Think Digital Foundry is the bastion of credibility? Think again.

ROFL your an idiot. Revisions are different versions. They aren't major different versions like Mass effect 1 vs Mass effect 2.

Actually the hardware again, either has to be emulated or not. The compiled software isn't being interpreted on the Japanese software. Your are factually wrong.

And your doing everything you can to paint a picture that they are unreliable because for all intensive purposes it seems like with the information you provided that their methodology is considered reliable... until this one case where there might be an issue loading assets on a particular console's OS version. The quote from neogaf is again further proof that the expectation is there shouldn't be any differences and your ignoring that and claiming their methodology is wrong even if people do this and generally make it a verifiable method...

I'm a what? It helps when calling someone an idiot that you actually spell "you're" correctly, especially when it's a part of the same sentence.

A revision is a revised edition of something existing, for each region whatever their base game is would be their base game, in essence version or model 1.0. They're not revisions of each other and are not compatible and/or interchangeable, whatever happens in a particular region does not mean it will effect other region models of a game or system. The only revision that this game ever saw was on PC in the form of Road & Track Presents: The Need for Speed SE, that's it, the original PC game was revised and they added to it.

There were no revisions made to any Saturn version of the game in any region, nor were there with the PlayStation. I'm not painting a picture, they painted the picture, I am explaining the picture and what's wrong with it. Their methodology was wrong, they should have been using an NTSC Saturn in conjunction with the NTSC game to ensure stability, compatibility and reliable functionality of the game as it was intended to run; on the system it was intended to run on.

So since we can't trust DF, I sure hope other websites to pop up when scorpio comes out. If not, how will we know which version is better!?

grammar mistakes on a forum.. oh woe is me. At least its a small mistake instead trying to make a distinction between revision and versions... all new revisions are a different version. Major version differences are still a revision change... The Japanese version of the game is a revision of the base game that supports japonese localization.

The fact that your trying to make this disticition is nonsensical. Its actually a dumb mistake to make. Version vs Revision isn't standardized and it might be based on the studio how those are used. Revisions usually are used to denote a particular build with a unique number. They can be based on the build count or specific commit but either way all Versions of a software are generally by definition a different revision. The versioning is mostly down to marketing... Prior to ps2/3 many games didn't actually list what internal revision they might be. The version was usually just the title of the game. Defining a software version wasn't prominent in games until updating became more standard. Older systems you might never know if there slightly different revisions were made unless they were discovered by examining different boxed copies.

So sure I made a grammar mistake. But do you realize that you're still dumb. And even dumber for trying to compare a grammar mistake to lack of understanding on how software revisions work.

Do you also understand the NTSC-u vs NTSC-j is likely the same hardware compatibility? NTSC is the video format so the output connector is whats different with the PAL version. They may have different power adapters I'm not sure what standard japan uses... but the hardware the software interacts will basically be the same. The software on the system is likely doing a region check so their "brute force" method is bypassing the region check (no emulation).

They can be interchangeable terms in passing conversation but when speaking of revisions and versions in a serious dicussion they must be supplied with context to denote exactly what you're talking about as they hold very different meanings.

In terms of localization the PAL version of a game could have different features as compared to its NTSC counterpart. They're two different versions of a game specifically because of their localization, and also two different versions because their content differs, however they are not public revisions of each other. Whenever a game is localized and released, whatever state that game releases in for a particular region is its base code, it is not revised, it is version 1.0 for that region. For a revision to take place the developer would have to take the code base of that game for that region, revisit and alter it and then re-release this modified copy of the game again in that region, that is a public revision.

An internal revision is something different, this is when a game such as NTSC Blue Stinger for the Dreamcast has a different camera system applied than its NTSC-J counterpart in Japan. The game was revised internally for localization, however this took place before release, so its release version is still 1.0 because it was not publicly revised after its point of market inception, the NTSC market got no other variation of this game, only its release version. Hydro Thunder is an example of public revision, it has a version 1.0 which was its release code base, and version 1.1. The game was publicly revised because of corrupted code that rendered them mostly inoperable on the system.

Revising something is the act of updating it, the NTSC version of Road and Track Presents: The Need for Speed for the Sega Saturn never saw a public revision, there was never a re-release of this game operating different code. The copies I've had, and currently have now are exactly the same as every other NTSC copy of this game in existence, including John Linneman's.

The Japanese Saturn uses a different bios and functioning operating system, this NTSC game was not built to operate on this different software platform, but can be forced to as it's similar, but similar does not equate to same and similar can generate anomalies.

Wow... just wow. Your really trying to force a seperation here that doesn't exist to prove your point.

In terms of localization the PAL version of a game could have different features as compared to its NTSC counterpart. They're two different versions of a game specifically because of their localization, and also two different versions because their content differs, however they are not public revisions of each other. Whenever a game is localized and released, whatever state that game releases in for a particular region is its base code, it is not revised, it is version 1.0 for that region. For a revision to take place the developer would have to take the code base of that game for that region, revisit and alter it and then re-release this modified copy of the game again in that region, that is a public revision.

The example is of PAL version vs NTSC having different features is because the game was localized off a different revision of the game. Thats a fact. They share 99% of the code base that makes the game. IE its revisions or small changes that create the differences in builds. Not to mention the act of localization is creating a new revision of the software. They could localize the PAL version specifically many times for different language support... Your arguing over nonsensical semantics at this point that don't make a shit difference whether or not there was a code change.

For instance an interesting scenario, if you localized the playstation game at 1.0 with different feature sets like music, and got a new manufacturer, its completely possible that the saturn version got a ninja update when they released the images to manufacturing. Technically its still "1.0" but it got the playstation updates because it was easier to reproduce than try to find the original image. I mean look at the type of rigidness we are working with, the silent hill collection where they lost the finished version of the game and ported an earlier less complete version of the game to 360/ps3. These weren't projects working for a government defense program where documentation and change management was extremely important. It might as well have been the wild west of software development.

An internal revision is something different, this is when a game such as NTSC Blue Stinger for the Dreamcast has a different camera system applied than its NTSC-J counterpart in Japan. The game was revised internally for localization, however this took place before release, so its release version is still 1.0 because it was not publicly revised after its point of market inception, the NTSC market got no other variation of this game, only its release version. Hydro Thunder is an example of public revision, it has a version 1.0 which was its release code base, and version 1.1. The game was publicly revised because of corrupted code that rendered them mostly inoperable on the system.

You think there is some sort of standard for what is listed on a game package as a version/revision? Your logic is fundamentally flawed about revisions/versions and can't be applied across different games. Some developers were good about versioning their software and releases... some were not.

1.0->1.1 is different versions. They are publicly documented as version 1.0 and version 1.1

Revising something is the act of updating it, the NTSC version of Road and Track Presents: The Need for Speed for the Sega Saturn never saw a public revision, there was never a re-release of this game operating different code. The copies I've had, and currently have now are exactly the same as every other NTSC copy of this game in existence, including John Linneman's.

Not all revisions were re-releases or publicized. If you have proof that every NTSC version is the same... be my guest and prove it.

The Japanese Saturn uses a different bios and functioning operating system, this NTSC game was not built to operate on this different software platform, but can be forced to as it's similar, but similar does not equate to same and similar can generate anomalies.

Yes its a boot strapping device to spoof a different region code. You can modify your saturn to do this also. The binary compatibility is the same. There is no emulation or compatibility OS required. The hardware hasn't changed that much. In fact you could bypass region locks by quickly changing CD's...

They should be called out on it.

You don't seem to understand the difference between an internal revision before localization and release and a public revision after the game has already been released to market. Furthermore a public revision doesn't mean it's something that is announced or they tell people, it's something that affects the public in the capacity of a game alteration made after the game is already in the public's hands. The way this is handled now is through updates to a game via downloads also known as patches etc, prior if there was a problem they actually had to revise the game code itself and re-release the game with a new disc as this online infrastructure did not exist, that's a public revision.

I'm telling you and you need to be quiet and understand, I'm the guy who spotted this problem because of my intimate knowledge of the game, I'm the guy with a Saturn right in front of him, I'm the guy who owns this game, I'm the guy who owned this game on three other occasions not to mention played it elsewhere, I am the guy who bought this game at launch in 1996 when it was brand new, there is no public revision of this game, there is no alternative NTSC version of this game, it does not exist.

You're a random guy arguing with me who likely has never even touched or seen this game in his entire life, let alone a Sega Saturn. You're not even discussing the game itself because you possess no understanding of it, you're just here to argue. What's even more absurd is you're trying to drop the burden of proof on me to prove that a revision doesn't exist? That doesn't even make sense, that's not how it works, you're the person claiming it could be a revision, the burden of proof falls onto you, and you will never find it because it doesn't exist.

You don't even know how the Saturn functions, you're talking about hot swapping discs, you can't do that unless it's with region patched or modified iso's on burned games, the protection methods for the discs cannot be overridden without hardware alteration e.g. an Action Replay. This system doesn't use regular CD's, they've got a two point system that scans proprietary alterations to a game disc that cannot be replicated in the form of an inner and outer line circling the disc with encrypted code in the system, this was only now cracked 20 years after the system released.

That still doesn't change the functioning software of the system itself, just because you bypassed its protection methods to launch an out of region disc you still have to contend with a Japanese software suite operating the system, this differs from the North American and PAL Saturn's. Just because the game launched doesn't mean there's not software conflicts or anomalies, these games are not intended to run on these region separated platforms or their software, different operating system, different system bios etc.

You're out of your depths trying to discuss something you don't understand and don't have experience with, you have general knowledge that you think applies to this specific system and scenario, throw that out the window, it has no implications here.

They absolutely should, we live in a world of checks and balances.

OMFG i'm done. Your as dumb as a rock.

You think prior to updates they had to revise the game code and re-release it? How.. .what?

• Patches -> game code changes
• Region changes -> game code changes
• Localization (languages and what not) -> game code changes
• Versions (1.0 -> 1.1) -> game code changes

All of the above are new binary builds (revisions) of the game. The one exception might be language support which if they did correctly they might be able to swap out a resource dll somewhere. Granted the differences between languages would like create code changes due to printing languages being different and likely require different UI layouts to make work.

So what you think they create patches to games like bloodborne with a hex editor going to town on the binary? No they create a new build from game code changes and they send down the new binary which contains all the latest compiled game code.

Your mistaken thinking that "revisions" mean a product that is out getting a revised update. A version 1.0 -> 1.1 is an updated VERSION of that game. We the public get explicit versions of the game that map to specific revisions of the game code.

That still doesn't change the functioning software of the system itself, just because you bypassed its protection methods to launch an out of region disc you still have to contend with a Japanese software suite operating the system, this differs from the North American and PAL Saturn's. Just because the game launched doesn't mean there's not software conflicts or anomalies, these games are not intended to run on these region separated platforms or their software.

They are binary compatible. You can mode a US version of the system and play japonese games. You just need this to be true so bad because its the only other alternative theory that makes sense to it either being a simple mistake or that they game copy differs than yours.

Again you don't know how to use "you're" and "your", and yet again you're using the wrong one in a sentence that's being pushed as an insult... The irony...

Yes, prior to online updates if there was an issue large enough to warrant it a publisher or development team would make a revision to the game and re-release it, is that hard to understand? That is what is generally referred to as a public revision, it's the modern day equivalent of an update patch.

To your bullet points, yes, any modification to game code is a revision of the code, any modification to anything is a revision, but there is a big difference between internal revised code before a release, and public revised code after a release. Why you're incapable of understanding this is beyond me, it's very simple to grasp. There is no public revision to the NTSC release of The Need for Speed on the Saturn, I don't know how many more ways this can be reiterated for that to sink in.

Just because they are binary compatible doesn't mean that they are free from compatibility errors due to variations in their software design and operation. You're treating compatibility as if it's a black and white plane of code operation free of anomalies and errors, compatibility ensures functionality, not a set level or scope of functionality. I don't need it to be true, it is true, what you're saying is so feeble in argument stance that you're actually hamstringing this to a scratched disc which is absurd or a mysterious game revision that doesn't even exist instead of the obvious, the game running into compatibility problems because it's being operated on a foreign Saturn and certain coded elements are incompatible.

Also this is the second time you've stated that you're leaving, please do so.

LOL, I cited GPU area size numbers for PS4, X360, 7870 and Polaris 10, not just Scorpio.

@manticored: Oh man. I replied once to Ron with a quote I read off the bottlecap from a snapple beverage. It was something to do with Hummingbirds. The next time, a quote from Saturday night live's "Deep thoughts by Jack Handey".

In both cases he responded the exact same. about 10 pages worth of charts, arguments, GPU die sizes etc. Like seriously wtf is with this guy?

Apparently you missed my relaxed grammar policy as it doesnt matter. And my single quote key works 50% of the time. Again I've established at being ok with grammar issues. You are still trying to push a dumb idea. I'm owning up to the grammar mistake but I'm not going to bother correcting it. Its of such little importance. Plus you know someone realizes they are wrong once they resort to attacking inconsequential things like grammar... like who the **** cares?

Yes, prior to online updates if there was an issue large enough to warrant it a publisher or development team would make a revision to the game and re-release it, is that hard to understand? That is what is generally referred to as a public revision, it's the modern day equivalent of an update patch.

Actually no, patches are new versions, thats why in patch notes there is a new version number.

FOR INSTANCE

Dark souls there has both the regulation version and app version listed on the main page.

WoW you can just search patch notes to see all the different versions.

steam/origin you can get the versions going to the about page.

You can get the version of windows 10 your running in the system information

To your bullet points, yes, any modification to game code is a revision of the code, any modification to anything is a revision, but there is a big difference between internal revised code before a release, and public revised code after a release. Why you're incapable of understanding this is beyond me, it's very simple to grasp.

New versions are just new versions... Your making this concept harder trying to make a distinction to updated games with new versions (1.0 -> 1.1) as explicitly being public revisions. Your objectively wrong.

Revision is not a term used very often. Versions get release. Revisions generally mean a specific build of a application. For instance in the examples above, none of them use the term revision. All the patches and updates are new Versions. So again, your idea is fundamentally flawed. As there is no standardization on versioning software. So my usage of the term revision is completely fine. And I explained it to you so I don't know what the problem is. So you should have figured out that my argument is that there may be different... builds of the game that are undocumented.

There is no public revision to the NTSC release of The Need for Speed on the Saturn, I don't know how many more ways this can be reiterated for that to sink in.

You can't prove that though, and its not out of the question that some manufacturer got in updated version. Or a greatest hits casing sometimes included an updated build without adding a new public version. Like I mentioned previously there is a huge problem with the pre internet age that many things could go undocumented or lost on some guys PC. It was not uncommon that some specific person's PC was responsible for creating a released build for manufacturing. That guy quits you might end up with a different revision without even knowing it because it wasn't documented. Or if you change who's printing your game, your might accidentally release a different revision.

The fact remains this type of information is unreliable because of the types of software practices that were used in the 90's.

Just because they are binary compatible doesn't mean that they are free from compatibility errors due to variations in their software design and operation. You're treating compatibility as if it's a black and white plane of code operation free of anomalies and errors, compatibility ensures functionality, not a set level or scope of functionality. I don't need it to be true, it is true, what you're saying is so feeble in argument stance that you're actually hamstringing this to a scratched disc which is absurd or a mysterious game revision that doesn't even exist instead of the obvious, the game running into compatibility problems because it's being operated on a foreign Saturn and certain coded elements are incompatible.

Binary compatibly means exactly that. The way the game communicates with the OS would be identical. And these games more often communicated directly with hardware or really thin abstracted layers. If there was a bug in the API for the os then it would be a bug that persists with all software that use the API.

Now lets get back to my disc scratch assertion... thats more likely the cause than a incompatibly issue. Where you can load the music in some circumstances like on the title screen but not others ? If you have a problem with loading/playing music you likely will have a problem with ALL music.

Whats that... the same refute you used for a disc scratch?

Also this is the second time you've stated that you're leaving, please do so.

Those statements are more out of bewilderment over your stupidity.

And lets not forget the most likely cause is they made a mistake and it will likely end up corrected. Your attack on their credibility is dumb to begin with. Ockham's razor blah blah

A patch is a software revision, the only way to revise the code on a game in the 90's and even into the mid 2000's was to release a revised version of the game with alteration performed directly to the code that gets printed onto the disc.

There is no standardized term for revision, but as I stated and am reiterating yet again, when you speak of updates, revisions & versions you need to specifically indicate what they are pertaining to in a complex conversation like this and provide context. The term revision is pretty normal and frankly the most used term for physical games that got updates to their physical game code.

I'm not obligated to prove that a revision doesn't exist, that's the stupidest crap I've ever heard.

'Prove to me this thing which doesn't exist, doesn't actually exist' I mean really man? Since it doesn't exist it would have never of been talked about, there would be no documentation on it anywhere, there would be absolutely nothing to denote that it didn't get a revision. That's the whole point man, none of that ever happened and you won't find anything about it because it never had one. You can find video game discussions on the internet going back into the 80's, this is something from only 21 years ago, if there was something you would be able to find it, but it simply doesn't exist.

You're obligated to prove it exists because you're the one pushing that narrative on me and I'm telling you flat out that it doesn't, the burden of proof falls onto the accuser, not the accused. There's no alternative SKU, there's no alternative packaging, there's no alternative disc, there's absolutely nothing for this game that was ever revised post release. To add even more absurdity to what you're saying, why would they revise the game and then strip out the music, strip out the instrument panel, and strip out the road map? There's a total lack of logical congruity to what you're inferring here, it's just absurd.

Even worse, this game likely only had a semi-large single printed run, it was released roughly a year before the Saturn bit the bullet which to make things even worse the Saturn only sold about 1.5 million units in North America, not exactly a big market to be doing multiple print runs, especially ones with absurd revisions which remove features from the game for absolutely no reason, it doesn't make any sense.

A system functioning under binary compatibility has no bearing on its level of compatibility with non-native software, it simply means it will run it. Binary compatibility or even compatibility itself does not denote the level of functionality software will have nor does software have to universally conform the same or respond to it fully, it just has to run. As I've stated it's a similar system and it will launch and execute these games because of that with the assistance of cartridges, however that doesn't mean the other inherent differences in the system and its software could not present conflicts and game feature set failures. The hardware in the Saturn could be identical, but the operating software of the system itself is not, it could be egregiously similar but it's not the same, and something this minute could result in software communication failure with a game that cause certain game features speaking a slightly different operational language to simply not work or function.

I'm not going back into your scratched disc nonsense, if it were just the music not working or skipping I would bite, but even then that doesn't add up given it works perfectly fine in the menus, but two functional game features just not existing, no.

Present a better argument with proper source information backing not just empty rhetoric.

Given similar GPU tech generation, the larger GPU size with higher effective memory bandwidth has the higher grade PC GPU SKU.

OMG LOL. You created an alt to post yet another nonsensical reply that has nothing to do with anything I was talking about?

This is absolute gold. I gotta bookmark this.

Your post is nonsensical.

This topic is about discrediting DF and TC has mentioned DF's "4K assets" comment and recent DF comment on "4K assets" refers to DF's Scorpio reveal.

I posted an argument that supports DF's POV that relates to DF comment on "4K assets".

Missing speedometer is minor when compared to missing light pass effects which actually affected the cockpit's lighting.

If missing speedometer issue is a bigger deal over missing light pass effects, then there's something wrong with you.

Again a revision is commonly refereed to as a particular build I explained this. Your confusing this as a technical term where the industry literally labels different releases as different versions. Trying to point out my usage of revision is wrong is objectively wrong on your end. So again your attacking my wording and avoiding the point.

I'm not obligated to prove that a revision doesn't exist, that's the stupidest crap I've ever heard.

Than don't claim it. Its an assumption at best but the possibility exists.

'Prove to me this thing which doesn't exist, doesn't actually exist' I mean really man? Since it doesn't exist it would have never of been talked about, there would be no documentation on it anywhere, there would be absolutely nothing to denote that it didn't get a revision. That's the whole point man, none of that ever happened and you won't find anything about it because it never had one. You can find video game discussions on the internet going back into the 80's, this is something from only 21 years ago, if there was something you would be able to find it, but it simply doesn't exist.

Yup because binary comparisons don't exist... The hard part would be finding and comparing them I guess but its not impossible.

You're obligated to prove it exists because you're the one pushing that narrative on me and I'm telling you flat out that it doesn't, the burden of proof falls onto the accuser, not the accused. There's no alternative SKU, there's no alternative packaging, there's no alternative disc, there's absolutely nothing for this game that was ever revised post release. To add even more absurdity to what you're saying, why would they revise the game and then strip out the music, strip out the instrument panel, and strip out the road map? There's a total lack of logical congruity to what you're inferring here, it's just absurd.

I didn't say it exists, I'm saying your not taking into account the possibility of it existing. Your making the assumption it does not, where other gamers have mentioned there may be differences with the PAL or other versions which it means its worth looking into.

Even worse, this game likely only had a semi-large single printed run, it was released roughly a year before the Saturn bit the bullet which to make things even worse the Saturn only sold about 1.5 million units in North America, not exactly a big market to be doing multiple print runs, especially ones with absurd revisions which remove features from the game for absolutely no reason, it doesn't make any sense.

They also probably didn't produce 1.5 million all on one or two goes. So you got any numbers to back that up.

A system functioning under binary compatibility has no bearing on its level of compatibility with non-native software, it simply means it will run it. Binary compatibility or even compatibility itself does not denote the level of functionality software will have nor does software have to universally conform the same or respond to it fully, it just has to run. As I've stated it's a similar system and it will launch and execute these games because of that with the assistance of cartridges, however that doesn't mean the other inherent differences in the system and its software could not present conflicts and game feature set failures. The hardware in the Saturn could be identical, but the operating software of the system itself is not, it could be egregiously similar but it's not the same, and something this minute could result in software communication failure with a game that cause certain game features speaking a slightly different operational language to simply not work or function.

The fact that it runs means its compatible with the system's API... its binary compatible on many levels. So to expand on the when I say binary compatible I mean ABI (application binary interface). The cartridges you require are generally to bypass region locks..

So at this point there is 2 issues. 1 is its either there is a bug in the software causing the music to not load, there is a bug in the OS that is causing the music to not load, or the music wasn't included in that copy of the game.... 3 potential issues here... figure it out.

The idea they have different operational languages again shows the level of understanding how compiled code works is rudimentary or non existent, or how an application interfaces with the OS. To assume that 1 type of resource can't be loaded in played during specific game operation... is the equivalent of cd scratch. A cd scratch can definitly lead to undefined behavior.

The OS versioning might lead to some undefined behavior in rare outlier cases. These would be rare as the feature in the software would actually have to rely on a bug in the OS... or use the API in some corner case to expose a bug in that particular version of the OS that is completely unknown.

@rnnval: Yes, totally something wrong with me. I lose sleep at night over missing speedometers and missing light pass effects.

Did you know that gum stays in your belly for like 10 years?

I posted a comment that supports DF's POV that relates to DF's comment on "4K assets". It's your problem with being stupid on PC hardware basics.

@rnnval: I disagree, you haven't posted anywhere NEAR enough charts to defend your position.

See below:

@appariti0n said:

@rnnval: I disagree, you haven't posted anywhere NEAR enough charts to defend your position.

See below:

What happened with his other account

the attack on credibility is ricidiculous, even if they made a mistake, but they didn't, well not exactly anyway.

People on neogaf reporting they experienced the saturn version without music as well, allthough others say they did experienced music.

The reason for this is there is a ntsc version and pal version, the pal version doesn't have gauges and music. Pal is used in europe. Digital foundry is in europe.

case closed.

Can you link the neogaf thread?

the neogaf thread didn't mention ntsc and pal though, they still trying to figure out themselves I think ,

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1345485

I found the ntsc and pal explanation in the youtube comment section of the df video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FjLXLhaGfFA

@drummerdave9099: Lol ? It's a pretty big deal when they make all their info out to be 100% objective...

Originally Posted by dark10x

Hmmm...

Well, I used my Japanese Saturn with the US disc so maybe it caused some sort of incompatibility. That's very strange indeed.

This is John Linneman by the way (dark10x), you can stop posting this drivel now.

Your PAL information is also incorrect, it has music, functioning instruments and the road map as well. As I've said this entire time, they fucked up and it's no doubt entirely related to them trying to run this NTSC version on a Japanese Saturn.

• PAL game: has racing music, functioning instruments and the road map on a PAL region Saturn
• NTSC game: has racing music, functioning instruments and the road map on an NTSC region Saturn
• NTSC game: doesn't have racing music, has non-functional instruments and the road map is missing on an NTSC-J region Saturn

Do the math, what's out of place in this equation and coincidentally having the problems?

Aside from the 50hz output from the Saturn itself in the PAL region, the game is functionally identical to its NTSC counterpart.

Originally Posted by Diablohead

This youtube video seems to be on saturn, with music and dials.

I've never owned a saturn to say if the drive can fault like that but I do know resident evil will get HUGE loading times for each door if the laser is uncalibrated.

Originally Posted by dark10x

Ahhh, it MIGHT be a PAL vs NTSC thing, actually. Very good point there. The Saturn version posted in the video above is of the PAL release and I used the NTSC version.

...and yeah, I still would love to chat with Jeff about his work on these games in the future. NFS2 would make a good spot for that since there are only two versions.

I had to rush this episode out, though, so I didn't get to do everything I wanted.

Good Job, I hate big gaming websites , semi-independent youtubers and Individual youtubers within the gaming apparatus taken as gospel from a lot of clueless gamers.

That why I never seen the appeal of DF

or Total biscuit and even jimquisition.

People trust them to much

There's nothing wrong with trusting bigger outlets honestly, but you can't just blindly trust and follow what they say and take everything at face value. When you take the things these people say and like you said just soak it up as gospel, you're doing a disservice to everyone including yourself.

If they're wrong they need to be called out about it regardless of how big or small the issue is, incorrect reporting is incorrect reporting. When they're wrong they need to pull and revise their videos and articles, anything less is willingly contributing to misinformation because they're simply too lazy to edit their content or they don't give a shit about accuracy.

yeah but let's not get carried away here, they could have done their research better considering the saturn port, but this isn't even the same guy that does most of the hardware reporting. Not to mention that this is just a retro video.

Is this posted on their main Youtube channel and on their website the same as anything else would be and getting hundreds of thousands of views resulting in large amounts of people being misinformed and generating money? Yes, also John Linneman is a regular analysis reporter for them.

Again, why try to diminish this? What benefit does it serve trying to defend them when they're wrong? Hell according to that NeoGaf thread he has known there was something wrong with his analysis for over two months... Do you see a retraction? Do you see an update? Do you see anything that indicates their reporting as incorrect and thus trying to correct it? No, because they don't care enough to fix these things when they've made a mistake and are generating thousands of dollars off of this video and as a result are not pulling it down.

They don't give a shit about misleading you and the gaming community at large, so why do you give a shit enough to defend them?

They're still the best site when it comes to these comparisons.

Hahahhaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa DF sony fanboys..hahahaa

Why because they showed gaps in games this gen they did the same last gen for the xbox 360 and lemmings didn't complain.

The only problem about DF that i have is with Richard leadbetter which i can on quote contradicting him self,on one side he claimed the difference between 900p vs 1080p was massive when it was PC vs PS4,but when the same gap was recorded on xbox one vs PC some how it was smaller than the math suggested.

He is the one who ride the xbox one secret sauce on 2013 for the xbox one,and basically was doing MS propaganda for months trying to kill the notion that the PS4 was stronger.

Every time a frame drops on a game on Pro is the CPU he claims,and he has call it a bottleneck for the pro,enter Scorpio with the same shitty jaguar at 2.3ghz and he doesn't raise the flags about the CPU being even more constrained than Pro one since it is easier for a 2.1ghz jaguar to feed a 4.2TF GPU than a 2.3ghz CPU feeding a 6TF one,you increased power 43% but only increased your CPU 10% over the Pro and he doesn't raise question about the possible bottleneck this CPU may introduce?

He goes on highlighting the so call CPU modifications done to the command processor of Scorpio and turns out is not even new as Richard Leadbetter was selling it first,the customization was already on xbox one and even 360 in the old days,is nothing new and CPU on consoles have always being very efficient and have no draw call problems so the so call secret sauce for the CPU is nothing they have a weak jaguar 2.3ghz pair with a 6TF GPU no matter one that CPU will never drive a 6TF GPU exactly as good as a i7 or even an i5.

They did 9 articles about scorpio in less than 16 something they never did with the pro,i don't have a problem with DF but their lead Richard Leadbetter is a MS suck up.

DF usually seems f.o.s. anyway.

But not a big deal if it is an honest mistake such as running NTSC version on Japanese Saturn (i.e. random region related glitches). This explanation seems odd to me, but I guess it's technically possible if there were hardware differences between regions. Maybe it never occurred to them.

On the other hand *IF* they did this test based on emulated versions, it would destroy their credibility completely. That is not an "honest mistake". That would be fraud. Don't really care if it's comparing a 20 year old game, if they can't do an honest comparison with actual hardware they shouldn't bother at all IMO. .

I don't see how that could be a problem,emulating the game on PC is a problem because you are using stronger hardware and the results will never be exactly as the real thing also could explain lack of music which is normal for poor emulated games or games with bugs on emulation.

Running NTSC J games on NTSC console is not a problem,in both ways US games in japan or Japanese games on US,i owned a Saturn and i had the ram key card that allowed you to play Japanese games on US hardware and never had a problem with any Japanese game all had music all works exactly as the Japanese version was made.

Alto i can't say for NFS but for many other games that i imported that was the case.

@commander said:

@appariti0n said:

@rnnval: I disagree, you haven't posted anywhere NEAR enough charts to defend your position.

See below:

What happened with his other account

I'm going to assume it was a temp ban due to forum karma hitting 10. Apparently folks don't appreciate being blinded by charts/walls of text on every topic created here.

They've never shown a trend of any bias or intentional falsification of their results. One instance of them potentially having incorrect test settings does not indicate a trend nor ruins their credibility.

This whole things sounds like somebody who is sick of Digital Foundry constantly showing unfavorable results to their favorite consoles. As other said here, when DF starts showing the Scorpio version of games being clearly superior to that of the PS4 Pro, are you just going to ignore them?

I shown W5000 with 1.3 TFLOPS and 153.6 GB/s GDDR5 VRAM was unable to beat Radeon HD 7850, let alone the slightly faster R7-265. Minus CPU bound issues (e.g. Hitman NPC load), XBO with max ESRAM optimizations (effectively like W5000) will not beat R7-265.

Max ESRAM optimizations = tile render with PRT with intended goal to keep both ROPS and TMUs read/write stalls to the minimum. PS4/PS4 Pro/Scorpio doesn't require strict tile render with PRT optimizations due to large and fast VRAM storage. W5000 example removes the need for tile render with PRT optimizations and 1.3 TFLOPS wouldn't be enough to beat 7850 and R7-265.

The majority of Scorpio's Forza 6 result is just memory bandwidth boost (reducing memory bandwidth bottleneck) for 6 TFLOPS bound by 256 GB/s. Having Vega 11 with RX-480's 256 GB/s memory bandwidth would still gimp it. For AMD GPUs, next year's GDDR6 from SK Hynix would be needed for 256 bit bus equipped GPUs. Micron's GDDR5X is mostly for NVIDIA camp.

With 60 hz cap, running about 20 percent usage on my Intel Core i7-4790K is hardly maxing my CPU.

That's Mantis Burn Racing 4K and max details on "out-of-the-box" MSI Gaming GTX 980 Ti. PS4 Pro's Mantis Burn Racing has 4K with double rate Fp16 usage.

Alright. Between all of the charts, lengthy posts and quoting, and all of the flagging I have been seeing happening I'm locking this thread. Chill out for a while.