Splinter Cell: Double Agent: A Performance Analysis
by Josh Venning on December 8, 2006 2:10 AM EST- Posted in
- GPUs
Introduction
Computer game developers always face a dilemma when creating cutting edge games: do you try to target the lowest common denominator in terms of graphics and performance, or do you try to create a truly next-generation game and hope that the hardware is able to support it at launch? When The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion was released, we saw the most recent instance of a game that reached beyond the limits of the graphics cards available at launch, and even now 8 months after its release it still is one of the most stressful games available. Part of the problem with pushing too far into next-generation hardware requirements is that developers run the risk of people being disenfranchised with their product, due to poor performance. After all, it doesn't matter how great a game looks if it's basically an unplayable slideshow.
Bethesda was fortunate that they created a game that received enough critical acclaim that many people were willing to live with the low frame rates, or even spend the extra money to get hardware capable of running the game with all of the details turned up. Certainly, the fact that Oblivion is a sequel to a popular franchise helped overcome the performance limitations. Ubisoft is in a somewhat similar situation with their successful line of games in the Splinter Cell series. Recently they released their newest installment of the series, Splinter Cell: Double Agent (SCDA) for the PC, which is essentially a direct port from the Xbox 360 version released several days before. We even see configuration files designed for the 360 included with the PC version.
Splinter Cell: Double agent doesn't break the same type of graphical boundaries that The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion did, and unfortunately there seem to be a lot of technical problems with the game. Aspects of the game feel rushed, and even though there is a patch available which addresses some issues (such as anti-aliasing) the game is still rife with bugs and glitches. Luckily though, when working the game itself is very enjoyable and a great addition to the series; we just wish Ubisoft could have waited till they fixed many of the technical issues in the game before they released it (or better yet, address the issues and release the game on schedule in the first place).
One of the major issues we have had during our testing is the exclusion of a usable timedemo feature. Timedemo functionality has been included in previous generations of Splinter Cell, and even the readme file distributed with SCDA makes reference to using its timedemo feature to test the performance of in-game settings. Without the ability to make use of a timedemo, we had to fall back on FRAPS for our performance testing. This does introduce a higher degree of variability to our tests, but our numbers will reflect the performance gamers will see when playing on a system similar to our test configuration. Hopefully Ubisoft will release a patch that exposes the timedemo (and console) features that are inherent in games built around Unreal Engine 2. If they do, we will be there with an update to our testing.
As with our initial Oblivion performance articles, we tackled Splinter Cell: Double Agent's performance tests in multiple parts. We found that the game has a wide range of environments, some of which have higher or lower impacts on performance, so we chose two benchmarks that represent a good balance of CPU and GPU limited scenarios the gamer encounters throughout the different maps. We will also be testing different graphical settings to find out what works the best for the different types of mainstream and high-end graphics cards out there right now.
Computer game developers always face a dilemma when creating cutting edge games: do you try to target the lowest common denominator in terms of graphics and performance, or do you try to create a truly next-generation game and hope that the hardware is able to support it at launch? When The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion was released, we saw the most recent instance of a game that reached beyond the limits of the graphics cards available at launch, and even now 8 months after its release it still is one of the most stressful games available. Part of the problem with pushing too far into next-generation hardware requirements is that developers run the risk of people being disenfranchised with their product, due to poor performance. After all, it doesn't matter how great a game looks if it's basically an unplayable slideshow.
Bethesda was fortunate that they created a game that received enough critical acclaim that many people were willing to live with the low frame rates, or even spend the extra money to get hardware capable of running the game with all of the details turned up. Certainly, the fact that Oblivion is a sequel to a popular franchise helped overcome the performance limitations. Ubisoft is in a somewhat similar situation with their successful line of games in the Splinter Cell series. Recently they released their newest installment of the series, Splinter Cell: Double Agent (SCDA) for the PC, which is essentially a direct port from the Xbox 360 version released several days before. We even see configuration files designed for the 360 included with the PC version.
Splinter Cell: Double agent doesn't break the same type of graphical boundaries that The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion did, and unfortunately there seem to be a lot of technical problems with the game. Aspects of the game feel rushed, and even though there is a patch available which addresses some issues (such as anti-aliasing) the game is still rife with bugs and glitches. Luckily though, when working the game itself is very enjoyable and a great addition to the series; we just wish Ubisoft could have waited till they fixed many of the technical issues in the game before they released it (or better yet, address the issues and release the game on schedule in the first place).
One of the major issues we have had during our testing is the exclusion of a usable timedemo feature. Timedemo functionality has been included in previous generations of Splinter Cell, and even the readme file distributed with SCDA makes reference to using its timedemo feature to test the performance of in-game settings. Without the ability to make use of a timedemo, we had to fall back on FRAPS for our performance testing. This does introduce a higher degree of variability to our tests, but our numbers will reflect the performance gamers will see when playing on a system similar to our test configuration. Hopefully Ubisoft will release a patch that exposes the timedemo (and console) features that are inherent in games built around Unreal Engine 2. If they do, we will be there with an update to our testing.
As with our initial Oblivion performance articles, we tackled Splinter Cell: Double Agent's performance tests in multiple parts. We found that the game has a wide range of environments, some of which have higher or lower impacts on performance, so we chose two benchmarks that represent a good balance of CPU and GPU limited scenarios the gamer encounters throughout the different maps. We will also be testing different graphical settings to find out what works the best for the different types of mainstream and high-end graphics cards out there right now.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
28 Comments
View All Comments
mpc7488 - Friday, December 8, 2006 - link
Neverwinter Nights 2 would be my vote. From the reviews I've read and my experience, it's even more difficult to run than Oblivion (though it's not clear why, the graphics are not that great in most instances, though the lighting effects are phenominal).Centurin - Friday, December 8, 2006 - link
Neverwinter Nights 2 has framerate problems because of the engine. I wouldn't really use it to benchmark future games. I still feel that Oblivion is the best benchmarks for graphics at this point.DukeN - Friday, December 8, 2006 - link
Where are the 8800 series benchmarks?Josh Venning - Friday, December 8, 2006 - link
As we mentioned in the article, the 8800 cards weren't rendering the game properly. The graphical errors with Double Agent on the 8800 GTS and GTX made the game basically impossible to play. That's why we didn't include numbers for these cards. Hopefully when a patch or driver update fixes this issue we can see how the game performs on the 8800 in the future.Jodiuh - Friday, December 8, 2006 - link
97.44 on NV's site now...Splinter Cell: Double Agent Single Player has geometry corruption.
Jodiuh - Friday, December 8, 2006 - link
^^ That's under issue resolved.PrinceGaz - Friday, December 8, 2006 - link
The GeForce 6 series cards support SM3.0 so could you please add results for some representative cards of that generation. I would suggest a 6800GT (which usually performs in between a 7600GS and 7600GT so would probably belong in the 'mid-range' category) and a 6600GT (which I guess is somewhere around the 7300GT level or slightly higher and would therefore be considered 'low-end').I know the GF6 cards are getting on a bit now but there are a lot of people still using them as they are still capable of running most games quite well (especially the 6800s), and including them makes sense as owners of them are probably the most likely to be considering an upgrade which is what an article like this is presumably intended for.
imaheadcase - Friday, December 8, 2006 - link
From the performance I'm assuming it looks better when playing, because that looks like a console game graphics. heheshabby - Friday, December 8, 2006 - link
The only thing this article is missing is different cpu's, but let me fill that void. With a p4 @ 3.2 ghz + x1900xtx i get around 10-20fps avg. Luckily my e6400 just arrive and i will finally get some decent fps now since the p4 seems like a huge bottleneck.yyrkoon - Friday, December 8, 2006 - link
Forcing paying customers to BETA test games, seems to be becoming a habit among developers, and is simply wrong. Anyone remember the BC 3000 A.D. days and what happened to Derrik Smart ? Anyhow, hoping that Bethesda made Oblivion into a game that would renew my days of playing Daggerfall, I purchased the game, and even stuck up for the developers when others criticized the bugs of the game. Days turned into weeks, then weeks into months, additional content was released (pay ware I might add), all before Bethesda finally released its beta patch. It soon dawned on me, that Bethesda no longer enjoyed creating games, or cared about making their customers happy, but only cared about making money, and that I couldn't help feeling ripped off.I do realize that game developers need to make money like anyone else, but they also need to realize that "anyone else" that works very hard for their money, when they do sell something, they need to provide a solid, working product. Could you imagine Ford, or another car manufacturer selling cars, as new, only to let the customer know AFTER they made the purchase, that some items still needed to be worked on, and that some assembly may be required ? We all know this wouldn't float for one second. After all, its not our fault the developer couldn't release a product on time, or needs money NOW to continue their product. Also, I find it rather strange, that a game recently released does not support new hardware, when games that have been out much longer do. Or did they ?
Companies such as this will find it very hard to get any of my money in the future, and I can only hope that other people will follow, and that perhaps someday we'll have game companies that actually release games as advertised once again. It's hard enough that we gamers have to live with games that are no longer as dynamic as they once were, and have to pay $50usd for game content that lasts about 5-8 hours, before you start reliving the game over, and over, until it finally ends.