the development process.
There have been similar uses of fast non-flash based nvram in the enterprise (Workstations/HPC/Datacenters), for streaming and handling large data-sets (computed/pre-computed, latter being more exploited in the console) immediately on assets that can't fit (be wasted) in main memory of the GPU at a given time. It's just that the feature is now finally disseminated into the mass market console/consumers environment for the first time which is rather exciting.
AMD Radeon Pro SSG's 2TB storage has four Samsung 512GB SM961 (3200 MB/s seq read, 1800 MB/s seq write) NVMe drives.
Existing workstation-class PC motherboard can support two or more PEG v3.0 16X slots e.g. one fully populated PEG v3 slot with NVMe drive array + one PEG v3 slot NVIDIA Quadro RTX.
By the time AMD releases "Big NAVI" RDNA 2 GPUs, NVIDIA would release it's Ampere RTX with PEG v4 support.
1. Halo Infinite was "1st card citizen" developed on PC workstation with NVIDIA RTX card before AMD's RDNA 2 silicon.
2. Both Windows 10 version 2004 and Xbox Series X shares the same DirectX12 Ultimate API.
There's no major reason for Xbox Series X to be bound by CPU constrained XBO/X1X "DirectX12.X" API variant.
3. RDNA 1, RDNA 2 and Turing GPUs have supports for Shader Model 6's wave32 compute format which GCN does not support natively.
The "DirectX12 Ultimate API" convergence between PC and XSX is also hardware-based with AMD following NVIDIA's RTX lead.
4. Microsoft's GeForce RTX 2080 equipped PC workstation used to compare against XSX for Gears 5 wasn't an accident.
Man stop that is total bullshit.
The story had entered planning stages in 2015.[17] An announcement trailer was released on June 10, 2018.[18] The developer said that all of the scenes in the Halo Infinite trailer were running in the engine.
The game has been in development since 2015,the first trailer which was say to be in game came in june 2018,the RTX line of card came in september 2018 well after the halo trailer was not only showcase but even more time after it was made,remember the trailer was shown on june 2018 but it took time to develop.
After that first line NOTHING but fu**ING NOTHING you say there adress my point,stop arguing so much irrelevant bullshit what the fu** does windows 10 and windows from 2004 have in common? Yeah maybe the windows name.
Fact is games are made for the lowest common denominator that is a fact,and by the way you were lying the RTX came well after the Halo infinite trailer reveal stop inventing shit to defend MS lemming.
1. Notice the "story had entered planning stages in 2015".
Now, as the videos above show, NVIDIA RTX and the power of Volta-architecture GPUs make real-time ray tracing a reality in highly detailed videogame scenes at playable framerates. And through a collaboration with Microsoft, RTX will be fully supported in applications that utilize their new DirectX® Raytracing (DXR) API, and Volta-architecture GPUs, ensuring widespread support for the new features
----
NVIDIA has shown Volta's RTX demo on March 19 2018 and GDC 2018. Microsoft already has work-in-progress DXR API with NVIDIA since early 2018, hence MS has been working with NVIDIA's RTX R&D prior to March 2018!
Retail Turing RTX release does NOT equate developmental RTX releases.
DXR is a design rule for RDNA 2 and AMD is following NVIDIA's lead.
Volta RTX (DXR) was the devkit GPU card for the succeeding Turing RTX (DXR) cards.
Microsoft later replaced Volta RTX cards with Turing RTX cards. Microsoft has access to engineering Turing RTX versions prior to retail Turing RTX release.
From https://new.engineering.com/story/the-turing-gpu-architecture-and-nvidias-rtx-graphics-cards
News article date: March 2019.
From the news article, TU102 engineering version is already floating in the development community since February 2019 e.g. NVIDIA shows actual TU102 silicon. The news article shows EA's RTX enabled Battlefield V since March 2019, hence EA has been working on DXR/RTX prior to March 2019 demo.
AMD's RT hardware patent is dated around December 2017 (cite ref1) which is too late since NVIDIA/MS is already at an advance stage with RTX/DXR R&D with RTX/DXR demo ready on March 2018.
NVIDIA's Volta has RTX/DXR (shader based), Turing's spilt INT and FP CUDA core design and Tensor cores (deep learning AI of RT denoise pass) before March 2018 public demo.
Hint: both Turing and Volta are compute capability 7.x CUDA generation you fool!
You know fuking nothing about the lead time in the engineering development cycle.
Reference
Ref1 http://www.freepatentsonline.com/20190197761.pdf Date: December 2017, AMD's hardware RT.
----
From https://www.anandtech.com/show/14579/all-ryzen-qa-with-amd-ceo-dr-lisa-su
David Wang, AMD:We started RDNA before the Sony engagement. I think RDNA is revolutionary, and it is very flexible in terms of being able to be customized for different types of workloads.
NAVI was designed before the Sony engagement, hence debunking pro-Sony articles like https://segmentnext.com/2018/06/13/amd-navi-sony-playstation-5/
I don't know but usually the best looking games on Sony consoles have always be their exclusives,and they are made to take advantage of the hardware deeply.
This was to show how easy it was to get Xbox One games running on series X with updated visuals and performance. Wait until we have games built specifically for next gen hardware before whining about graphics.
No they don't man if you make a game to use ray tracing what will happen on xbox one?
See if you make a game for a lower denominator and as you add extras you add ray tracing that would be no problem,now even more than ever,the xbox one can't match or come even close to the SSD even on xbox series X,it doesn't have ray tracing or VRS,so you need to get your lower denominator up and running first them uping thing as you go.
That is funny because if you see the pics of Gears of war 5 man the changes between consoles is rather small,and you can see that even on the lower denominator,what changes some settings and resoltion and frames,this come with power standard basically unless your game is locked.
You see gears on xbox one vs xbox series X and it doesn't look twice as good,but the power difference is almost 12 times.
Exclusives always show the best your hardware have to offer but i am not talking about exclusive games that don't go to other platforms,but more in the line of those that are not held back by the lower denominators.
Killzone may not be a great game on launch but it was a very looking game on 2013,it wasn't tie to the PS3.
Not trying to be rude but what you are saying not only ignored what I wrote in my comment but shows that you are not familiar with the development process.
lol this board is funny because this shit should be common sense but It's easier to illustaite through games than trying to argue with a brick wall.
To make it easier using a last gen game, last gen game with current gen scaling and finally a current gen game with no ties to previous console limitations.
This is TLOU on PS3 designed ground up for that hardware.
This is TLOU Remastered on PS4 using all the updated features of the new console to "scale" it up to current gen.
There is indeed a perceivable difference when upscaled from PS3 to PS4, Yah?
However...
This is TLOU 2 on PS4 developed specifically for current gen hardware...
There is NO comparison between the 2. Your "scaled" and cross-gen games are completely blown out the water by games developed specifically for the current gen hardware. This will also be the case next gen.
All the "scaling" in the wold will never close this gap. You would literally have to "remake" the previous game specifically for current gen hardware to get similar results.
Example: Resident Evil 2, Final Fantasy Remake, Shadow of the Colossus ect.
THIS will always be the difference between a "scaled" game across multiple systems and one specifically for a single piece of powerful hardware.
We already know Series X won't have any exclusive games for 2 years and will be relying on 3rd party who are also going to be making PS4/XB1 upscaled games for the next 2 to 3 years.
lol you guys really sound delusional talking about "better graphics" on XSX. With what upscaled current gen games? That's what your going to get from MS and 3rd parties for 2 or 3 years. The lot of you PC and xbox fanboy are going to have to be taught what the term "next gen" actually means...you guys are clearly confused.
I don't know but usually the best looking games on Sony consoles have always be their exclusives,and they are made to take advantage of the hardware deeply.
The best looking game on consoles is RD2 and its multiplatform. Making the best looking game is not about unlocking hidden potential or secret sauce. It mainly revolves around budget and time. Even Hellblade looked absolutely stellar on both the PS4 and PC prior to coming to Xbox One and Switch. None of this have anything to do with the point you were trying to make besides being a convenient side track.
This was to show how easy it was to get Xbox One games running on series X with updated visuals and performance. Wait until we have games built specifically for next gen hardware before whining about graphics.
So at least 2 more years then?
I Gotcha but don't think anyone else but xbox fanboys are going to wait for that.
But hey you guys have already waited 5 years without having the best quality of games and graphics, so I guess 2 more years is nothing for you. Have fun with that lol
This was to show how easy it was to get Xbox One games running on series X with updated visuals and performance. Wait until we have games built specifically for next gen hardware before whining about graphics.
So at least 2 more years then?
I Gotcha but don't think anyone else but xbox fanboys are going to wait for that.
But hey you guys have already waited 5 years without having the best quality of games and graphics, so I guess 2 more years is nothing for you. Have fun with that lol
I don't know but usually the best looking games on Sony consoles have always be their exclusives,and they are made to take advantage of the hardware deeply.
The best looking game on consoles is RD2 and its multiplatform....
That's an opinion but RDR2 is up there with other Sony AAA caliber graphically impressive games, however 3rd parties that produce games with the quality and graphical impressiveness of Sony exclusives far and inbetween. It takes a lot of time and money to get the most out of each system which only a few 3rd party companies like Rockstar can do.
There are only a hand full of 3rd party games that can go toe to toe with the best Sony has produced this generation...
Also, you forget to mention the fact that RDR2 is a 100% current gen developed game with 0% ties to previous hardware, still this make RDR2 a fully current gen game unlike say something like Titanfall or destiny which both tone down graphics compared to other current gen games.
BTW: TLOU2 has better graphics than RDR2 and if you try to lean on upscaling done by X and PC, the PS5 will eliminate that goalpost argument once it's released.
@Pedro: budget and time. I'm glad you finally admit it.
Now my question is why would ms put a that required budget and time if their 1st party games will be on gamespass day 1 ?
Why wasnt the budget and time spent on the x1x version of halo 5 ? Or gears 5 ?
Like I said before unless the series x outsells the ps5 2 to 1 in the 1st month you will not see a game that truly shows it power.
Even then they might not risk going all out into game that wont sell at 65 cash well enough
Ms doesnt care for for super AAA.
As long as the online component the ip is kinda fun they are satisfied
All of this has been obvious since the second half of 360s life cycle.
Finally admit? Was there a moment that I have stated to contrary? Is this you and your goons new strategy? Randomly come up with scenarios that never happen.
Because they make money from their games. I know its a shocker. Also please don't try arguing that Halo Infinite is going to be a low budget game. Don't be silly.
Are we going to pretend that Halo 5 and Gears 5 are NOT high budget games? The complaint with these games were NEVER about the graphics.
Like I told the other loyalist. Educate yourself. Don't speak about things your are thoroughly ignorant about.
Man I sometimes forget what I post due to me being very busy this time in my life. You're right about the "fearful" part of my post.
The ps4 was not only the strongest, but also the cheapest. If the Xsex is more than the ps5, and the differences are negligible at best, then I can see the ps5 being the clear winner.
Man I sometimes forget what I post due to me being very busy this time in my life. You're right about the "fearful" part of my post.
The ps4 was not only the strongest, but also the cheapest. If the Xsex is more than the ps5, and the differences are negligible at best, then I can see the ps5 being the clear winner.
I would also anticipate the same outcome under those circumstances.
@Livecommander: You're special, but not in a good way.
It is nice to see you back after the debacle that was Death Stranding where you said that the gameplay that was shown (walking, walking & more walking) wasn't a true representation of the game and Kojima was hiding key gameplay elements, boy wasn't you wrong LOL.
The best looking game on consoles is RD2 and its multiplatform. Making the best looking game is not about unlocking hidden potential or secret sauce. It mainly revolves around budget and time. Even Hellblade looked absolutely stellar on both the PS4 and PC prior to coming to Xbox One and Switch. None of this have anything to do with the point you were trying to make besides being a convenient side track.
No is not and its assets are all over the place,you get good models mix with terrible ones and yes i OWN the game.
BC on XB1 was a mixed bag as far as performance goes. It wouldn't surprise me if both MS and Sony both have games that do BC exceptionally and others that will run worse than they would on their original system. Hope both are up to task of improving the BC environment on their consoles.
BC on XB1 was a mixed bag as far as performance goes. It wouldn't surprise me if both MS and Sony both have games that do BC exceptionally and others that will run worse than they would on their original system. Hope both are up to task of improving the BC environment on their consoles.
XB1's BC for X360 is gimped by weak Jaguar CPUs, hence MS used many software translation tricks that rivaled Apple's Rosetta.
Not trying to be rude but what you are saying not only ignored what I wrote in my comment but shows that you are not familiar with the development process.
lol this board is funny because this shit should be common sense but It's easier to illustaite through games than trying to argue with a brick wall.
To make it easier using a last gen game, last gen game with current gen scaling and finally a current gen game with no ties to previous console limitations.
This is TLOU on PS3 designed ground up for that hardware.
This is TLOU Remastered on PS4 using all the updated features of the new console to "scale" it up to current gen.
There is indeed a perceivable difference when upscaled from PS3 to PS4, Yah?
However...
This is TLOU 2 on PS4 developed specifically for current gen hardware...
There is NO comparison between the 2. Your "scaled" and cross-gen games are completely blown out the water by games developed specifically for the current gen hardware. This will also be the case next gen.
All the "scaling" in the wold will never close this gap. You would literally have to "remake" the previous game specifically for current gen hardware to get similar results.
Example: Resident Evil 2, Final Fantasy Remake, Shadow of the Colossus ect.
THIS will always be the difference between a "scaled" game across multiple systems and one specifically for a single piece of powerful hardware.
We already know Series X won't have any exclusive games for 2 years and will be relying on 3rd party who are also going to be making PS4/XB1 upscaled games for the next 2 to 3 years.
lol you guys really sound delusional talking about "better graphics" on XSX. With what upscaled current gen games? That's what your going to get from MS and 3rd parties for 2 or 3 years. The lot of you PC and xbox fanboy are going to have to be taught what the term "next gen" actually means...you guys are clearly confused.
My quick color change for TLOU based on TLOU 2's color theme.
Fact is that there's not a single PS4 exclusive that came out during the first two years that looks trully "Next gen" or that still stands today as a graphical showpiece. But don't let logic get in the way.
@Livecommander: You're special, but not in a good way.
It is nice to see you back after the debacle that was Death Stranding where you said that the gameplay that was shown (walking, walking & more walking) wasn't a true representation of the game and Kojima was hiding key gameplay elements, boy wasn't you wrong LOL.
Lol we were both were wrong actually. You and others spoke as if the way it starts would be the way it stays. You guys didnt even think there be much weapons etc.
The game brings action it just doesn't focus on it.
im currently learning how to edit and still will post a montage of more action packed death stranding sequences that are better or on par with what any editor can provide from almost all other , more praised games.
@Livecommander: You're special, but not in a good way.
It is nice to see you back after the debacle that was Death Stranding where you said that the gameplay that was shown (walking, walking & more walking) wasn't a true representation of the game and Kojima was hiding key gameplay elements, boy wasn't you wrong LOL.
Lol we were both were wrong actually. You and others spoke as if the way it starts would be the way it stays. You guys didnt even think there be much weapons etc.
The game brings action it just doesn't focus on it.
im currently learning how to edit and still will post a montage of more action packed death stranding sequences that are better or on par with what any editor can provide from almost all other , more praised games.
Yall only think i forgot lol
Nah dude you were adamant that Kojima was trolling everyone with the gameplay shown, and it turned out to be EXACTLY what was shown. You got owned and disappeared for a few months in the hope people would forget, you were WRONG lol.
@Pedro: budget and time. I'm glad you finally admit it.
Now my question is why would ms put a that required budget and time if their 1st party games will be on gamespass day 1 ?
Why wasnt the budget and time spent on the x1x version of halo 5 ? Or gears 5 ?
Like I said before unless the series x outsells the ps5 2 to 1 in the 1st month you will not see a game that truly shows it power.
Even then they might not risk going all out into game that wont sell at 65 cash well enough
Ms doesnt care for for super AAA.
As long as the online component the ip is kinda fun they are satisfied
All of this has been obvious since the second half of 360s life cycle.
Finally admit? Was there a moment that I have stated to contrary? Is this you and your goons new strategy? Randomly come up with scenarios that never happen.
Because they make money from their games. I know its a shocker. Also please don't try arguing that Halo Infinite is going to be a low budget game. Don't be silly.
Are we going to pretend that Halo 5 and Gears 5 are NOT high budget games? The complaint with these games were NEVER about the graphics.
Like I told the other loyalist. Educate yourself. Don't speak about things your are thoroughly ignorant about.
I think the answer is a mix of both of your answers. If the skeleton of the game has to keep in mind those jaguar cpu's and 5200rpm harddrives then you can't just scale the entire game design to the next gen platform of Zen 3 and 6gb/s SSD UNDER CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES. Complexity of AI can be completely designed for a certain CPU due to it's capable processing of calculations. The speed at which data is capable of being juggled around in a system can determine in how much time you can travel from one space to another in a game itself. For example, think of a Gears of War character that slowly moves from one corridor to the next. Scaling in this case is easy as streaming in and of data sets and set-pieces have been crafted to be able to run on last gen hardware. But now think of a game where the world comes at you very fast in an almost teleporting fashion from one scene to the next without a hitch in loading or streaming in all the layers of textures of a scene or all the AI that has to suddenly have to populate the scene. Such transitions are not possible on last gen X1X hardware without extensive loading or hitches along the way, and thus would limit game design under that circumstance if the developer would have liked to implement such an idea of instant scene switching. Certain things can be scaled easily such as "let's double the framerate" "let's double the draw distance" "let's double the polygon count on the character or the amount of particles on screen". But you can't just double the complexity of the AI with a built in scaler within an engine, you can't just scale pre-determined single player scenes containing numerous events that would crash old hardware. But the question is how much more is 2.5x the GPU Power and 4x the cpu power and 50x the CPU power gap? I personally think it's big enough to limit creativity if bound to older hardware.
@navyguy21: "From their studios, 3rd parties are free to do what they want. The first year is usually cross gen for both"
So Sony won't have an exclusive PS5 game day 1?
lol Sony already confirmed they will have launch exclusives for PS5.
This is just a bitter sad narrative lemmings are trying to push because MS shit on them with the news that they wouldn't be getting anything other than upscaled Xbox One games on Xbox Series X for the next 2 years.
Fact is that there's not a single PS4 exclusive that came out during the first two years that looks trully "Next gen" or that still stands today as a graphical showpiece. But don't let logic get in the way.
This is such bullshit is not even funny.
Infamous second son basically created a wave of bullshit post from lemmings claiming the game was nothing but bullshots and that it would not look like that since it was reveal on E3 2013.
I remember when the game launched and all was real time...lol
Finally admit? Was there a moment that I have stated to contrary? Is this you and your goons new strategy? Randomly come up with scenarios that never happen.
Because they make money from their games. I know its a shocker. Also please don't try arguing that Halo Infinite is going to be a low budget game. Don't be silly.
Are we going to pretend that Halo 5 and Gears 5 are NOT high budget games? The complaint with these games were NEVER about the graphics.
Like I told the other loyalist. Educate yourself. Don't speak about things your are thoroughly ignorant about.
I think the answer is a mix of both of your answers. If the skeleton of the game has to keep in mind those jaguar cpu's and 5200rpm harddrives then you can't just scale the entire game design to the next gen platform of Zen 3 and 6gb/s SSD UNDER CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES. Complexity of AI can be completely designed for a certain CPU due to it's capable processing of calculations. The speed at which data is capable of being juggled around in a system can determine in how much time you can travel from one space to another in a game itself. For example, think of a Gears of War character that slowly moves from one corridor to the next. Scaling in this case is easy as streaming in and of data sets and set-pieces have been crafted to be able to run on last gen hardware. But now think of a game where the world comes at you very fast in an almost teleporting fashion from one scene to the next without a hitch in loading or streaming in all the layers of textures of a scene or all the AI that has to suddenly have to populate the scene. Such transitions are not possible on last gen X1X hardware without extensive loading or hitches along the way, and thus would limit game design under that circumstance if the developer would have liked to implement such an idea of instant scene switching. Certain things can be scaled easily such as "let's double the framerate" "let's double the draw distance" "let's double the polygon count on the character or the amount of particles on screen". But you can't just double the complexity of the AI with a built in scaler within an engine, you can't just scale pre-determined single player scenes containing numerous events that would crash old hardware. But the question is how much more is 2.5x the GPU Power and 4x the cpu power and 50x the CPU power gap? I personally think it's big enough to limit creativity if bound to older hardware.
From https://www.tomsguide.com/news/first-xbox-series-x-gameplay-may-be-revealed-today-with-forza-motorsport-8
Forza Horizon 4
The demo show will reportedly continue with Forza Horizon 4. Here we will see how variable rate shading works on the Xbox Series X. VRS is a technique that allows the GPU to boost detail and quality in complex parts of the images while lowering its power needs in simpler areas.
The reasoning behind VRS is that our eyes and brain can’t focus on the totality of an image. If you are paying attention to the screen, your eyes will be focused on where the action is, which typically is the more complex part of the image. The graphics engine doesn’t have to spend so much power on the less complex, peripherals parts of the image. That results in power optimization that allows to boost detail even more or increase the frame rate.
The results? Playground Games — who develop the Forza Horizon series — added VRS to Forza Horizon 4 when it received its Xbox Series X development kits in December. That increased the frame rate in the game by a whooping 32% with “no optimizations, just using VRS in parts with motion blur.” According to the redditor, “VRS changes the way they design games (VRS as motion blur replacement),” pointing out that the” lead engineer says they can reach 4K/120 today on XSX thanks to RDNA2 architecture and the combined effort of AMD and Microsoft.”
Yeah, 4K and 120 frames per second.
Swapping FH4's blur motion into VRS version enables XSX's FH4 to reach 120 fps 4K.
If VRS improves the frame rate by 32 percent which yields 120 fps 4K, then non-VRS version would be 81.6 fps 4K, hence XSX GPU is about 2.72 times better than X1X GPU's FH4 results.
The "no optimizations" could mean running on GCN legacy mode (wave64 instructions) instead of RDNA mode (wave32 instructions)
When running on GCN legacy mode, XSX GPU is effectively ~16.3 TFLOPS GCN.
To double-check my TFLOPS conversion between RDNA vs GCN is based on the following AMD RDNA whitepaper
From https://www.tomsguide.com/news/first-xbox-series-x-gameplay-may-be-revealed-today-with-forza-motorsport-8
Yeah, 4K and 120 frames per second.
Swapping FH4's blur motion into VRS version enables XSX's FH4 to reach 120 fps 4K.
If VRS improves the frame rate by 32 percent which yields 120 fps 4K, then non-VRS version would be 81.6 fps 4K, hence XSX GPU is about 2.72 times better than X1X GPU's FH4 results.
The "no optimizations" could mean running on GCN legacy mode (wave64 instructions) instead of RDNA mode (wave32 instructions)
When running on GCN legacy mode, XSX GPU is effectively ~16.3 TFLOPS GCN.
To double-check my TFLOPS conversion between RDNA vs GCN is based on the following AMD RDNA whitepaper
I think the answer is a mix of both of your answers. If the skeleton of the game has to keep in mind those jaguar cpu's and 5200rpm harddrives then you can't just scale the entire game design to the next gen platform of Zen 3 and 6gb/s SSD UNDER CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES. Complexity of AI can be completely designed for a certain CPU due to it's capable processing of calculations. The speed at which data is capable of being juggled around in a system can determine in how much time you can travel from one space to another in a game itself. For example, think of a Gears of War character that slowly moves from one corridor to the next. Scaling in this case is easy as streaming in and of data sets and set-pieces have been crafted to be able to run on last gen hardware. But now think of a game where the world comes at you very fast in an almost teleporting fashion from one scene to the next without a hitch in loading or streaming in all the layers of textures of a scene or all the AI that has to suddenly have to populate the scene. Such transitions are not possible on last gen X1X hardware without extensive loading or hitches along the way, and thus would limit game design under that circumstance if the developer would have liked to implement such an idea of instant scene switching. Certain things can be scaled easily such as "let's double the framerate" "let's double the draw distance" "let's double the polygon count on the character or the amount of particles on screen". But you can't just double the complexity of the AI with a built in scaler within an engine, you can't just scale pre-determined single player scenes containing numerous events that would crash old hardware. But the question is how much more is 2.5x the GPU Power and 4x the cpu power and 50x the CPU power gap? I personally think it's big enough to limit creativity if bound to older hardware.
Paragraphs. :)
Every gen I see the same pipe dream on AI. AI has remained pretty stagnant because developers general don't care to improve it and most games don't see much of advantage on advancing it. With that said, AI can be scaled. An AI can have routines that are more complex and adapt to the capability of the system its running on. A basic optimization as the frequency of the routine can be easily implemented depending on the systems specs. Faster systems runs the routine more often than the slower systems. This is currently implemented in games.
I am currently working on a game in which the player will be moving relatively fast between areas and would require all of the scenes to be streamed in. There would be absolutely no loading times in the game. The world is designed in the way we intend it to be. Then divided up for optimal loading and memory management. It would be running on these slower drives and steps would be taken to pause the player if the assets aren't loaded fast enough for systems that are significantly slower. For the folks with stronger systems, they will have the best experience. This idea of being held back is entirely up to the developer. If you want to be held back by hurdles(which exist on every hardware) then you most definitely can. But, the ones that work with weaker systems in mind, development of more efficient code and the creation of innovative solutions to solve problems encountered. These solutions benefit the stronger systems.
@tormentos: I was going to mention Infamous actually. That game looked good because of the particle effects just like Halo will show off ray-tracing despite being cross gen. (And you can quote me on that)
It's nowhere near a top best looking game for this gen. That's why the faux outrage you cows are creating over Xbox having cross gen titles for the first two years is silly. ( Though imo MS should have just compromised for for the first year)
I absolutely agree that if you cross develop a game you'll end up compromising stuff. But when you develop a game for a low install base you also compromise stuff because the investment is not worth it. You do just enough. Also because even in-house programmers have a limited knowledge of the hardware.
Ironically my favourite game this gen, and one of my favourites ever, BotW, it's a cross-gen title running on what's basically previous gen hardware. That just goes to prove that I care more about concept and execution than hardware.
You, BoxRekt, Ron and the likes just make it difficult not to troll since you make any discussion impossible.
I think the answer is a mix of both of your answers. If the skeleton of the game has to keep in mind those jaguar cpu's and 5200rpm harddrives then you can't just scale the entire game design to the next gen platform of Zen 3 and 6gb/s SSD UNDER CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES. Complexity of AI can be completely designed for a certain CPU due to it's capable processing of calculations. The speed at which data is capable of being juggled around in a system can determine in how much time you can travel from one space to another in a game itself. For example, think of a Gears of War character that slowly moves from one corridor to the next. Scaling in this case is easy as streaming in and of data sets and set-pieces have been crafted to be able to run on last gen hardware. But now think of a game where the world comes at you very fast in an almost teleporting fashion from one scene to the next without a hitch in loading or streaming in all the layers of textures of a scene or all the AI that has to suddenly have to populate the scene. Such transitions are not possible on last gen X1X hardware without extensive loading or hitches along the way, and thus would limit game design under that circumstance if the developer would have liked to implement such an idea of instant scene switching. Certain things can be scaled easily such as "let's double the framerate" "let's double the draw distance" "let's double the polygon count on the character or the amount of particles on screen". But you can't just double the complexity of the AI with a built in scaler within an engine, you can't just scale pre-determined single player scenes containing numerous events that would crash old hardware. But the question is how much more is 2.5x the GPU Power and 4x the cpu power and 50x the CPU power gap? I personally think it's big enough to limit creativity if bound to older hardware.
Paragraphs. :)
Every gen I see the same pipe dream on AI. AI has remained pretty stagnant because developers general don't care to improve it and most games don't see much of advantage on advancing it. With that said, AI can be scaled. An AI can have routines that are more complex and adapt to the capability of the system its running on. A basic optimization as the frequency of the routine can be easily implemented depending on the systems specs. Faster systems runs the routine more often than the slower systems. This is currently implemented in games.
I am currently working on a game in which the player will be moving relatively fast between areas and would require all of the scenes to be streamed in. There would be absolutely no loading times in the game. The world is designed in the way we intend it to be. Then divided up for optimal loading and memory management. It would be running on these slower drives and steps would be taken to pause the player if the assets aren't loaded fast enough for systems that are significantly slower. For the folks with stronger systems, they will have the best experience. This idea of being held back is entirely up to the developer. If you want to be held back by hurdles(which exist on every hardware) then you most definitely can. But, the ones that work with weaker systems in mind, development of more efficient code and the creation of innovative solutions to solve problems encountered. These solutions benefit the stronger systems.
So essentially you want the weaker console to have loading times, and in a multiplayer based game you plan to do this how?
From https://www.tomsguide.com/news/first-xbox-series-x-gameplay-may-be-revealed-today-with-forza-motorsport-8
Yeah, 4K and 120 frames per second.
Swapping FH4's blur motion into VRS version enables XSX's FH4 to reach 120 fps 4K.
If VRS improves the frame rate by 32 percent which yields 120 fps 4K, then non-VRS version would be 81.6 fps 4K, hence XSX GPU is about 2.72 times better than X1X GPU's FH4 results.
The "no optimizations" could mean running on GCN legacy mode (wave64 instructions) instead of RDNA mode (wave32 instructions)
When running on GCN legacy mode, XSX GPU is effectively ~16.3 TFLOPS GCN.
To double-check my TFLOPS conversion between RDNA vs GCN is based on the following AMD RDNA whitepaper
1.33 x 12.147 = 16.15551 TFLOPS GCN via GCN legacy mode
1.418 x x 12.147 = 17.20825 TFLOPS in GCN via RDNA native mode
18% better GPU man not even half of last gen how sad.
That's a full systems test with desktop-class CPU in operation.
Don't expect RTX 2080 Ti FE level results i.e. RTX 2080 like results have lower limits.
Your PS5 also has a desktop-class CPU with just 448 GB/s shared memory bus i.e. RX-5600 XT 36 CU with 2230 Mhz clock speed OC with 336 GB/s memory bandwidth for it's near worst case. PS5 will need resource-saving tricks earlier than XSX.
@tormentos: I was going to mention Infamous actually. That game looked good because of the particle effects just like Halo will show off ray-tracing despite being cross gen. (And you can quote me on that)
It's nowhere near a top best looking game for this gen. That's why the faux outrage you cows are creating over Xbox having cross gen titles for the first two years is silly. ( Though imo MS should have just compromised for for the first year)
I absolutely agree that if you cross develop a game you'll end up compromising stuff. But when you develop a game for a low install base you also compromise stuff because the investment is not worth it. You do just enough. Also because even in-house programmers have a limited knowledge of the hardware.
Ironically my favourite game this gen, and one of my favourites ever, BotW, it's a cross-gen title running on what's basically previous gen hardware. That just goes to prove that I care more about concept and execution than hardware.
You, BoxRekt, Ron and the likes just make it difficult not to troll since you make any discussion impossible.
Your BotW argument is subjective and it covers art style, story plots, and other art-related creative processes. Most of my arguments do not cover these topics.
Finally admit? Was there a moment that I have stated to contrary? Is this you and your goons new strategy? Randomly come up with scenarios that never happen.
Because they make money from their games. I know its a shocker. Also please don't try arguing that Halo Infinite is going to be a low budget game. Don't be silly.
Are we going to pretend that Halo 5 and Gears 5 are NOT high budget games? The complaint with these games were NEVER about the graphics.
Like I told the other loyalist. Educate yourself. Don't speak about things your are thoroughly ignorant about.
I think the answer is a mix of both of your answers. If the skeleton of the game has to keep in mind those jaguar cpu's and 5200rpm harddrives then you can't just scale the entire game design to the next gen platform of Zen 3 and 6gb/s SSD UNDER CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES. Complexity of AI can be completely designed for a certain CPU due to it's capable processing of calculations. The speed at which data is capable of being juggled around in a system can determine in how much time you can travel from one space to another in a game itself. For example, think of a Gears of War character that slowly moves from one corridor to the next. Scaling in this case is easy as streaming in and of data sets and set-pieces have been crafted to be able to run on last gen hardware. But now think of a game where the world comes at you very fast in an almost teleporting fashion from one scene to the next without a hitch in loading or streaming in all the layers of textures of a scene or all the AI that has to suddenly have to populate the scene. Such transitions are not possible on last gen X1X hardware without extensive loading or hitches along the way, and thus would limit game design under that circumstance if the developer would have liked to implement such an idea of instant scene switching. Certain things can be scaled easily such as "let's double the framerate" "let's double the draw distance" "let's double the polygon count on the character or the amount of particles on screen". But you can't just double the complexity of the AI with a built in scaler within an engine, you can't just scale pre-determined single player scenes containing numerous events that would crash old hardware. But the question is how much more is 2.5x the GPU Power and 4x the cpu power and 50x the CPU power gap? I personally think it's big enough to limit creativity if bound to older hardware.
Both Forza Horizon 3 and 4 are demonstrated open-world games with 30 fps limit on XBO and X1X.
X1X's FH4 has 1080p with 60 fps i.e. the CPU too weak to command the GPU with half of 4K at 60 fps.
Playground Games (UK) is designing a role-playing game with Turn10's ForzaTech 3D game engine.
Microsoft already demonstrated open-world game Flight Simulator 2020.
MS's demonstrated large game world-scale example.
Loading Video...
Loading Video...
Adaptive texture technology demonstration
Online mode texture stream
Offline mode texture stream
Local cache mode texture stream
Simulator: Planet Earth via Azure Bing map.
Microsoft Flight Simulator 2020 is effectively Forza Horizon for planes.
@boxrekt: "lol Sony already confirmed they will have launch exclusives for PS5."
Besides godfall, what else do you think they will have day 1?
For starters...
Bluepoint Games' PS5 Project 'Aims to Define the Visual Benchmark' for Next-Gen
Remake masters Bluepoint Games is talking a very, very big game when it comes to its mysterious PlayStation 5 title. Through various comedic Twitter teases and comments published alongside fresh next-gen details in Wired articles, the Austin-based studio suggests that it is cooking up something hot. It's probably Demon's Souls, and with it, the developer is aiming "to define the visual benchmark for the next generation of gaming hardware."
The quote has surfaced by way of a refresh of Bluepoint Games' website, where it makes a tantalizing case to bring budding developers under its wing. From discussing its previous projects, including Shadow of the Colossus to Uncharted: The Nathan Drake Collection, to explaining its culture, it sounds like a lovely place to work. Although, we're here to learn about the team's take on the From Software masterpiece. If this website refresh is anything to go by, Demon's Souls on Sony's next hardware platform is going to be a real looker.
While the project was always assumed to launch alongside the PS5 in late 2020, the quote continues to suggest that Demon's Souls will indeed be a launch title for the system, making it the largest title in the studio's history.
And Sony hasn't had their PS5 blowout show yet, you already know that but Sony will reveal more of their lineup at that event.
The point is Sony has CONFIRMED they will have PS5 exclusives starting at launch, exactly what they will be, we will find out more when they tell us.
MS CONFIRMED they WONT have ANY Series X exclusives for 2 years, so that's all we need to know to confirm they won't compete with Sony in next gen games. Besides current gen upscaled Halo Infinite, you don't know what MS has for XSX launch either....but recently this was also confirmed...
Loading Video...
🤷♂️ But if you're into MS's gamepass caliber games this should be right up your ally.
Log in to comment