PS4 and Xbox One resolution / frame rate discussion

[XorpiZ]

I always put my PC games up to the highest res that the game and my pc can handle - it depends what monitor your playing on - but for 32, 42 inch TV's etc then 1080p is a much better res for the games - there is no denying that on a console a 1080p output is the optimal resolution on a HD TV.

 

That's not what I'm talking about. I get why 'discussing' framerates, resolutions and the likes is great for confirming to yourself and others, that you made the right choice, when you bought the more powerful console, but using that as definite proof of higher image quality is wrong.

[firey]

I'm wondering why you aren't reading what is being written to you. Resolution has next to nothing to do with how a game looks. I'd like to repeat it for you, if you so wish. Besides, the entire second sentence is either ignorance or just an outright lie.

Uh.. yes resolution does play a part in it.  I used to play The Sims at 800x600.. then I did the 1024x768.. and my god did it look better.

[nitroxhotshot]

That's not what I'm talking about. I get why 'discussing' framerates, resolutions and the likes is great for confirming to yourself and others, that you made the right choice, when you bought the more powerful console, but using that as definite proof of higher image quality is wrong.

 

Well no - it's about balance, and as consoles are designed for HD TV's then still the optimal output for eye candy and performance is 1080p.

 

I know where you are coming from but it's about balance, and the PS4 has found it's peak at 1080p, where the Xbone has found it's own at 720p.

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

I'm wondering why you aren't reading what is being written to you. Resolution has next to nothing to do with how a game looks. I'd like to repeat it for you, if you so wish. Besides, the entire second sentence is either ignorance or just an outright lie.

 

Last generation we had differences of 40/60p causing many to prefer 360 titles, and see differences - Now we have differences of whole resolution jumps, 720p - 1080p and resolution has next to nothing to do with how a game looks?  :s

 

 

Well no - it's about balance, and as consoles are designed for HD TV's then still the optimal output for eye candy and performance is 1080p.

 

I know where you are coming from but it's about balance, and the PS4 has found it's peak at 1080p, where the Xbone has found it's own at 720p.

 

 

900p is more accurate for an average.

[trooper11]

I think the xbox one is under powered. The last play station I've owned was a PS2. I've been a microsoft fan buy since. Microsoft really blew it this time. X1 was marketed as "next gen". It can't even compete with the PS4.

I had my pre order the day I could. Then cancelled it. It's not worth it.

For anyone that says it can.

Show me three exact games that run 1080/60 on both.

Games that are coming out later are 1080 on PS4. But good old X1, nope! Might as well buy them for the 360. what's the point of paying for a system that practically only does old gen stuff? They dropped the ball.

 

 

There are three games that run at 1080/60 on both, but that was already pointed out to you.  This is an example of ruining a decent debate.  We need to get past the sweeping generalizations. 

 

To your point about the X1 though, MS did clearly blow it.  If most people are convinced that the X1 is far, far weaker than the ps4, then its over.  When people claim that its not better than a 360, then its over.

 

Its amazing that a console that is clearly many times as powerful as its previous version struggles to offer games that look better than that previous version.  Take MGS5 as a prime example of that.  Even if the hardware is not really to blame, the fact that the 360 and X1 versions show little separation sends the message that the X1 is barely better than a 360, if at all.  Some of us may know that the hardware should be capable of more, but until games show that off, it doesn't matter.

 

 

I disagree. The XB1 isn't even hitting 1080p for games running at 30fps, so that speaks to a lack of performance. We've even seen XB1 exclusives running at 720p @ 30fps, which there simply is no excuse for.

 

Which begs the question:  Why?

 

How can a console that has hardware that we know for a fact is several times more powerful than the previous version, offer games that are not a step above games on that previous console?  Forget the whole ps4 vs x1 debate, just look at the 360 vs x1 side of it.

 

It just makes you wonder if something else could be causing this.

 

Last generation we had differences of 40/60p causing many to prefer 360 titles, and see differences - Now we have differences of whole resolution jumps, 720p - 1080p and resolution has next to nothing to do with how a game looks?  :s

 

 

So your claiming a fan conspiracy?

 

I guess that is happening, especially if you know the person saying it said the opposite last gen.

 

I do wonder sometimes about all of the people that were claiming how little this stuff matter last gen.  Do they say the same now, or have they 'evolved' on the subject.

[theyarecomingforyou]

I'm wondering why you aren't reading what is being written to you. Resolution has next to nothing to do with how a game looks.

Nobody is claiming that resolution is the be-all-and-end-all of gaming but the issue here is that most developers aren't able to hit 1080p, even at 30fps. If the console was powerful enough they would be, as non-native resolutions reduce the image quality. Most importantly, developers are able to run games at a higher resolution and/or framerate on the PS4 so that does speak to performance issues with the XB1.

 

So? That doesn't really make your post less incorrect. XB1 is fully capable of doing 1080p/60. Claiming otherwise is bordering on ignorance.

Nobody is claiming otherwise. But the PS3 is also capable of 1080p @ 60fps. One or two titles running at 1080p isn't proof that the console is capable of it or that it's not underpowered. Games like Thief, Watch_Dogs, Ryse, Battlefield 4, Call Of Duty: Ghosts, Dead Rising 3, Metal Gear Solid V, Titanfall, Plants Vs Zombies: Garden Warfare, Killer Instinct and Assassin's Creed 4 have all been unable to hit 1080p and a lot of them are only 30fps. We didn't see the same thing last generation - sure there were titles that dropped the resolution but they weren't as common and the drop in resolution was much smaller.

 

Which begs the question:  Why?

 

How can a console that has hardware that we know for a fact is several times more powerful than the previous version, offer games that are not a step above games on that previous console?  Forget the whole ps4 vs x1 debate, just look at the 360 vs x1 side of it.

 

It just makes you wonder if something else could be causing this.

It doesn't really matter why it is occurring, just that it is. We saw a similar thing last generation when everybody talked about how much more powerful the PS3 was than the X360 yet most games looked or ran better on the X360. The issue is that the XB1 costs significantly more than the PS4 and yet offers inferior performance. And unlike a PC it's not possible to upgrade things later.

[LaP]

The key word here is "settings". Not resolution.

 

A game can look much better in 900p than in 1080p, depending on the settings. Using resolution to define how a game looks is wrong. The sooner people learn that, the better.

 

It might look better. But it still gonna be slightly more blurry because of the upscaling. And you wont gain much by going 900p instead of 1080p. It really is a matter of can you live with the blurriness of the upscaler or not. It's mostly a matter of taste i guess but pretty much all people i know who play PC games at native res on a regular basis don't like the blurriness of past gen console titles.

 

You get used to it. When i play my 360 a lot i get used to it no doubt about it. But then i fire a PC game at native res (even one with bad console like gfx like Gone Home) and it then strikes me how blurry the upscaled console games using FXAA are.

[Dane]

So? That doesn't really make your post less incorrect. XB1 is fully capable of doing 1080p/60. Claiming otherwise is bordering on ignorance.

 

Then its developer issue.   If they can make it go 1080 for ps4 they can make it for xbox one,  but I believe I read here, it harder to code for.  Microsoft needs to help them out in that area then.  

[trooper11]

It doesn't really matter why it is occurring, just that it is. We saw a similar thing last generation when everybody talked about how much more powerful the PS3 was than the X360 yet most games looked or ran better on the X360. The issue is that the XB1 costs significantly more than the PS4 and yet offers inferior performance. And unlike a PC it's not possible to upgrade things later.

 

 

Exactly, very few people in the online community or among mainstream consumers are interested in hearing why or being willing to accept a justification. That was clear last gen and its clear again now.

 

MS simply must do whatever it can to improve the situation asap. If that means a better sdk, drivers, or more direct help given to third party developers, then they have to do it. 

 

As soon as you start seeing more games hit the magic numbers that people are talking about, the debate fades away on its own. 

[XorpiZ]

One or two titles running at 1080p isn't proof that the console is capable of it or that it's not underpowered.

 

Lets take a metaphor, as we all love those.

Lets assume that the PS4 is a 100m runner, who consistently runs around 9,9 seconds. People will agree, that he's capable of running 100 meters in less than 10 seconds.

Now, lets assume that the XB1 is another 100m runner, who averages out at 10,3 seconds, but from time to time runs 9,9 seconds. Wouldn't you then agree, that he's definitely capable of running 100 meters in less than 10 seconds?

There's a LOT of titles running 1080p on the XB1, so it's definitely capable of running it. Claiming otherwise is just silly.

Now, there's a lot of posts directed at me, and I'm not gonna quote them all, but instead give a general answer.

Higher resolution is mostly something that should be strived for, but claiming a game running in 1080p is better looking than a game running in 900p is just... dumb. There, I said it. Native resolution is something that is to be preferred, in order to avoid the upscaler, but I'm willing to bet that the average gamer has absolutely no idea if the game he's playing is running 900p or 1080p, unless his TV or a buddy told him.

It'd be much more relevant to discuss the actual image quality differences (such as the huge difference in MGSGZ), than to discuss numbers that has (almost) no saying in how the game actually looks.

[theyarecomingforyou]

Lets assume that the PS4 is a 100m runner, who consistently runs around 9,9 seconds. People will agree, that he's capable of running 100 meters in less than 10 seconds.

Now, lets assume that the XB1 is another 100m runner, who averages out at 10,3 seconds, but from time to time runs 9,9 seconds. Wouldn't you then agree, that he's definitely capable of running 100 meters in less than 10 seconds?

That's a terrible analogy. It doesn't work like that because each game has different graphical demands. Being able to run Forza at 1080p @ 60fps doesn't prove that the XB1 is capable of running more demanding games at that resolution. And even if it does hit 1080p @ 60fps that doesn't mean it's doing so with the same graphical fidelity.

 

There's a LOT of titles running 1080p on the XB1, so it's definitely capable of running it. Claiming otherwise is just silly.

I have never claimed that the XB1 isn't capable of 1080p @ 60fps, as even the PS3 is. My argument was that the XB1 has not been able to hit it with graphically demanding games - heck, it hasn't even been able to hit it at 30fps. The most important factor here is that we have the PS4 to compare it to and that has been able to hit 1080p more consistently.

[XorpiZ]

 

 

That's a terrible analogy. It doesn't work like that because each game has different graphical demands. Being able to run Forza at 1080p @ 60fps doesn't prove that the XB1 is capable of running more demanding games at that resolution. And even if it does hit 1080p @ 60fps that doesn't mean it's doing so with the same graphical fidelity.

 

 

But you keep claiming, it isn't capable of 1080p/60 when that's clearly false, based on the large number of games running that particular resolution/fps.

 

Cut it out. I have never claimed that the XB1 isn't capable of 1080p @ 60fps, as even the PS3 is. My argument was that the XB1 has not been able to hit it with graphically demanding games - heck, it hasn't even been able to hit it at 30fps. The most important factor here is that we have the PS4 to compare it to and that has been able to hit 1080p more consistently.

 

 

 

Yes you have. And I quote: " One or two titles running at 1080p isn't proof that the console is capable of it "

[McKay]

But you keep claiming, it isn't capable of 1080p/60 when that's clearly false, based on the large number of games running that particular resolution/fps.

 

When people here blanket say "xbox can't do 1080" they mean "demanding games".

[Lord Method Man]

They just mean modern games that don't have to make obvious concessions elsewhere.

[XorpiZ]

When people here blanket say "xbox can't do 1080" they mean "demanding games".

 

.. which would still make it a false statement, though. But alas, I think it's a lost cause.

[DirtyLarry Veteran]

 

But you keep claiming, it isn't capable of 1080p/60 when that's clearly false, based on the large number of games running that particular resolution/fps.

 

 

.. which would still make it a false statement, though. But alas, I think it's a lost cause.

 

What??? It is not a false statement.

 

YES, the XBox One can and indeed has games that are 1080p/60fps

However those games in fact are easier to achieve that resolution and frame rate thanks to what types of games that they are. Games with largely "static" backgrounds.

For example most of the games on the One that are hitting 1080p/60 FPS are sports titles and/or titles where one cannot go anywhere they see. In a basketball game for the sake of this example, you are limited to interacting with the court itself. The background is an elaborate set piece. it does not change. Although it is also rendered in 3D, it takes much less processing power to do so because there is no interacting with the background. It is just there. Even with Forza 5, the background is the same deal. You cannot interact with it except for going slightly off the track of each course.

 

Then you have games like Assassins Creed, Dead Rising 3, or any First Person Shooters, etc., where if you can see it, you can more or less go there. This is where the One is clearly not hitting 1080p right now. Titanfall being 900p is a perfect example.

 

So to say the One is capable of doing 1080p on all games is clearly ignoring the facts we are current facing. The One is capable of 1080p when there is not much happening with the environment. When there is, it cannot do 1080p.

 

Not sure why there is so much denial and continuous talk about this all tbh. It is what it is. The One may be capable of hitting 1080p on those types of games but that remains to be seen. Really what else more is there to say about it at this point?

[dipsylalapo Supervisor]

This conversation seems to be going around in circles. :p

 

Until something changes (developer experience and software) it seems that the Xbox won't be able to match the resolution/framerate of its PS4 counterparts or have it's exclusive "demanding" titles hit 1080/60.

 

I guess over the next 12 months or so we'll be able to decide what kind of machine the Xbox is. 

[XorpiZ]

 

What??? It is not a false statement.

 

YES, the XBox One can and indeed has games that are 1080p/60fps

 

 

Thank you. So we agree that it's capable of doing that. I'm wondering why there are several people in this thread claiming otherwise.

 

 

 

So to say the One is capable of doing 1080p on all games is clearly ignoring the facts we are current facing. The One is capable of 1080p when there is not much happening with the environment. When there is, it cannot do 1080p.

 

It is capable of doing that. It's just a matter of tuning down the graphics enough, which they chose not to do. 

 

The XB1 won't match the PS4 in terms of performance, unless the esRAM turns out to be a bigger advantage than we thought. But going from there to throwing out ridiculous claims as we see over and over in this thread - that is somewhere between ignorance and plain lies.

[theyarecomingforyou]

Yes you have. And I quote: " One or two titles running at 1080p isn't proof that the console is capable of it "

The context of that statement is very clear. Just because some games run at 1080p doesn't mean that the console is able to hit that consistently for more demanding games.

 

But you keep claiming, it isn't capable of 1080p/60 when that's clearly false, based on the large number of games running that particular resolution/fps.

You're literally ignoring what I'm saying. I won't respond any further, as you are simply not being reasonable.

[firey]

After reading through this thread off and on for the last few days, I agree with Anthony Toise. Page after page of useless arguing.

"Xbox/PS4 framerate-flamebait. No real conversation just nitpicking and lies"

 

So it's a lie that the xbone hasn't been able to put out consistant 1080/60 in games such as COD, BF4, AC IV?  I think it's more about the facts which are: 

Right now the PS4 is leading the Xbone in terms of average resolution, fps, and graphical fidelity.  Is it going to stay that way? Who knows.. but right now.. that's just how it is.

[trooper11]

Time to just drop trying to explain anything related to the X1 and this topic.

 

The ps4 just destroys it in game after game, get over it. Anyone trying to lay out why that is happening is wasting their time. If the situation changes later, then this can be revisited, but this is how it is now. Few people are interested in justifications.

 

The X1 is capable of 1080p/60, but it cannot offer the same level of visual effects compared to a similar game on the ps4. Right now it seems like 900p is the sweet spot on the X1.

 

 

I think a more interesting aspect of this is why the X1 is basically not better than the 360. Why are games showing up that end up looking very close to the 360 version? You cannot claim poor hardware, so it has to be a development issue.

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

 

 

 

What??? It is not a false statement.

 

YES, the XBox One can and indeed has games that are 1080p/60fps

However those games in fact are easier to achieve that resolution and frame rate thanks to what types of games that they are. Games with largely "static" backgrounds.

For example most of the games on the One that are hitting 1080p/60 FPS are sports titles and/or titles where one cannot go anywhere they see. In a basketball game for the sake of this example, you are limited to interacting with the court itself. The background is an elaborate set piece. it does not change. Although it is also rendered in 3D, it takes much less processing power to do so because there is no interacting with the background. It is just there. Even with Forza 5, the background is the same deal. You cannot interact with it except for going slightly off the track of each course.

 

Then you have games like Assassins Creed, Dead Rising 3, or any First Person Shooters, etc., where if you can see it, you can more or less go there. This is where the One is clearly not hitting 1080p right now. Titanfall being 900p is a perfect example.

 

So to say the One is capable of doing 1080p on all games is clearly ignoring the facts we are current facing. The One is capable of 1080p when there is not much happening with the environment. When there is, it cannot do 1080p.

 

Not sure why there is so much denial and continuous talk about this all tbh. It is what it is. The One may be capable of hitting 1080p on those types of games but that remains to be seen. Really what else more is there to say about it at this point?

 

 

Small correction, it's 792p Larry :)

 

I don't know why people are going on about lies and lieing, technical differences are benchmarkable, you can't fudge resolution and FPS reports.

[trooper11]

Small correction, it's 792p Larry :)

 

I don't know why people are going on about lies and lieing, technical differences are benchmarkable, you can't fudge resolution and FPS reports.

 

Yeah, its much worse than he thought.

[DrunknMunky Veteran]

Topic cleaned - Please read!

 

I'll be frank with you guys, this topic has one last shot at staying and then I'll be closing it. Whereever we go from there is then on your neck and if the Gamers' Hangout descends back into every game / topic being brought down to resolution discussion, you've no one to blame but yourself. Let's not forget it was some of the very vocal members of the GH who asked for this topic to be made in the first place, not the staff. Right now it serves a very specific purpose in the subforum and that is to allow those who are interested in technical details relating to the games and to discuss them freely while not spilling out into every other discussion where others aren't interested. That sounds like a pretty reasonable solution to me and why I agreed to create the topic in the first place. That does not mean that those of you who don't care can come in and thread crap with comments along the lines of "wow, x pages and this is still going", "who cares, gameplay is what matters" etc etc. People care about it and if you can't share the sentiment then needless to stay (again), don't post. This topic isn't for you if you are quite happy to buy a game and play it without any more thought about how it was made, what technical issues it has or what differences there are between platforms.

 

With that said, the following type of discussion is what I'd expect to see:

 

• Screenshots and videos of games highlighting either their performance or differences
• Hardware discussion, to any degree or depth. If you don't have an understanding you may still take part to learn more.
• Articles and news either released by the developers, platform holders or any other informable source.
• Your personal opinion about the above.

 

Bearing in mind this is just an example of acceptable comments, as I can't possibly include every imaginable comment on my own. However, It doesn't give you free roam to take rules into your own hands either and interpret what is and isn't flame bait or trolling. Above all else, the community rules are still in effect in this topic and even more so to allow it to continue with structure.

 

From here on anyone who derails/flames/trolls this topic will be given an instant warning, regardless of how long you have been a member or if believe yourself to be more correct than the next person. That includes those of you who decide to play the flamebait / trolling card when you don't agree with someone. If you can't agree to disagree with someone then drop the conversation and move on. This isn't a war or competition to be won, but If you continue a fight you'll find yourself in trouble more often than not. If you truly believe someone is breaking the community rules then use the report button. Complaining about it in this topic or elsewhere is not acceptable.

 

I'll be adding this comment to the OP so there are no excuses for not reading it nor will it be an excuse if you're caught breaking the above rules set out.

[XorpiZ]

 

 

The context of that statement is very clear. Just because some games run at 1080p doesn't mean that the console is able to hit that consistently for more demanding games.

 

You're literally ignoring what I'm saying. I won't respond any further, as you are simply not being reasonable.

 

 

I'm not ignoring you. I'm quoting you. If you mean something else, than what you're writing, don't blame me. I'm not a mindreader.