PS4 and Xbox One resolution / frame rate discussion

[DrunknMunky Veteran]

Face-Off: Lego The Hobbit

One brick to rule them all.

[trooper11]

http://www.ign.com/articles/2014/04/23/lords-of-the-fallen-dev-1080p-tougher-on-xbox-one-than-ps4

Well its reassuring that he said it was only 'slightly harder'

He could have said 'impossible' and then boy, watch out.

Since the X1 is more difficult to develop for, its not really shocking that any ps4 version is done quicker.

[trooper11]

Face-Off: Lego The Hobbit

One brick to rule them all.

Seems like some bugs on each platform make it a bit harder to choose a clear winner. The PC gets the nod simply thanks to an unlocked frame rate. I do think the pricing is a big deal too. Its very cheap on the pc vs consoles.

[McKay]

Face-Off: Lego The Hobbit

One brick to rule them all.

 

They used "real" plants? Come on man Lego has flowers and bushes. 

[JonnyLH]

Face-Off: Lego The Hobbit

One brick to rule them all.

Down sampling on the PS4? Hnng.

[GotBored]

Down sampling on the PS4? Hnng.

 

Down sampling from 1920x1280 (Higher than 1080p) to 1920x1080 (1080p)

 

The PS4 game offers up a 1920x1280 image vertically super-sampled down to 1080p, providing extra anti-aliasing in the process, while Xbox One operates natively in 1080p

 

Due to the minor use of super-sampling, the PS4 actually demonstrates slightly cleaner edges than on the other formats.

[JonnyLH]

Down sampling from 1920x1280 (Higher than 1080p) to 1920x1080 (1080p)

Should really learn that rhetorical questions don't pass well through the internet.

[DrunknMunky Veteran]

Back on topic, please

[Guest]

http://www.ign.com/articles/2014/04/23/lords-of-the-fallen-dev-1080p-tougher-on-xbox-one-than-ps4

 

That's brilliant! Another amazing idea, make the game in 4K resolution and 10 fps. Because it will look amazing! Who cares about how smooth the gameplay and game mechanics are these days, really. It is all about the look.

 

/s

[gohpep]

I'm sorry, but I just had to do this.

Here's a 1080p image:

 

Here's that same 1080p image downscaled to 720p and then resized to 1080p:

 

Am I just blind or is there no difference?

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

You're downsampling an original 1080p image. The only way to do a comparison like that in a fairly is for the second image to have been captured at 720p, and then upscaled to 1080p.

[gohpep]

You're downsampling an original 1080p image. The only way to do a comparison like that in a fairly is for the second image to have been captured at 720p, and then upscaled to 1080p.

Well it's the best I could do. I'm trying to prove that the comparisons are getting pretty ridiculous.

[Blackhearted]

Well it's the best I could do. I'm trying to prove that the comparisons are getting pretty ridiculous.

 

It's not ridiculous at all. Even in your less than great comparison, the latter image has a clear blur to it.

[gohpep]

It's not ridiculous at all. Even in your less than great comparison, the latter image has a clear blur to it.

You have to take into effect that this is a still image, and that such blurs may not be seen with post processing effects, or even noticed in fast paced games. Resolution is just one thing to take into account.

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

Well it's the best I could do. I'm trying to prove that the comparisons are getting pretty ridiculous.

 

It's not about what's the best you can do, it's about what's factual.

[Blackhearted]

You have to take into effect that this is a still image, and that such blurs may not be seen with post processing effects, or even noticed in fast paced games. Resolution is just one thing to take into account.

 

The fact that this is a still image actually plays in its favor. As a 2d game, made with 2d images(like this), tends to play nicer with upscaling than a 3d game does. If this was a 3d game screenshot comparison it would actually look much worse.

[gohpep]

The fact that this is a still image actually plays in its favor. As a 2d game, made with 2d images(like this), tends to play nicer with upscaling than a 3d game does. If this was a 3d game screenshot comparison it would actually look much worse.

Well there are 2D textures in a 3D game, and people have found that the textures in the Xbox One version are higher quality than the Playstation 4 version, even though the resolution is lower. And post processing does affect the appearance of the image, as does shader quality.

It's not about what's the best you can do, it's about what's factual.

It's about real world examples, simulations, and analogies. It's nearly impossible to replicate the same exact scene on both the Xbox One and Playstation 4 without some kind of compression or difference in randomly generated details. I'm trying to say a lot of things look good on paper but in real world applications they can fail.

 

I would prefer stable frame rates than a good looking screenshot of Second Son on PS4.

[Guest]

I'm sorry, but I just had to do this.

Here's a 1080p image:

 

 

Here's that same 1080p image downscaled to 720p and then resized to 1080p:

 

 

Am I just blind or is there no difference?

 

 

Aside from the fact that there is a difference, albeit a small one (the second image is slightly softer), what you've done here is take a 1080p image that is high quality, downsampled it to 720p and then upscaled it again.

 

It's quite different to have a 720p image to start with and then scale it up on it's own.

 

I don't personally have a bias to either console, I don't own either, nor have I in the past, I'm mainly a PC gamer. Having said that, although both consoles have games that look great visually. From what I've seen, they both play the same games well enough, the PS4 seems to have more compelling exclusives to me (some that I wish I could play on my PC) more so than the xbox one. Personal preference of course.

[Blackhearted]

Well there are 2D textures in a 3D game, and people have found that the textures in the Xbox One version are higher quality than the Playstation 4 version, even though the resolution is lower. And post processing does affect the appearance of the image, as does shader quality.

It's about real world examples, simulations, and analogies. It's nearly impossible to replicate the same exact scene on both the Xbox One and Playstation 4 without some kind of compression or difference in randomly generated details. I'm trying to say a lot of things look good on paper but in real world applications they can fail.

 

I would prefer stable frame rates than a good looking screenshot of Second Son on PS4.

 

When i said 2d i meant when the whole screen is made of 2d elements. A simple example: the menu in an rpg. That scales up to higher resolutions far better than the 3d graphics of the wii game that menu screen is from.

[gohpep]

Aside from the fact that there is a difference, albeit a small one (the second image is slightly softer), what you've done here is take a 1080p image that is high quality, downsampled it to 720p and then upscaled it again.

 

It's quite different to have a 720p image to start with and then scale it up on it's own.

 

I don't personally have a bias to either console, I don't own either, nor have I in the past, I'm mainly a PC gamer. Having said that, although both consoles have games that look great visually. From what I've seen, they both play the same games well enough, the PS4 seems to have more compelling exclusives to me (some that I wish I could play on my PC) more so than the xbox one. Personal preference of course.

Well, obviously there is still a loss in quality enough to compare, and I agree, both consoles look very nice, and that's what I was trying to get at.

When i said 2d i meant when the whole screen is made of 2d elements. A simple example: the menu in an rpg. That scales up to higher resolutions far better than the 3d graphics of the wii game that menu screen is from.

Yes it does scale better

[trooper11]

I don't know if its a good idea to try and downplay the importance of resolution. You would need some VERY VERY compelling evidence to hold up to scrutiny.

Now frame rate, that you can do already.

Thanks to games like infamous and driveclub, there is plenty of evidence that 30fps can work and its not the end of the world if you are not running at 60fps.

[DrunknMunky Veteran]

I don't know if its a good idea to try and downplay the importance of resolution. You would need some VERY VERY compelling evidence to hold up to scrutiny.

Now frame rate, that you can do already.

Thanks to games like infamous and driveclub, there is plenty of evidence that 30fps can work and its not the end of the world if you are not running at 60fps.

 

inFamous maybe but hold your breathe on Driveclub :P Sub-60 on a racing game, ehhh :/ Remains to be seen if they pull it off

[trooper11]

inFamous maybe but hold your breathe on Driveclub :p Sub-60 on a racing game, ehhh :/ Remains to be seen if they pull it off

Fair enough, we should wait to see what the final product is like.

I do agree that a racing game may be a poor genre to be using 30fps, but we will see.

[LaP]

You have to take into effect that this is a still image, and that such blurs may not be seen with post processing effects, or even noticed in fast paced games. Resolution is just one thing to take into account.

 

This is a jpg image with noise. You can already see jagged edges and noise in the 1080p version so of course there wont be too much difference. The blur associated with the upscaling wont matter at all as the 1080p version is not really crystal clear.

 

It is like doing a side by side battle of a 1080p 1.2GB h264 file and a 720p 600MB h264 file. Of course the 1080p one will win but it will still look average and wont look any better than a 720p 6GB h264 file (will probably look worse actually). All of them will be really far from blu ray quality as you'll need a 1080p 10GB+ h264 file to get "close" to that.

 

Anyway nobody is saying 720 upscaling of an high quality image like the xbox one or ps4 can produce is making games looks like 700MB dvd resolution divx files. In fact to be honest on small screens you wont probably see any difference. On large low quality screen both will probably look bad anyway. But if you got a good quality 50+ inch TV and the game is using a proper AA algo not making the image blurry you'll definately see the difference. It wont be day and night but the difference is there and once you get used to it the blur associated to upscaling (and bad AA algo) can become a pain in the ***.

 

But in the end all this is probably moot as long as the console games are using FXAA and such. Those aa algos already make the image blurry so you wont get "crystal clear" native res anyway.

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

inFamous maybe but hold your breathe on Driveclub :p Sub-60 on a racing game, ehhh :/ Remains to be seen if they pull it off

 

PGR was 30  :rofl: Definitely room for eyecandy in a game that isn't a full on simulator. On the other hand if GT suddenly decided to pull this it flat out wouldn't work.

 

Sony only have themselves to blame though for the tidal wave of Forza/Driveclub comparisons incoming. GT6 should have been PS4 launch with the usual cars look great, scenery pretty meh, with GT7 to hit ~2 years down the line. Internally they must have known Driveclub wasn't going to make the launch making the whole GT6 on PS3 even more stupid (voids any arguments of 2 racing games launching together on PS4/GT sinking Driveclub sales, etc).