PS4 and Xbox One resolution / frame rate discussion

[ViperAFK]

Well the fact is polygon counts  and other graphic enhancments matter far more than resolution beyond 720p.  Of course 1080p will be better but to an extent your only going to see if you stop playing and just sit there and TRY to see it.

The differences would be bigger on your tv vs screenshots though. 720p upscaled vs native 1080p would look "blurry" (and this can vary depending on the quality of the upscaling) and have more aliasing.

[Houtei]

Its kinda stupid to even be having a convo about what the resolution will be/wont be/cant be/might be/ because at the end of the day its a bunch of guesses.  Having said that its not likely they will hit 1080p by launch but its also not out of the realm of possibility so its kind of dumb to get so defensive about it.

[Houtei]

Thats the thing though on a TV in the living room your far less likely to notice than sitting at a PC specially if you care at all about gaming and not just sitting there trying to examine it.

[BajiRav]

At the end of the day the only reason it wouldn't be 1080p would be technical reasons, not because they have or haven't said anything. As I pointed out and you do see to somewhat agree if they had hit 1080p they'd most likely be singing about it on social media (publicly). There's been an alpha at 720p and a beta at 792p, both of these are taken from snapshots of the code, so they are relevant in gaging what the game can do technically, and because the beta was so recent, aid in projecting the final builds resolution. Besides apparently compressed assets to lower the download size for the beta, there won't exist another separate code base of the game with different technical on-goings. If it's going above 792p for release it's because they've done something with the same code everyone ran at beta, completely possible, but any level headed person would guess 900p, not 1080p due to a plethora of annecdotal evidence stacking against such a leap.

 

Do you know what happens between beta and 11th March? The March Xbox One update that is rumored to drop the system GPU reserve. If that is true, a resolution jump is possible without compromising IQ. We can only speculate by how much but it is not impossible.

[LaP]

Well the fact is polygon counts  and other graphic enhancments matter far more than resolution beyond 720p.  Of course 1080p will be better but to an extent your only going to see if you stop playing and just sit there and TRY to see it.

 

 

Doing a 1080p versus 720p comparison using compressed image or video files is kind of stupid.

[vcfan]

At the end of the day the only reason it wouldn't be 1080p would be technical reasons, not because they have or haven't said anything. As I pointed out and you do see to somewhat agree if they had hit 1080p they'd most likely be singing about it on social media (publicly). There's been an alpha at 720p and a beta at 792p, both of these are taken from snapshots of the code, so they are relevant in gaging what the game can do technically, and because the beta was so recent, aid in projecting the final builds resolution. Besides apparently compressed assets to lower the download size for the beta, there won't exist another separate code base of the game with different technical on-goings. If it's going above 792p for release it's because they've done something with the same code everyone ran at beta, completely possible, but any level headed person would guess 900p, not 1080p due to a plethora of annecdotal evidence stacking against such a leap.

 

Assassins Creed 4 on ps4 went from 900p to 1080p with a patch created between going gold,and release date

792p = 1,115,136 pixels

900p = 1,440,000 pixels

1080p = 2,073,600 pixels

[Hedon]

At the end of the day the only reason it wouldn't be 1080p would be technical reasons, not because they have or haven't said anything. As I pointed out and you do see to somewhat agree if they had hit 1080p they'd most likely be singing about it on social media (publicly). There's been an alpha at 720p and a beta at 792p, both of these are taken from snapshots of the code, so they are relevant in gaging what the game can do technically, and because the beta was so recent, aid in projecting the final builds resolution. Besides apparently compressed assets to lower the download size for the beta, there won't exist another separate code base of the game with different technical on-goings. If it's going above 792p for release it's because they've done something with the same code everyone ran at beta, completely possible, but any level headed person would guess 900p, not 1080p due to a plethora of annecdotal evidence stacking against such a leap.

Did you notice the difference res difference between the Alpha and the Beta of Titanfall when you were playing it?

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

Assassins Creed 4 on ps4 went from 900p to 1080p with a patch created between going gold,and release date

792p = 1,115,136 pixels

900p = 1,440,000 pixels

1080p = 2,073,600 pixels

 

What's your point? I'm not debating patches having the ability to increase resolution, never have. All I said earlier is 792p to 1080p is a very large jump, and it's for a 60FPS title. AC4 is 30FPS. Even the PS4 has struggled with 1080p/60FPS, Killzone only managing 1080p/60FPS in MP.

 

Did you notice the difference res difference between the Alpha and the Beta of Titanfall when you were playing it?

 

Haven't played it, merely reporting resolution facts, not my opinion on the difference between 720p and 792p.

[vcfan]

What's your point? I'm not debating patches having the ability to increase resolution, never have. All I said earlier is 792p to 1080p is a very large jump, and it's for a 60FPS title. AC4 is 30FPS. Even the PS4 has struggled with 1080p/60FPS, Killzone only managing 1080p/60FPS in MP.

 

 

Haven't played it, merely reporting resolution facts, not my opinion on the difference between 720p and 792p.

beta is even earlier than gold,so how can you gage that 900p would most likely be the ceiling when a ps4 game increased its resolution even more significantly than 792p to 900p after going gold? Have you also considered that the beta may be ROP bound because of going with the 2xMSAA because their AA solution was not completed yet?. This would have a significant performance hit. Fact is no one can gage anything from a beta.

[BajiRav]

Wolfenstein has been confirmed for 60FPS on all consoles

http://gamerhorizon.com/wolfenstein-the-new-order-interview-with-jens-matthies-creative-director-machine-games/

Only the PS4 has resolution confirmed so far

http://blog.us.playstation.com/2014/02/24/wolfenstein-the-new-order-ps4-hands-on-old-school/comment-page-1/#comment-952220

Bit OT but here's PS4 footage

Angela Ramsey a PR rep of Bethesda Studios has confirmed to OnlySP that, ?the Xbox One version of Wolfenstein will run at 1080p/60 fps.?

Previously we could only confirm that the PS4 version would do so. So there you have it, both version will have the same specifications which means we can all get along now. I?ve also responded asking to confirm the 15-20 hour playtime quote and will update this story when we have a response.

http://m.neogaf.com/showthread.php?t=775667

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

beta is even earlier than gold,so how can you gage that 900p would most likely be the ceiling when a ps4 game increased its resolution even more significantly than 792p to 900p after going gold? Have you also considered that the beta may be ROP bound because of going with the 2xMSAA because their AA solution was not completed yet?. This would have a significant performance hit. Fact is no one can gage anything from a beta.

 

What? I said 900p is the likely outcome (IMO) for Titanfall, not 1080p. Going from 792p to 1080p is a far bigger jump than AC4 going from 900p to 1080p.

 

Fact is no one can gage anything from a beta.

 

That has to be one of the strangest things I've ever read.... I'm not even going to comment why.

 

http://m.neogaf.com/showthread.php?t=775667

 

Well that's good, but unfortunately until release you're going to see the "but is it native or upscaled" comments...

[trooper11]

Well that's good, but unfortunately until release you're going to see the "but is it native or upscaled" comments...

 

 

And that is pretty unfair considering those same people would be quick to assume the announcement was correct if it had stated the X1 version would be lower.

[Hedon]

What's your point? I'm not debating patches having the ability to increase resolution, never have. All I said earlier is 792p to 1080p is a very large jump, and it's for a 60FPS title. AC4 is 30FPS. Even the PS4 has struggled with 1080p/60FPS, Killzone only managing 1080p/60FPS in MP.

 

 

Haven't played it, merely reporting resolution facts, not my opinion on the difference between 720p and 792p.

Oh, I was just wondering. I hadn't noticed a difference, but I didn't look for the difference. You should have played it, it's super fun. Are you getting it at retail?

[Hedon]

http://m.neogaf.com/showthread.php?t=775667

Great news. Nice to see yet another title is confirmed 1080p 60fps native on the Xbox One.

[SnoopZ]

Great news. Nice to see yet another title is confirmed 1080p 60fps native on the Xbox One.

I do hope so but is it confirmed as native though?

[Hedon]

I do hope so but is it confirmed as native though?

Well, then I guess we should ask...is the PS4 version confirmed native? If the game was 720p, they would say it's 720p, but can be upscaled.

 

PS4: 1080p 60fps

http://gamingbolt.com/wolfenstein-the-new-order-confirmed-at-1080p60-fps-on-ps4

 

X1: 1080p 60fps

http://gamingbolt.com/xbox-one-version-of-wolfenstein-the-new-order-will-run-at-1080p60-fps#G0SgX5JjITkXpe1y.99

[vcfan]

What? I said 900p is the likely outcome (IMO) for Titanfall, not 1080p. Going from 792p to 1080p is a far bigger jump than AC4 going from 900p to 1080p.

 

the difference between 792p to 900p is a fraction of the difference between 900p to 1080p. it isnt that crazy if that jump were to happen.

 

That has to be one of the strangest things I've ever read.... I'm not even going to comment why.

it isnt strange,because developers have said there will be changes to the xbox sdk[re:esram],and there will also be freeing of resources. the beta takes advantage of none of those so far,and it is still in fact a beta build. how you can gage what the final resolution will be,without knowing the intricacies of the code is beyond me.

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

 

the difference between 792p to 900p is a fraction of the difference between 900p to 1080p. it isnt that crazy if that jump were to happen.

 

it isnt strange,because developers have said there will be changes to the xbox sdk[re:esram],and there will also be freeing of resources. the beta takes advantage of none of those so far,and it is still in fact a beta build. how you can gage what the final resolution will be,without knowing the intricacies of the code is beyond me.

 

I've never once said 792p to 900p is a "crazy jump". I only commented on jumping to 1080p. Multiple times I have said 900p seems most likely, isn't that what you're saying as well, therefore why are you putting words in my mouth when we agree with each other?

 

Are the GPU resources confirmed to be changing though? We've read the rumours but is it actually happening for March the 11th? Remember as well how long the game has been in development, a change to an SDK doesn't guarantee you can suddenly retroactively re-tool a whole game overnight.

 

We're so close to release we're starting to argue about diminishing returns here, if anyone wants to put their bets on 1080p go for it, you'll know very shortly (review copies will probably confirm prior to release, unless embargoed).

[Lord Method Man]

I wouldn't put much stock in an id title running at 60 fps, they did the same thing with Rage and they accomplished it by using Nintendo 64 quality textures on most environments.

[vcfan]

I've never once said 792p to 900p is a "crazy jump". I only commented on jumping to 1080p. Multiple times I have said 900p seems most likely, isn't that what you're saying as well, therefore why are you putting words in my mouth when we agree with each other?

i think theres a misunderstanding.looking back at my comments, theres more than one way to interpret them,and the comparison i was making lead to confusion.

what im trying to say is, we've seen a ps4 game go from 900p to 1080p in a small time window. you're AOK with that. going from 792p to 1080p though,is not some crazy extra jump that it becomes unthinkable if it were to happen.

792p------>900p------------>1080p

 

Are the GPU resources confirmed to be changing though? We've read the rumours but is it actually happening for March the 11th? Remember as well how long the game has been in development, a change to an SDK doesn't guarantee you can suddenly retroactively re-tool a whole game overnight.

if they bent over backwards for titanfall with the controller,and stuff in the update,what makes you think they wouldnt have gotten this thing done in time? there are a lot of unknowns,which makes it hard to guess where things will fall. beta or not,i have no ####in clue. who knows,we might even see 950p.

[trooper11]

I wouldn't put much stock in an id title running at 60 fps, they did the same thing with Rage and they accomplished it by using Nintendo 64 quality textures on most environments.

 

So this would be another one of those titles that dont count.

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

So this would be another one of those titles that dont count.

 

How is it some sort of injustice to the XB1 to comment on the engine they use? To be fair on him RAGE ran at 60FPS on the PS3/360. They do have their methods, whatever those are, to reach 60FPS. Check RAGE upon release, lots of issues with texture streaming failing. The PS3 and 360 versions of Wolfenstein are also running at 60FPS, it would be a bit of a crime if the PS4/XB1 couldn't then do it.

 

"Don't count titles", just sounds like a coined up phrase to purposely create an image of "unfairness"  :laugh:

 

 

i think theres a misunderstanding.looking back at my comments, theres more than one way to interpret them,and the comparison i was making lead to confusion.

what im trying to say is, we've seen a ps4 game go from 900p to 1080p in a small time window. you're AOK with that. going from 792p to 1080p though,is not some crazy extra jump that it becomes unthinkable if it were to happen.

792p------>900p------------>1080p

 

if they bent over backwards for titanfall with the controller,and stuff in the update,what makes you think they wouldnt have gotten this thing done in time? there are a lot of unknowns,which makes it hard to guess where things will fall. beta or not,i have no ####in clue. who knows,we might even see 950p.

 

 

I think we should just drop the AC4 chat, whatever points we seem to be trying to make through it just seem to be getting lost in translation. As for 950p, unlikely, 900p is chosen due to its aspect ratio (16:10) being the same as 720p and 1080p.

[trooper11]

How is it some sort of injustice to the XB1 to comment on the engine they use? To be fair on him RAGE ran at 60FPS on the PS3/360. They do have their methods, whatever those are, to reach 60FPS. Check RAGE upon release, lots of issues with texture streaming failing. The PS3 and 360 versions of Wolfenstein are also running at 60FPS, it would be a bit of a crime if the PS4/XB1 couldn't then do it.

 

"Don't count titles", just sounds like a coined up phrase to purposely create an image of "unfairness"  :laugh:

 

 

Excuse me?  Where did I say it was an injustice?

 

I think your too deep in the whole console war thing to see the difference anymore.

 

Read my reply again.  I asked a question, nothing more.  We had talked about how racing games and sports tiles dont really count as much as other genres becuase they are not as demanding as other genres.  That was a point I agreed with.  so my question is if Wolfenstein should also be considered one of those less demanding titles due to the engine they use or whatever.

 

I know you guys are complete experts on every game engine in use, but some of us aren't.  Sometimes a question is simply a question, not a vailed attempt to attack.

 

So I'll ask it again, is the general idea that the engine being used in Wolfenstein does not have a history of being demanding like other engines in use today?

[DrunknMunky Veteran]

Excuse me?  Where did I say it was an injustice?

 

I think your too deep in the whole console war thing to see the difference anymore.

 

Read my reply again.  I asked a question, nothing more.  We had talked about how racing games and sports tiles dont really count as much as other genres becuase they are not as demanding as other genres.  That was a point I agreed with.  so my question is if Wolfenstein should also be considered one of those less demanding titles due to the engine they use or whatever.

 

I know you guys are complete experts on every game engine in use, but some of us aren't.  Sometimes a question is simply a question, not a vailed attempt to attack.

 

So I'll ask it again, is the general idea that the engine being used in Wolfenstein does not have a history of being demanding like other engines in use today?

 

Can anyone truly say one way or the other? Nobody is an expert here and we've only seen it in action in one game.

[trooper11]

Can anyone truly say one way or the other? Nobody is an expert here and we've only seen it in action in one game.

 

Um someone already claimed it was true, hence my question.

 

I have no idea who the expert is here, so I ask. 

 

If people are going to claim something of a technical nature, dont be shocked when someone asks for clarification.