Top
200°

Performance Analysis: Titanfall revisited

Eurogamer:

"Well, it's visible now, but what's clear from an initial playthrough is that resolution remains at the 1408x792 pixel count of the launch code with the same 2x MSAA (multi-sampling anti-aliasing). Running key clips through our performance analysis tools, our take on the Update Five is that there is a clear improvement in frame-rates, but we do wonder if the average gamer is likely to notice - baseline performance is still mostly in the 40-60fps range, and there are still dips into the 30s when the game is really struggling under the load."

Read Full Story >>
eurogamer.net
The story is too old to be commented.
gamer11381225d ago

I think the one thing people forget with Titanfall is it was built on the original source engine. Apparently it doesn't even have some of the latest features of the source engine that we saw in Portal 2. It doesn't look like the engine is designed for the multiple cores like the xbox 1 or playstation 4 have available. After reading count down to titanfall, respawn admit they went with the quickest and dirtiest engine they could to get results, owing to the fact they were a new company working on a new ip and needed something to show. Titanfall 2, if it happens, will most likely be running on a much more up to date engine and hopefully won't suffer the inconsistent performance that Titanfall 1 has. That said, I barely notice any of the stuff mentioned above when I'm playing. The game is just too frenetic. The screen tear has defiantly been reduced.

Kayant1225d ago

Where is this BS from? They tweaked their engine for it.

"It's 64-bit obviously and we converted it to DX11 and part of the conversion gave us the opportunity to re-architect the engine and make it more like we wanted it to be on the memory side," Baker says.

"A lot of the work was making the engine multi-threaded. The original Source engine had a main thread that built up a command buffer for the render thread and there was a frame of delay. We kind of changed that so the render thread buffered commands as soon as they were issued - in the best case, it gets rid of a frame of latency there. And then almost every system has been made multi-threaded at this point. The networking is multi-threaded, the particle simulation is multi-threaded. The animation is multi-threaded - I could go on forever. The culling, the gathering of objects we're going to render is multi-threaded. It's across as many cores as you have."

http://www.eurogamer.net/ar...

Digital Foundry: Of course, with Call of Duty, you guys have the track record in taking an existing technology and making something new from it...

Drew McCoy: Yeah, we chose it because a lot of our designers wanted to prototype gameplay from day one and we had effectively 10 years of gameplay toys that were already in the engine from all the Valve games that we could use, like, "oh they did that in Team Fortress, let's pull that in and see how that works" and if it's good, then we'll go and make our own that's better suited for what we want to do.

Digital Foundry: But Source is fast, right? It has to be if I can play Portal 2 at 720p60 on a Surface Pro.

Drew McCoy: The thing about the Source Engine when we got it is that we actually branched from Portal 2. It was DX9, very single-threaded and they used the way that engine worked to its best possible potential for Portal. It can't render that much on-screen. The main thread just can't push out enough jobs, so we've done a huge amount of work. We didn't choose this engine because it was going to be 60, we chose this engine knowing that we'd be spending the next two years making it fast.

It's actually a pretty slow engine for showing stuff on-screen. What we have in a level now would run in single digits on what it was before - if you could even get it to load at all. It's been a huge engineering task, so what we did was put all the engineering [team] on the back-end so design [team] could be up and running at the task, otherwise engineering would have to be creating tools and design would be sitting around twiddling their thumbs. We only have a dozen or so engineers - it's pretty small for the amount of work they've done.

http://www.eurogamer.net/ar...

gamer11381225d ago

Exactly, the engine wasn't designed for this! I guess it depends on how much faith you put into the Respawn Design team to actually take an engine and try to make it do work it wasn't originally designed for. I think the evidence is there that shows they didn't quite manage the task. Titanfall is not the most demanding game on the xbox one which is why everyone struggles to understand why it's res and fps aren't that great.

Kayant1225d ago (Edited 1225d ago )

"Exactly, the engine wasn't designed for this" - Well yh which is why they TWEAKED it for it. You know that things can change when you tweak them right. A video player not originally designed for support for hardware acceleration but getting it in an update is tweaking it. That's what respawn did. It's not the same engine anymore expect in name.

"I guess it depends on how much faith you put into the Respawn Design team to actually take an engine and try to make it do work it wasn't originally designed for" - You're saying this like they are babies here. Most of the dev team is from infinity ward where they did the same thing with cod why do you think they can't do it again? They are experienced devs.

"Titanfall is not the most demanding game on the xbox one which is why everyone struggles to understand why it's res and fps aren't that great." - It's not the prettiest yes but demanding wise I don't agree now(some time ago I would have agreed when my knowledge was less) it's a MP game with fast movement and unpredictable action compared that to a racing game for example or some other genres where the main thing being rendered is the environment. It also targets 60fps. that's demanding on the hardware. Rough measure on how it is. Trials fusion dev - http://forum.beyond3d.com/s...

Bigpappy1225d ago

It is obvious that they have not fully optimized the old engine, and maybe never will. This new engines are built every new generation, from the ground up. The game plays great by the way.

Elit3Nick1225d ago

Respawn did indeed state that frame rate dips were due to the outdated physics engine

Kayant1225d ago

Link?

You guys keep on saying things without the evidence to back it up.

Kayant1225d ago (Edited 1225d ago )

@Elit3Nick

Do you read past the title?
As that doesn't say that. It says they are using the same baseline physics engine but again tweaked and optimized.

Outdated doesn't mean it's not optimized. It's like saying Windows Vista was > XP because it's newer when it was broken at the time.

PCGH: What physics engine uses titanium case? Have you, for example, played with the idea to implement Nvidia's PhysX to realize a few flashy effects?

"Richard Baker: We use basically still the version of the Havoc physics engine, which was also used in Half-Life 2. We have made ​​a lot of performance and stability improvements, but it is in essence still the same. In the future we will probably look around for other physics engines, because the version used here is somewhat outdated. The titanium case to use upcoming Havok engine is therefore a very early version, which was then heavily revised by Valve for Half-Life 2 and optimized by us. But it is not at the same level of current, more modern versions of Havok."

PCGH: The Xbox One is based on an AMD APU with eight physical threads. Uses the engine case from titanium and this is also the case when we play with a PC with eight cores?

Richard Baker: Basically, we are in the PC process as well as on the Xbox One. On the PC we like on the Xbox One as a main thread and a rendering thread. And then, depending on how many cores are available, additional worker threads, reducing the workload of the main thread. The bulk of the workload of our programmers was to adapt the engine to modern multi-core processors, later to be able to develop the advantages of multithreading on PC and Xbox One.

PCGH: In the case of titanium beta there were very impressed the fast, effective charged fights. We were impressed with how stable into the game for a beta. But also a few more drops, we noticed at very action-packed scenes. Will the retail version run more smoothly?

Richard Baker: With titanium case, it is indeed an online-only game, so we will try to provide a very good support after the release. There are still some points that may improve performance and to which we are still working. We try as to better distribute the particle rendering on multiple processor cores. There is potential power, just as in the physics calculation. Therefore, the frame rates a break even when tons of simulated physics objects fly through the air and countless particles are shown. Therefore, we are also working to improve these two systems are still working. And then of course we have taken care of many things that we noticed during the beta. We have also resolved SLI and Crossfire problems, you can eat there now better performance at higher resolutions. And of course we will generally continue to screw the game after it was delivered. So we will in the future continue to add features and improve performance.

http://www.pcgameshardware....

What he has actually said on dropped framerates -

"A lot of the performance is on the GPU side. There's still room for optimisation and we're still working on it," Baker says. "Ideally it would have been a rock-solid 60 all the time when we shipped but obviously when there's big fights going on, lots of particle effects, lots of physics objects... we're still working to condense the systems, make them more parallel so we can hit 60 all the time, ideally."

http://www.eurogamer.net/ar...

TheDevKit1225d ago

What's hilarious are your screenshots.

1225d ago Replies(1)
MasterCornholio1225d ago

Didn't Respawn said they would bump up the resolution with a patch?

madjedi1225d ago

To boost the resolution to 900p, they were talking about it prior to the release of tf or shortly after.

I think if titanfall hit 900p on the xb1 it will be with the release of tf2, after respawn gets a new engine. Because their current version of the source engine isn't doing the game's reputation any favors.

akaFullMetal1225d ago

"Well, it's visible now, but what's clear from an initial playthrough is that resolution remains at the 1408x792 pixel count of the launch code with the same 2x MSAA (multi-sampling anti-aliasing). Running key clips through our performance analysis tools, our take on the Update Five is that there is a clear improvement in frame-rates, but we do wonder if the average gamer is likely to notice - baseline performance is still mostly in the 40-60fps range, and there are still dips into the 30s when the game is really struggling under the load."

Wow, with optimizations and updates I figured the performance would be better than this.

DLConspiracy1225d ago

Ihave actually noticed how much smoother the game is now. Its pretty damn smooth. I noticed it right away some days ago. It feels great to play this way.

1225d ago
Show all comments (24)
The story is too old to be commented.