It's UE4. The basics of the engine are already optimized for each consoles.
-
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.
Digital Foundry: Ace Combat 7: - Every Version Tested!
- Thread starter chandoog
- Start date
This is a topic about the differences, surely you must understand the frustration or disappointment that a more powerful system is performing worse.
The game is not exclusive, that's when one can expect games to take advantage of the hardware to the fullest but to have a system more powerful perform worse for the exact same game is rather odd. The PC version is really the only one that concerns me and the limited anti aliasing and other features is also disappointing. That's why I will wait for a deep deep sale and the PSVR exclusivity (for one year apparently) is just another reason for me to hold off.
How is it concerning ?
As for the anti-aliasing option, it's not that limited. For post processing ? Sure. Only FXAA.
There's supersampling though.
But for the rest, it seems to perform well.
Could it have more options ? Sure. But even then I believe it'll be easy to tweak the ini file for LoD and draw distances.
They absolutely give the same amount of support to all developers who request it, and they certainly give as much as Sony. This is a suspect post if ever I've seen one.
Glad I'm waiting for the PC version. FXAA is trash, but won't matter too much at 4K. Non-scalable HUD is disappointing.
I'm guessing many of the little things with the PC version will be fixable with INI tweaks, like you can do with Dragon Quest XI. Pushing the draw distance higher, enabling TAA, etc. It's possible the game isn't made with TAA in mind and you'll get loads of ghosting with it, but since there's motion blur here which works with the same components, that may not be the case.
Game is kind of a mixed bag playing on a 1400p monitor with a X1X. The graphics themselves and effects looks really good but the image quality could defo be better at times. I also havent noticed the fps drops but that might be because i dont play with a fps counter. But the visuals themselves minus image quality together with the kickass sound and soundtrack make it for a nice experience flying around.
So you are saying publisher can decide what is displayed on MS Xbox dash, and on the MS Xbox storefront?
I would imagine everything on MS store and on the XBox dash has to be submitted to MS to be approved and put up on the Dash. I would imagine MS keeps completel control on that side of things
Sure, but the data comes from the publishers/developers. Which means, if they don't submit that data, it won't appear.
Basically, there is no detection happening here - whether something shows up as X enhanced or not is entirely based on submissions from developers. Just because it lacks that flag doesn't mean it isn't X enhanced, basically.
I find it very strange why Namco haven't told MS (whey they have for every other Namco Enhanced XBox game) why it's not on the Dash or the store and why MS taken Ace Combat 7 off the official XBox One Enhanced site. Its almost as if Namco or MS are ashamed to say its enhanced. Saying that it's such a crap basic XBox One X enchantment, maybe they are
I don't think there is 'shame' or any other emotional elements at play here. That's not how this works.
It's not a crap enhancement, though. The base Xbox version is terrible and I wouldn't recommend it. The X version is 1080p60 and mostly locked. It looks great.
You need to stop doubling down on this, chief. You're embarrassing yourself in front of the adults.
Of course, but as I've mentioned before Microsoft doesn't do much. Unravel 2 for example is listed as 4K yet is only 1080p. Microsoft don't really care what developers advertise
Or maybe they just dont care about these labels. A 2.25 times boost in resolution and higher res effects is decent enough. It's a game made on a tight budget. You cant have mid gen upgrade consoles and ask at the same time for all games to support them or follow up. It wont happen and if it's what you're expecting, you're playing on the wrong platform.
Precisely. The list and the subsequent labels mean little in the end as it's not well managed.
I'm getting the feeling that some people thought there was some sort of auto-detection thing happening here.
So condescending and with a insulting post like that, I think you're showing yourself up tbh
I guess. But I find it weird not just the lack of labels but when MS have taken Ace Combat 7 off it's XBox One enhanced website when it was originally up on there, untill very recently.
Sure but that doesn't change the fact that it's enhanced. Which was the original point.
It was also listed with 4K and HDR, probably a miscommunication with PR. Then when the devs clarified it wasn't 4K or HDR they just removed all labeling entirely despite it still being technically Enhanced. Wish it was easier to reach out to Project Aces about this
By the current state, normally UE4 should be optimised for every platform. I don't know which version they used for the game.
Didn't the developer hit back on twitter and say parts of the game we in 4K and that the test was done on early code?. Or it may have been another game sorry :)
Good points. It all seems a bit of a cock up and miscommunications. Oh well still an amazing game that looks fab too
The lighting pass is done in 4K but the final frame is 1080p and with jaggies to boot. Game is undoubtedly still 1080p.
While the X has better hardware on paper, it has a different API than the Pro. How well does the X handle massive draw distances?
a bit funny how the GOTY18 has massive impressive LOD quality detailed drawdistances, and it is 4K on the X and not on the Pro. It is never that simple, as you must very well be better point to the handling of streaming of Open world's culling methods ir something, in ACombat case. The thing is with UE4 it is always badly used on Japan devs mostly. The res. of SCalibur6 being pathetic and looking like a last-gen game (another bamco game) and on the other hand you have the mighty impressive UEngine current gen Injustice/MKombat games.
It really doesn't matter I think, since the gap in power is too wide.
They simply stopped optimizing the XBO version in favor of the PS4 version at some point I'd wager, so the X is running outdated code. I can't think of another explanation.
It's not a "on paper" related thing.
No API choice can make that gap that small.
What happened here is basically devs going for good enough results.
The only part of the PS4 pro that is undeniably superior to the X is the numer of ROPs (rasterisation units) and they are needed for volumetric fog.
I think this might be a large part of the issue too.
And it's not a small difference either, the pro has twice the number of ROPS (64 vs 32 in the X). This used to be a primary measure of GPU power but it's not anymore.. Until you actually need a huge number of texels/s.
That might very well explain it considering the massive use of volumetric clouds in the game.
ROP advantage is only useful when you are rendering simple polygons. (Rendering shadowmaps etc.)
With any decent shader and texture sampling other limitations will become a lot more important. (Texture units, ALUs and bandwidth.)
Truesky is a proper volumetric renderer, so not many polygons rendered, if any.
Yes, it used to be important but not so much anymore unless the game relies on them heavily.
And if this game does that, this is probably the only hardware advantage that the pro has that could explain the differences except software optimisations.
For the base xbox, this only has 16 ROPs and it is in line with the massive drop compared to PS4 which has 32, same as xbox x.
That's why I'm hoing next generation isn't so disproportionate. One might have better hardware, one might have better customer service, one might be more pro-consumer (region locking, censorship, etc.) . I really despise third party titles having exclusive deals (such as DLC, timed exclusives, VR etc.) and favoring one system but I don't blame them at all, it's all about money.
This one is hard because it been attaced to PlayStation since 1996 so we should expect to see this a huge difference in sales between the 2 to be honest.
or it could be a hint as to why the Xbox version isn't selling as well. Why would anybody buy the gimped version?
anyways, I could buy the PS4 version but I'm not rewarding them for a half assed job with a sale. That volumetric cloud BS is just a terrible excuse for bad optimization.
I wonder how much of the pie the PC version will take when it comes out. I'd imagine it'd hold a significant chunk of sales.
The Xbox One X version of AC7 is not "the gimped version".
It's 1080p, 60fps with only a few tiny framerate dips.
EDIT: If you're talking about the Xbox One S, version, then I agree with you.
So was Tomb Raider. Sorry but I will never understand the link to a game and a console brand loyalty other than first party titles.
TR have always been way more successful and popular than AC tho. I would expect the TR player base to go where the series goes.