Zechs Merquise Posted October 31, 2013 Posted October 31, 2013 Whilst a lot is being made of the fact the XBO is only displaying the BF4 and Ghosts at 720p some of the over reactions to this are hilarious. People are acting like the difference is going to be night and day between the two and the XBO versions are going to be a pixellated mess. Basically, if you're sat anymore than three metres away from your TV you wouldn't really notice the difference between 720 and 1080 unless your TV was 50 inches or greater. Now it's obviously more noticeable if you sit closer to the screen, but even then, it's hardly going to be the night and day difference some are claiming. Whilst this will no doubt cause MS some serious embarrassment in online discussion forums I highly doubt anyone that picks up BF4 or Ghosts on the XBO will be squinting at the screen trying to pick out enemies due to the blurry mess!
MATtheHAT Posted October 31, 2013 Posted October 31, 2013 The difference is huge. 1080p has over double the amount of pixels than 720p. Even on a modest size TV with native 1080p resolution, the difference will be very noticeable. I think Daft posted a good visual representation of it on the previous page. But I think to focus on the CoD Ghosts resolution disparity is kinda missing the point. If the Xbox One cannot display a last generation game at 1080p then it is clearly underpowered.
Happenstance Posted October 31, 2013 Posted October 31, 2013 Its the start of a new generation, this kind of stuff always happens. PS3 games had real problems when they first launched too. Devs have already said it will be much better after this.
Debug Mode Posted November 1, 2013 Posted November 1, 2013 Guys, lets not get too far ahead of ourselves. The weakest console in regards to hardware has the tendency to outsell the competition because you know, you can sell the console for cheaper which really does give a massive edge and... Oh. Well, either way, the thing is going to sell regardless because it's the fucking Xbox and people loving paying way more than they need to. As for the weakest hardware? Well that's gone to shit this generation, I am not going to be surprised if the PS4 and Xbox One surpass the Wii U's LTD by the end of the fiscal year.
Zechs Merquise Posted November 1, 2013 Posted November 1, 2013 Guys, lets not get too far ahead of ourselves. The weakest console in regards to hardware has the tendency to outsell the competition because you know, you can sell the console for cheaper which really does give a massive edge and... Oh. Well, either way, the thing is going to sell regardless because it's the fucking Xbox and people loving paying way more than they need to. As for the weakest hardware? Well that's gone to shit this generation, I am not going to be surprised if the PS4 and Xbox One surpass the Wii U's LTD by the end of the fiscal year. I think that's the sticking point for a lot of people. You're looking a hundred dollars more for the XBO and it clearly isn't as powerful. Reminds me of the situation the Saturn was in. However, the big difference is MS have the budget to properly market the XBO and they're not coming back from two disasters (Mega CD and 32X). I think the Wii U will be annihilated once the other next gen systems are out. It's simply going to end up as a place for Nintendo games and quirky third party titles that fit within Nintendo's philosophy. Nintendo totally blew their year head start which really should have put them in a position of such strength.
Sheikah Posted November 1, 2013 Posted November 1, 2013 The difference is huge. 1080p has over double the amount of pixels than 720p. Even on a modest size TV with native 1080p resolution, the difference will be very noticeable. I think Daft posted a good visual representation of it on the previous page. But I think to focus on the CoD Ghosts resolution disparity is kinda missing the point. If the Xbox One cannot display a last generation game at 1080p then it is clearly underpowered. This. As Nintendo have only just adopted HD I'd hardly expect Zechs to know the first thing about higher resolutions. :p
Dante Posted November 2, 2013 Posted November 2, 2013 This. As Nintendo have only just adopted HD I'd hardly expect Zechs to know the first thing about higher resolutions. :p Also Aaron Greenberg (Chief of Staff for Devices and Studios Group at Microsoft).
MATtheHAT Posted November 2, 2013 Posted November 2, 2013 See this winds me up. People will actually read this nonsense and believe they are seeing a true 1080p picture. It's MS marketing spin and damage control. If they had just taking the angle that the Xbox One is designed to be an entertainment centre with less focus on power and more on features and TV, then fair enough. Trying to position it in parity with what Sony is offering is clearly untrue, and they are getting called out on it.
Zechs Merquise Posted November 2, 2013 Posted November 2, 2013 I clearly do understand the issue of resolution. I realise that on paper and as a visual representation the way Daft presented it 1920x1080 is far more than 1280x720. However what I am saying is that you also have to put that in the context of how big the screen is and how far away you are from that screen! Please see the graph below to explain it: You see if you're sat three metres back from the screen you really need a 50" screen (or larger) to see noticeable differences between 1080p and 720p. However if you have a 24 inch monitor and you're sitting the distance away you would typical sit if you were working at a PC you would easily notice the difference between 720p and 1080p and resolution would be much more important to you. Never have I said that it's a non-issue. I simply said that the way some people were talking about it you would think the PS4 is producing graphics akin to Crysis 3 on ultra high PC settings and the XBO is basically running Doom on the SNES - but maybe slightly more pixellated! Resolution has always been a far bigger thing to the PC audience due to the distance they sit from the screen. It has been less important to the console audience as console gamers typically sit much further away from the screen. However I also went on to clarify what I feel is a sticking point for MS: I think that's the sticking point for a lot of people. You're looking a hundred dollars more for the XBO and it clearly isn't as powerful. Whether or not people will notice a huge difference in their living room when playing COD is one thing, but the knowledge that you paid $100 more for a system that is less capable is another thing entirely. Overall I would say that most consumers would be put off in the knowledge that a more expensive product is less technically capable.
Debug Mode Posted November 2, 2013 Posted November 2, 2013 One thing that is still relatively unknown at this point, in defence of the Xbox One, is the difference in performance. COD isn't exactly the best judge for this, so we're going to need to wait a while. What if Xbox One has gone for in-game performance over resolution? I kind of doubt it, considering all that extra money is basically being used to reap back the costs of researching the Kinect, but it's a valid point. Playing a game in a higher definition requires even more processing ability. There's always going to be a sacrifice here. A game being rendered at 1080p rather than 720p is going to be less capable when it comes to graphical fidelity unless the hardware is significantly more powerful. It's going to be an interesting time over the next few months, as the games reach the hands of the public and we start to realise yet again that we got a final product looking pretty gimped compared to the bullshots on both consoles. But still, for that price? I very much doubt core gamers are going to feel it was a justified extra expense for some fucking huge, intrusive Eye Toy.
Sheikah Posted November 2, 2013 Posted November 2, 2013 I think you need to put down your researched charts and just do the test, Zechs. I can clearly see the difference on my 32 inch TV sat at a reasonable distance away. The difference between 720p and 1080p is really quite obvious, and I should imagine most people have at least a 32 inch TV. Also Aaron Greenberg (Chief of Staff for Devices and Studios Group at Microsoft). As has already been said, the man is talking out of his backside.
Debug Mode Posted November 2, 2013 Posted November 2, 2013 I can't believe the gall of this guy. Customers are more informed than ever. People know the difference between native and upscale. Thank fuck for the information age.
Sheikah Posted November 2, 2013 Posted November 2, 2013 I can't believe the gall of this guy. Customers are more informed than ever. People know the difference between native and upscale. Thank fuck for the information age. I know, it's fucking ridiculous. It's as bad as false advertising if you ask me. It is NOT 1080p.
bryanee Posted November 2, 2013 Posted November 2, 2013 Jesus are Microsoft trying redefine what 1080p is? From a Reddit thread, MS employee
Debug Mode Posted November 3, 2013 Posted November 3, 2013 It's ridiculous, but as long as they don't say it is being rendered in 1080p on any advertising, they can get away with it. It's ridiculous, and the only way they can suffer for this is if people took a stand and said "Fuck off, I'm not buying this".
Debug Mode Posted November 3, 2013 Posted November 3, 2013 Fuck off, I'm not buying this. You have just saved the gaming industry for the consumers.
Cookyman Posted November 3, 2013 Posted November 3, 2013 (edited) You have just saved the gaming industry for the consumers. *round of applause* Thank you all! Edited November 6, 2013 by Cookyman
Debug Mode Posted November 6, 2013 Posted November 6, 2013 Looks like we were all a bit too quick to go firing bullets at the Xbox One's edition of Call of Duty's inferior resolution compared to the Playstation 4 Call of Duty framerate issues on PS4
Sheikah Posted November 6, 2013 Posted November 6, 2013 Ooo err. I guess the PS4 must have been more capable for them to decide on 1080p, but they obviously didn't test it all the way through.
Debug Mode Posted November 6, 2013 Posted November 6, 2013 Ooo err. I guess the PS4 must have been more capable for them to decide on 1080p, but they obviously didn't test it all the way through. I'm guessing this as well. I watched the Killzone video, and it handles the resolution and framerate perfectly but is made in-house. But still, it's pretty embaressing (especially for me) that we didn't wait this out to see what should have obviously been a factor to consider, the technical performance.
S.C.G Posted November 6, 2013 Posted November 6, 2013 The framerate dropped a good handful of times when I was playing through the campaign on the 360 version, only at specific intensive points though... I don't know if this is relevant if it happens to be in the same places in the PS4 version, but it certainly didn't break the game or anything, just the immersion level for a few mere moments. :p
MATtheHAT Posted November 6, 2013 Posted November 6, 2013 Apparently runs like shit on PC too. Smacks of poor optimisation and lazy ports.
Cookyman Posted November 6, 2013 Posted November 6, 2013 The consoles not officially launched yet - I'm betting a patch is in the works as we speak.
Recommended Posts