I would like to sell you some audio power cables which are Cryogenically treated. :) http://www.cryo-parts.com/ps_audio_cables.htmlQuote:
Originally Posted by SoulsCollective
Printable View
I would like to sell you some audio power cables which are Cryogenically treated. :) http://www.cryo-parts.com/ps_audio_cables.htmlQuote:
Originally Posted by SoulsCollective
No, he said the Engine is intended for multi-use. Bad Company is their console line.
I might be doing a little bit too much arguing, but you keep repeating a totally unfounded claim. Lots of games are made using multiplatform engines with absolutely no intention of porting the game to certain of the platforms which the engine runs on.
Quotes from one of the senior devs on Bad Company:
"With Bad Company we’re hoping to build a good franchise here on consoles."
"For Bad Company we really wanted to go strongly into that [console] market."
They don't explicitly say "we are ignoring PCs" but they strongly imply that the primary focus of the game is consoles, thus it is a console game.
Um what? 32 is superior. I really don't understand your ignorance comment here. Just because in your opinion the quality difference is small does not negate the fact that 32 is superior.Quote:
Originally Posted by Coldon
Relevance? Where the audio source is mastered and pressed in 16-bit there is no issue (although it would be nice if it was 24 at least) - the point here is that by DIce's admission it is not originally processed as 16-bit, it is processed at 32-bit, output at 32-bit on console platforms, but crippled on all PC platforms as a cheap way of addressing compatibility with PC soundcards which cannot support greater than 16-bit. The issue primarily is not that the audio is 16-bit, that would cause no stir because most game engines do not support higher, the issue is the removal of the option which exists on another platform.Quote:
Pretty much most HD audio codecs support 24bit, even though most recorded audio is still 16bit you dont hear people complaining.
So don't use WinAmp? Again, relevance to Bad Company II?Quote:
hell winamp cant even output 24bit audio without plugins and downsamples everything greater than 16bit to 16bit.
So for all you audiophiles listening to music through winamp, sucks to be you.
It is needlessly confrontational and highly arrogant to tell all and sundry that they cannot hear a difference in audio quality, and that if they say they can then they're fooling themselves into thinking they can. Leaving that aside, though, again, relevance to Bad Company II?Quote:
There are also practically no sound cards that can handle 32bit audio, even most professional sound cards cant handle 32bit audio, most music is recorded at 24bit / 192khz anyways. Even if you have an insane sound card and $1000 monitors you probably wont be able to hear the difference, and any supposed difference would be the placebo effect.
Agreed, but again, relevance?Quote:
Hearing the difference on normal hifi or computer speakers, in my opinion, is extremely unlikely since consumer speakers tend to have a built in EQ that flatters the sound, short of having monitors with a dead flat EQ (or even better an EQ set for the current room) i doubt you'd be able to hear it, and none of this taking into account how varied the human hearing ability is. Mixing and mastering is way more important than 16 vs 32bit...
And yet again, relevance?Quote:
most music and cd's out there are 16bit and I dont see any of you complaining at the record labels because its not 32bit.
The issue of file format is completely separate to the issue of sample rate and bit-rate, and again, relevance to the removal of playback options from Bad Company II?Quote:
Originally Posted by nullface
Oh good grief. There's no need to be insulting. If you don't have anything to add to the discussion, I suggest leaving the thread.Quote:
Originally Posted by yngndrw
Crippled? its downsampled to 16bit, its not like they took all the audio and compressed the hell out of it ie. something like 96kbit mp3. I wouldn't call a downsampling a crippling procedure.Quote:
Originally Posted by SoulsCollective
The relevance is that most people that are arguing the sound quality issues probably listen to half their audio in 16bit anyways. And the difference between the two is insanely small anyways...Quote:
Originally Posted by SoulsCollective
What you want DICE to do is to ship the game with 32bit audio then downsample the audio at REALTIME putting extra load on the system or to ship the game with three sets of audio (16bit/24bit/32bit) possible making the game a 2 dvd game.
I can understand getting upset about MW2's blatant disregard for PC gamers, but if anything DICE is doing the opposite and trying to support PC gamers and this is the response? Lets see rented dedicated servers is a good thing cause then the servers will be ranked and guaranteed to meet the required specs and no random dodgy apps will be installed on them. No prone: non-issue as lots of games dont have prone and we've survived (CS for example), sound issue: completely ridiculous.
As for the engine, the major difference between a console engine and a PC engine is in the memory management module, the renderer and the audio component. Most of those components can be refactored in a matter of days to support a new API as they are loosely coupled to the game engine.
If any one wants me to prove to them that difference between the two format is practically inaudible I can put up a 24bit audio clip from our upcoming album where the audio was recorded at 24bit / 96khz and a clip where its been downsampled to 16bit, and you can try and tell me which clip is which...
on the servers they arnt dice only, they are only from dices authorized vendors. its not like there was a lack of bf2 ranked servers this will be the same. it just lets them get more money so they can maintain rank hosting and give the pc users map packs and patches for longer
Well that depends entirely on how it's done and the source file. Perhaps crippled was an exaggeration, but nevertheless, it's a decrease in audio quality which is not observed on consoles.Quote:
Originally Posted by Coldon
But that is irrelevant. Regardless of whether or not in your belief folks can hear the quality difference, it should not acceptable for a developer to remove on all PCs, including those capable of it, an option available on another platform. The point here is not that DIce should be shipping with 24 or 32 in all their releases, the point is that in releases which do support that bit-rate they should not be sticking all PC gamers with inferior downsampled audio, even if their machines are capable of playing back higher.Quote:
The relevance is that most people that are arguing the sound quality issues probably listen to half their audio in 16bit anyways. And the difference between the two is insanely small anyways...
Er...have you been reading the thread? That's what they're doing currently. The game engine processes all audio at 32-bit, and then downsamples it in realtime to 16-bit prior to playback on the PC platform. What I'd like them to do is include an option to remove that automatic downsampling on systems which support a higher bit-rate.Quote:
What you want DICE to do is to ship the game with 32bit audio then downsample the audio at REALTIME putting extra load on the system
Don't be silly. Any decent player will tell you the bitrate - the only way to tell such things is in a double-blind trial. And honestly, I think people have better things to do than to prove themselves to you or anyone else on the interwebs, this petty quibbling is merely detracting from the discussion of the bigger issue.Quote:
If any one wants me to prove to them that difference between the two format is practically inaudible I can put up a 24bit audio clip from our upcoming album where the audio was recorded at 24bit / 96khz and a clip where its been downsampled to 16bit, and you can try and tell me which clip is which...
Just did some checking and you're right it is quantized at runtime to 16bit, then again since most of the processing is done in 32bit its is only the final output stream that is quantized so the quality reduction is less than if all the samples were in 16bit.Quote:
Originally Posted by SoulsCollective
Once again I still think its a completely silly thing to be moaning about, think about all the newest games, how many of them had 24bit sound? I just think that now since DICE actually came out and said it whereas other studios haven't, they are taking flak for something that's pretty common in the PC game industry.
Whats the output format for the sound in dragon age, the saboteur, mw2, l4d2, etc...
Once again, you're missing the point.
The issue is not that a game engine is producing 16-bit sound. If it was, noone would care - as you rightly point out, I can't think of a single modern PC game which outputs in a higher bitrate. The issue is that the game engine does do everything in 32-bit, and on every platform other than PC outputs in 32-bit. On PC, rather than allow an option for 32-bit and an option for 16-bit (or better yet, an option for 32, 24 and 16), DIce have taken the lazy way out and removed any choice - everyone is stuck with downsampled 16-bit, regardless of what their system is capable of. It's that that I have a problem with, not that the audio is in 16-bit. It's the lack of care for the PC platform, and the needless dumbing down of audio quality and removal of choice.
Don't buy the game. Simple as.Quote:
Originally Posted by SoulsCollective
Of all things to complain about, it's sound. Wow. I think DICE knows sound is one of the big things in BC2 after playing the PS3 beta. They have their reasons of going with 16-bit. I'm sure the quality is still top notch like it is on the console. Do you honestly think people actually care if their sound is 16 or 32 bit? 99% of the people wouldn't give a damn nor would they notice. It just makes me giggle reading posts like yours about features that the large majority finds irrelevant.
Atleast complain about Prone or how tanks were nerfed during the beta. But sound?....... :ROTF:
i completely get your point of view but from a game dev perspective it makes absolutely no sense to waste extra time and resources on writing in extra features to cater for around 10% (if even) of the PC community. Adding in those options will also mean a lot more QA needs to be on cards that support 32bit and then on cards that support 24bit etc... Its not just a quick matter of writing in a menu option and another quantizer. Its also not lazy, its called time management and prioritization, justifying the time and expense of adding that in just isn't worth it to offer something so unnoticeable when they could rather spend the time on other aspects of the game like gameplay.
Maybe my comment was a bit "out of order", but I'm fed-up with the amount of elitism from "Audiophiles". I think the elitism from this group in particular is far more than from any other group. (Not on here specifically, but across the internet on other forums too.) Maybe Audiophiles are second to the Unity energy group ...
What would have happened if nobody was told if it was 16/24/32 bit at all ?
How many games do you think already do this in order to ensure compatibility ?
I see your point about having an option, but on the other hand having too many options is also a problem - I personally hate seeing option menus with stupid amounts of options.
I'm going to touch on the dedicated servers "issue" with my own opinion. Firstly, having been playing MW2 alot I can say that I actually like the matchmaking - Sure it has it's issues but when it's working it does the job very well.
As a lot have been comparing it to MW2 I thought I'd go into more detail as to why I think the matchmaking is a good thing:
1) Reduces the chance for people to boost their stats. Sure it doesn't solve the problem, but it helps a lot.
2) It's far easier than having to find a server yourself. In TF2 I hate trying to find a server which has the right map and is full, but has enough slots for me and my friends, only to find that when I do find one and give them the IP it becomes full before they can join.
3) Lack of dedicated servers, yes I'm putting this as a plus point. I don't want to play on some :banana::banana::banana::banana:ty server where all the settings are :banana::banana::banana::banana:ed up - Sure it hasn't fixed the problem but again it has gone a long way to helping solve it.
4) Lack of dedicated servers pt2, there are no admins and no votekicks / votebans - This means that all of the idiots shouting HAX etc don't start voteremoving random players who they think are cheating but who are simply good at the game.
Now onto BC2 - They have taken IW's ideas and expanded them. The "private dedicated servers" mean that nobody but trusted people are able to run (ranked) servers. You can't even hack your client to run your own server like in MW2. First of all it reduces piracy - If the server requires a valid CD key in order for a player to join and there are no cracked servers, how are you meant to play with a pirated version ? Personally I think there should be a demo to go with this, but that's my thought.
It also builds upon the advantages that I've listed above, especially with the preventing of stats boosting. (Which is very important in my opinion, in fact I think it's the most important part of any level-based multiplayer game.)
It seems that they want to bring the nicer parts of console gaming to the PC, which I for one support. (I.e. "Plug-And-Play" gaming.)
Finally, I really don't see why:
1) People want a console so much.
2) People think that just because the prequel has X and Y feature, that the sequel should be identical.
lol people would give a damn if is either 32-bit or not after they start playing :rofl:
I understand where you're coming from, but I disagree.Quote:
Originally Posted by Coldon
Firstly, the method that DIce are using is inefficient. Downsampling in real-time is not a resource-effective solution to the problem.
Second, you say "writing in extra features". Writing in extra features is implementing the downsampling of all game audio to 16-bit. Disabling that downsampling is a different thing entirely.
Finally, I think you're vastly overestimating the time and difficulty of implementing a better solution. Sound is not like graphics - we have very standardised APIs and, to the best of my knowledge, very few errata or performance anomalies, or differing architectures (caveat - I'm not a programmer). In the same way that every PC soundcard, be it onboard or dedicated, can play back MP3s or CDs, every PC soundcard can understand a bitrate of 16, and every card that is capable of it can similarly understand a bitrate of 24 or 32 - there's not going to be a slew of bugs and issues caused by simply upping the bitrate.
It also would not be terribly, hugely difficult to simply disable that automatic downsampling on PCs that can support a higher bitrate, or for the downsampler that is implemented to instead produce 24-bit.Then there wouldn't be as much of a fuss? But are you seriously saying that you'd prefer that game studios treated you like a mushroom?Quote:
Originally Posted by yngndrw
None. I don't know of a single other release that on consoles outputs in 32-bit audio and on PC outputs downsamples to 16-bit. Game engines up until now have more-or-less always stuck with 16-bit on all platforms, because it's an industry standard and requires no compatibility solutions. DIce, however, have lauded the sound quality and effects in Bad Company II, and have written their engine so as to allow for the latest in effects, be it graphical with DX11 or auditory with 32-bit audio. That's great, but they've then gone and shot themselves in the foot by preventing the audience that they've spent a lot of time pitching their product to, PC gamers, from properly enjoying all of the advances available.Quote:
How many games do you think already do this in order to ensure compatibility ?
Um...what? Most audio menus in games have about four sliders and one checkbox/drop-down menu. The addition of another drop-down menu or checkbox is hardly going to constitute "stupid amounts".Quote:
I see your point about having an option, but on the other hand having too many options is also a problem - I personally hate seeing option menus with stupid amounts of options.
As a programmer, I think you are completely underestimating the time and difficulty of what you are proposing, directX and openGL are very standardized APIs, and yet nvidia cards don't behave like ati cards and vice versa.Quote:
Originally Posted by SoulsCollective
The API sits between the driver and the software, the API doesn't physically access the hardware, so its up to the driver to correctly handle the commands given to it by the API, can you assume every single sound card manufacturer out there has a driver that will comply 100% with the API? Of-course not and this is why testing occurs, and this is also the reason why PC development is usually harder and more time consuming than console development, due to the lengthy QA periods. for 24bit this isnt as much of a concern since pretty much all recent onboard HD codecs support 24bit output but 32bit? that's a whole other can of worms.
At the end of the day no-one cares about the sound quality when you're in the middle of a firefight, you just want to be able to hear the explosions, footsteps, etc... does it matter if you can hear ever little stone shift as someone runs over gravel? Ofcourse not...
So lets refocus this onto important topic...
WHAT?!?! No prone?!?!?! OMFGWTFBBQLOL!!!! DICE is SATAN, THEY ARE KILLIN PC GAMING!!! KILL THEM WITH FIRE.... (btw I'm being sarcastic for those of you that missed it)
i for one am really looking forward to BC2, and am glad just to know that I'm getting to play it on PC! I honestly think rented servers are the way forward, since you are guaranteed proper specs and settings, and its always nice building a community on a server after playing with the same people for a while.
Although they can process 32bit audio, neither current generation console can output 32bit audio which makes this whole aurgument somewhat confusing to me as why would things be any different? My understanding is PCs aren't being starved of any functionailty that the consoles have as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by SoulsCollective
I do believe officially the Xbox 360 can interally process up to 320 32bit channels but is only capable of actually outputting up to 256 16bit channels meaning things are being downsampled regardless. Please correct me if I am wrong but I do remember those stats when the 360s were first released ( amongst all the hooplah of technical specifications of the next gen consoles )
As far as whether the game has any promise or not, I've played the beta on PS3 and was quite impressed and as far as console shooters go, I am not easily impressed. I am still reserving judgement for the games fate on PC, but I am staying optimistic. More than anything I hope Frostbites netcode is solid on PC as the BF2 engine is quite bad for packet loss making the game very painful to play at times ( my biggest issue with BF2/2142 , more than any balance issues - 64 player servers mean crap all if the netcode/server can't back it up)
This^^Quote:
Originally Posted by Coldon
BC2 for the PC will be good enough to make the console tards look over the fence. DICE is setting the PC up big-time for Battlefield 3.
All this bickering is a tad overdone.
I think that that issue regarding 16 bit is do to the fact that it's software and, per the developer's post did state that it would take at least 1 HW thread to play audio. Which IMO is completely inefficient for running 16bit audio. This is why 24 bit should be an option. If the game and the audio need at least 1 HW thread or more then it makes sense as to why they are recommending a quadcore CPU. So, to play their audio I need a quad core just to hear it at 16 bit is down right hilarious. What this is saying to me (for now) is that I need a more powerful CPU to run their game just to hear audio at 16 bit when compared to the console with audio at 32bit. There is something wrong with that and I think that other's see the same thing.
It's also odd that a select few think that PC gamers asking for 32bit audio are somehow audiophiles while consolers get to enjoy 32bit audio from the jump. I guess that makes them audiophiles as well.
I'm betting that all they do is drop the least significant 16bits, which is not resource intensive in the slightest.Quote:
Originally Posted by SoulsCollective
An option here and there soon adds up.Quote:
Originally Posted by SoulsCollective
Why does it matter if that's how they have implemented it, as a thread ? Windows will manage that thread as it sees fit regardless of how many cores you have available. The overhead of having it in a thread is tiny.Quote:
Originally Posted by Eastcoasthandle
I've explained why I have that opinion in the previous post :up:Quote:
Originally Posted by yngndrw
Quite a few good points from both sides of the argument! I love these forums..seriously!
Anyways, I am of the mind set that if it CAN be done for the PC, then why not? Most people on these forums spend significant time and money building one-of-a-kind high end PC's that can handle whatever developers throw at it. It's our hobby and passion! However, there is one thing to consider:
Would you rather DICE spend their time putting their time into 32-bit audio, or would you rather they deliver this game in DX11? When it comes down to a choice I say bring on DX11 and work the bugs out.
As a competitive online gamer MW2 totally failed for me. (been discussed ad nauseum) I'm not saying BC2 is going to be God's gift to gamers, but I hold out hope it will be a great game. However, my biggest disappointment to date has been the announcement of no server files. Yes, we can rent dedicated boxes, but what about LAN play? I've been to some big ticket LAN's that had no internet access, just because the sheer volume of people.
on those points, with steam i dont think that its hard to join as a group u just have one person in and get people to join through them u dont have to give out IP addresses or anything. and for the servers most servers are marked as moded or with settings or they are stock or close to stock, with any BF game or COD i cant think of anything that was common to change exept for fog of war settings. for the admin thing, there is no admin on MW2 so when vac fails as it always dose u cant do anything but leave the server.Quote:
Originally Posted by yngndrw
they (EA/DICE) already have server partners and they are expanding it with this, if they keep some of the obnoxious rules like u can only run BF servers on boxes that are allowed to host a ranked server, so if they give basic admin options and let good hosts have this instead of giant ones like previously this should work out beter for both people. but since they are going to be chanrging to be a licensed server host they should not charge us for basic updates and map packs like with the consoles
I think we can all agree that it is better that they added support for 32 player and dedicated servers on PC than provided support for 32-bit sound. If they were going to cut corners programming, I'm glad they did it as far as coding for certain soundcards with iffy 32-bit support goes rather than cutting certain other features. Battlefield would benefit from the best possible sound, but it wouldn't even be Battlefield with 24 players.
also DX11 :DQuote:
Originally Posted by >HyperlogiK<
I think one thing that people are upset about as far as the 32bit vs. 16bit. debacle is that both BF2 and 2142 (the last PC entries of the BF series prior to BC2) is multi-faceted. On one end, people were led to believe that by investing in a Creative soundcard, this would guarantee them enhanced performance for the life of the card. Additionally, the seemingly step backwards on DICE's part.
Sure, it sucks, but it isn't going to change. Granted, there is the slight possibility that later on in a patch DICE will implement a revised sound engine utilizing OpenAL.
I think what a lot of people need to realize, is that this isn't the "successor" to BF2/2142 per-se. This is coming from a different series all-together. Yes East, I do realize your argument regarding this topic. However, before any information was available about BC1 or the Frostbite engine, DICE stated their deep desire to create a true BF single-player experience. I vaguely remember reading in the same article that they wanted to do this on console.
DICE realized that it had been some time since a PC BF series game was released, and decided to give what they could at the time to PC gamers.
Save the "DICE IS ABANDONING PC GAMING AS WELL!!!" comments for after we know what BF3 will be like. I have a feeling that the aforementioned comments won't need to be made at all.