Xbox One May Still Get 1080p Titanfall In Post-Release Patch

rated by 0 users
This post has 11 Replies | 0 Followers

Top 10 Contributor
Posts 26,748
Points 1,210,300
Joined: Sep 2007
ForumsAdministrator
News Posted: Mon, Mar 10 2014 5:23 PM
Expectations are high for the imminent launch of Titanfall. The game is a major test for Microsoft's Xbox One -- its one of the biggest exclusive projects, its beta was well-reviewed, and gamers have been looking for a game that would clarify just what the Xbox One is capable of when compared against the PlayStation 4. The game's beta ran an odd resolution -- 1408x792 -- but according to an interview with Respawn lead engineer Richard Baker, an upgrade could still be in the cards.

Digital Foundry spoke to Baker, who said: " One of the big tricks is how much ESRAM we're going to use, so we're thinking of not using hardware MSAA and instead using FXAA to make it so we don't have to have this larger render target. We're going to experiment. The target is either 1080p non-anti-aliased or 900p with FXAA. We're trying to optimise... we don't want to give up anything for higher res."

This is passing odd, for several reasons. It's not surprising that the Titanfall team would opt to dump multi-sampled antialiasing in exchange for higher resolutions; MSAA's impact on GPU performance is well known. What's a little more unusual is that the developer would identify FXAA as the difference between running at 900p and 1080p in the final product.



Here's the thing to understand about FXAA / MLAA -- it's not actually antialiasing at all. In conventional antialiasing, the GPU takes multiple sub-pixel samples of a point in space, then combines that data to create a smoother (albeit somewhat blurrier) line. This requires sub-pixel precision and it's computationally expensive. FXAA, in contrast, uses pixel-level precision to identify discontinuities (jaggies) in frame buffer data and then re-draw the image for better visual quality.



The impact of FXAA / MLAA on performance is supposed to be modest. That's the point. In the graph above (drawn from Intel's original presentation on the topic), the purple and red lines are the two to pay attention to. As scene complexity increases, the cost of FXAA stays consistent -- just above the cost of rendering a scene with no AA at all.

The jump from 1600x900 to 1920x1080 isn't small -- that's a 44% leap in total number of pixels, and it's downright odd that the performance gap between FXAA and no antialiasing whatsoever might require the Titanfall team to drop the resolution so drastically. But there's a potential answer to this question that dovetails with what we've heard from other sources -- the Xbox One's EDRAM cache might be a little too small.

A smaller-than-ideal cache wouldn't completely cripple a game, but it could create exactly the kinds of problems we've seen with launch titles. When the cache isn't big enough for everything to fit in comfortably, developers have to get creative about ensuring that data is loaded and evicted at precisely the right moment. Suddenly, it's imperative that algorithms be optimized for size, textures need excellent compression, and the game needs to be very, very stingy when it comes to loading only necessary information into cache. Information that gets evicted needs to stay evicted; information that's critical to the game's operation needs to take up as little room as possible.

If this is true, it suggests that 1080p isn't impossible on the Xbox One, but we may never see many titles take advantage of it. If it requires significant optimization to hit that level while 720p is readily available, the majority of game studios will likely settle for the 720p experience. 
  • | Post Points: 170
Top 500 Contributor
Posts 143
Points 985
Joined: Mar 2014
Jason replied on Mon, Mar 10 2014 5:59 PM

That's the biggest problem I have with the Xbox One. A great deal of the games run at lower resolutions on the One than on the PS4. Microsoft said the with cloud computing that performance is likely to increase in the future but we'll just have to wait and see. Would really want to rely on the cloud to get the best visuals possible though. Another reason PC is the way to go.

  • | Post Points: 5
Not Ranked
Posts 8
Points 40
Joined: Mar 2014

i will play this on pc, not intrested in this stupid console war so i choose the pc version for this game

  • | Post Points: 5
Not Ranked
Posts 2
Points 10
Joined: Jul 2013

Amen already have 1080p on pc anyways

  • | Post Points: 5
replied on Mon, Mar 10 2014 8:45 PM

O.o is not 1080 on XBOX??? why??

  • | Post Points: 5
Not Ranked
Posts 43
Points 380
Joined: Mar 2013

<

This sounds like a case of Not Thinking Ahead when the hardware was being developed.

  • | Post Points: 5
Not Ranked
Posts 3
Points 30
Joined: Mar 2014

Damn not bad.

  • | Post Points: 5
Not Ranked
Posts 32
Points 250
Joined: Mar 2014
koltirons replied on Tue, Mar 11 2014 4:47 AM

im with you guys PC > console wars, that being said sony exclusives do look tempting. definately grabbing my copy of titanfall for pc!

  • | Post Points: 5
Not Ranked
Posts 3
Points 15
Joined: Jan 2014

MS can't do ANYTHING right...too bad they let that moron Shrek, I mean Ballmer, run the company into the ground for so long.

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 200 Contributor
Posts 434
Points 3,340
Joined: Jul 2013
Location: United States,Alabama

Titanfall would of been fun on ps4 why go xbox exclusive >.<

  • | Post Points: 5
Not Ranked
Posts 7
Points 50
Joined: Mar 2014

I dont see why someone would want the overpriced game systems that are now coming out.. For the same amount of money (+ a little more) you get almost all the same games, with better performance.

  • | Post Points: 5
Not Ranked
Posts 1
Points 5
Joined: Mar 2014

Because the next gen consoles are weak lol

  • | Post Points: 5
Page 1 of 1 (12 items) | RSS