Microsoft: "Tiled Resources" Key To Xbox One Graphics
- Thread starter Earnest Cavalli
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I would have gotten both if I could afford it. Decided to go with XbOne for the XBL architecture and because I have had an Xbox for years. I might buy a PS4 down the line though.ZZoMBiE13 said:
Basically every piece of hardware uses shortcuts of some kind-- it's called optimization.neppakyo said:
Id Software is well-known for pioneering or at least popularizing a lot of techniques that let you squeeze more performance out of computers-- look up adaptive tile refresh or raycasting for some of the earlier examples of this. (The later examples are more impressive, but also more difficult to understand.)
Yeah, I'm not usually a "day one" kind of guy. But I happen to be in a fortunate financial situation right now so I thought "What the heck?" and put down a pre-order on both. Well PS4 first and then post 180 for Microsoft. But I was always going to eventually get both. And I'm glad MS dialed back on it's stance. I'm still not convinced it'll be the better system, but for me it really comes down to games and they both made great showings at E3 with titles I'm interested in and excited to play.John Schnell said:
And no way am I going to miss a Dead Rising (again, post 180). That has been my favorite series since 2006.
I never said it was a new technology, just an interesting one that allows for higher frame rates.neppakyo said:
I was thinking of hopping ship to the PS4, but now that Captain Microsoft has plugged the hole in the hull i'm much more comfortable in the XbOne. Plus my friends and I have always chosen XBL over PSN.ZZoMBiE13 said:Yeah, I'm not usually a "day one" kind of guy. But I happen to be in a fortunate financial situation right now so I thought "What the heck?" and put down a pre-order on both. Well PS4 first and then post 180 for Microsoft. But I was always going to eventually get both. And I'm glad MS dialed back on it's stance. I'm still not convinced it'll be the better system, but for me it really comes down to games and they both made great showings at E3 with titles I'm interested in and excited to play.John Schnell said:
And no way am I going to miss a Dead Rising (again, post 180). That has been my favorite series since 2006.
Not terribly excited, no.
Notable phrase: "to render more detail in areas that your character is focusing on" (emphasis mine.) So... Basically, the center of the screen, where your cross-hair is located in FPS games? The middle of your hood in racing games? And so on? I mean, yeah, it's not a bad idea; it's going to make for crappy screen shots that are even less indicative of what your game looks like than the ones we get now, but I suppose it could yield some modest improvements on the graphics the player is most likely to notice in-game.
When they can adjust on the fly the detail of what the player is looking at, we might actually have a good reason to integrate a camera into a gaming system.
Notable phrase: "to render more detail in areas that your character is focusing on" (emphasis mine.) So... Basically, the center of the screen, where your cross-hair is located in FPS games? The middle of your hood in racing games? And so on? I mean, yeah, it's not a bad idea; it's going to make for crappy screen shots that are even less indicative of what your game looks like than the ones we get now, but I suppose it could yield some modest improvements on the graphics the player is most likely to notice in-game.
When they can adjust on the fly the detail of what the player is looking at, we might actually have a good reason to integrate a camera into a gaming system.
Companies have this as an option, not as a requirement. Other wise the problems you point out would be a huge issue.Callate said:
Sounds like some really aggressive LOD/Mipmapping with a lot of post-effects(blurs) to try and hide it. TBH, not a bad idea but also not really new or particularly impressive.
It actually is something that can probably be abused for "bullshots". They take their shots with the original full uncompressed megatexture, and when they ship it out they compress the megatexture to fit onto a single blu-ray. Then the game engine reduces the quality further to hold a nice constant fps. Pretty screenshots, but not what is delivered. Like Rage.Callate said:
If this does allow for ridiculously consistent frames per second like Rage that would be nice for the feeling of a lot of games. Not that constant fps matters as much with a controller instead of the snappy response of a mouse.
Seems to me that pop in will be more of a rolling replacement, but I agree..... this is an interesting thing to flaunt.Jandau said:
AND THE CROWD GOES WILD!!!!! Oh wait, no, those were just Microsoft employees.
Anyway, late to the party as always, this feature's been there, done that. Slapping a flashy new name on it won't change anything, at least not for the people who know about the technology. God knows it'll probably sell to those Halo fanboys though.
Anyway, late to the party as always, this feature's been there, done that. Slapping a flashy new name on it won't change anything, at least not for the people who know about the technology. God knows it'll probably sell to those Halo fanboys though.
So, dynamic LOD adjustments, just not based on the players distance to the object, but on the distance of the object to the center of the players FOV. Not exactly new, and there's got to be a reason why no one else does it. If I'd have to guess, I'd say there's too many people who don't have the tunnel vision neccessary to not notice that.
I am suddenly reminded of Blast Processing.
I wonder why, what with Microsoft slapping that wonderful buzzword in my face.
I wonder why, what with Microsoft slapping that wonderful buzzword in my face.
On the contrary, most everyone probably is already doing it. A lot of techniques like this already exist and are used a lot.Whoracle said:
The only difference is that others don't advertise decade-old inventions as new features for an upcoming console.
It's basically the XBone advertising itself like this:
Not exactly. That's the visual leaves, which cut out parts of the level you can't see. In most games there is also a practice of cutting out all the faces/polygons behind what the player/camera is looking at (dunno if that's the case in L4D).Tucker154 said:
OT: Just because MS decided to combine other elements with that and gave it a fancy name doesn't exactly make it anything new or revolutionary. It seems to be a bit more advanced mix of visleafs (kinda), LOD management (every fucking game ever) and mipmapping (ditto).
Essentially they're touting they've improved rendering technology from Doom. Well I got news for you: So did everybody else.
Don't mean shit if Rockstar San Diego comes to port GTAIV to your console with its bloated usage of resources and inefficient world loading, can't hit 30 FPS and make you cry sweet lizardman tears.
TBH, as I understand it, not many games do that. It's not "Don't compute stuff that's outside of the FOV", but "Render stuff that's on the fringe of the FOV in lower quality". I checked 3 games for that since I read that post (Uncharted 3 [PS3], The Secret World [PC], and Kingdom Hearts II [PS2]), and none of those do that.Hagi said:
It's easy to test: Stand still, and compare the center of your screen to the borders. Any difference in fidelity?
Care to hook me up with a few games that implement this? I want to see if it's noticable.
Well I'm unsure on the exact implementation as Microsoft simply doesn't seem to mention this. There's a lot of factors when it comes to texture quality.Whoracle said:
There's the size of the texture itself, a 2048 texture is going to cost less performance than a 4096 texture, swapping them out when you focus on them might be smart but it's got the obvious issue seen in Rage where you get texture popping. On top of that in order to swap them out you're going to have to hold them both in memory, which takes up a lot of space. From what I can read it might be this, in which case Rage would be a good example to look at, but on the other hand this isn't the best way to use techniques like this because of the texture popping thing.
I may be overestimating Microsoft here but what I'm hoping it is instead for example AA techniques like seen in the ENB mod series ( www.enbdev.com ) which you can see in games like Skyrim and GTA IV ( when using the mod, do note that it also changes many other things in how objects are rendered ). What this does is that it using high quality AA near the center of the screen and gradually decreases the quality towards the edges. So the center will be rendered as if you're using the best possible AA setting, but since the very edges are much lower in quality the actual performance cost is only that of a medium AA setting.
On top of that what's also possible is to decrease the quality of many supporting textures like normal maps, when they're not near the center of the screen. This would be a lot less noticeable when switching so shouldn't produce the texture popping issue mentioned above whilst still causing an increase in performance.
Those two are much more subtle and very hard to notice when just playing, and since games don't exactly list their rendering techniques it's hard to provide examples unless you've got issues like texture popping in Rage or an explicit change list like for the ENB mod.
What's simpler to say though is that the concept of using less intensive rendering techniques and resources near the edges of the screen has been around for well over a decade. Chances that DirectX, which has pretty much always been running after OpenGL, is featuring something that hasn't been done before is practically zero.