PS4 and Xbox One resolution / frame rate discussion

[McKay]

  On 04/05/2014 at 20:15, Audioboxer said:

So lets never report anything gaming related until release date because things can change?

 

Yeah, that's not how the internet works.

 

My God man the readings off the scale.

 

 

Looks like futuristic shooter has firmly replaced dull,brown modern shooters. 

 

I'd love to see a "classic" WW2 shooter done on this new CoD engine, or the new Frostbite engine. 

[George P Global Moderator]

  On 04/05/2014 at 20:27, McKay said:

My God man the readings off the scale.

 

 

Looks like futuristic shooter has firmly replaced dull,brown modern shooters. 

 

I'd love to see a "classic" WW2 shooter done on this new CoD engine, or the new Frostbite engine. 

 

They've done WWII to death though, now it's all futuristic fiction etc.   I was getting tired of the WWII shooters years ago, probably why the CoD fanbase and franchise took off so much when they did MW1 and they haven't looked back since, well, since black ops 1 but that was cold war 60's.

[satysin]

So this isn't PS4/X1 directly but actually PS3/X360. I recently got my first X360 after owning a PS3 all of last generation. I liked my PS3 but I never loved it. It was great for JRPGs such as Ni no Kuni and Final Fantasy but I always found the Dual Shock 3 analogue sticks and triggers to be quite poor for FPS and action/adventure shooters such as Mass Effect, The Last of Us and Unchartered so while I did play these game I always found them more awkward to play than pleasent.

 

Until recently I had never actually played on a X360. The reason for this is that all my friends had PS3 and so that was what we all had. I actually played on a friends X1 and really liked the controller when playing Forza 5 so decided to give a X360 controller a try and wow. I pretty much fell in love with it for games that require accuracy within minutes. I played Halo 4 on the X360 and was amazed at how well it handled. The analogue sticks and the triggers are fantastic.

 

So what exactly does my post have to do with the PS4/X1 resolution and frame rate discussion? Well to me I have realised that graphical superiority really isn't all that important if the rest of the package has weaker points. I use the PS3 and X360 as example. The PS3 has better visuals than the X360 which is quite clear when playing some taxing games such as GTA V, CoD Ghosts and BF4 however while they might look better on the PS3 they play better on the X360. Games that I had written off such as the CoD and BF series are actually fantastic on the X360. Halo 4 is not just beautiful visually but it plays and handles fantastically. Mass Effect is fun to play on the X360 whereas I never enjoyed it on the PS3 as I found it awkward aiming with the Dual Shock 3.

 

Obviously a lot of this is down to personal preference and I know there are many PS3 owners who think the Dual Shock 3 is the better controller. However I have to say I wish I had got an X360 long ago so that I could enjoy the games I had written off. So while the PS4 might have better resolution and frame rate if the controller is not up to par with the X1 that does not really matter to me. I would rather lower resolution and frame rate with great controls than higher resolution and frame rate with poor controls.

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

  On 05/05/2014 at 15:41, bithush said:

So this isn't PS4/X1 directly but actually PS3/X360. I recently got my first X360 after owning a PS3 all of last generation. I liked my PS3 but I never loved it. It was great for JRPGs such as Ni no Kuni and Final Fantasy but I always found the Dual Shock 3 analogue sticks and triggers to be quite poor for FPS and action/adventure shooters such as Mass Effect, The Last of Us and Unchartered so while I did play these game I always found them more awkward to play than pleasent.

 

Until recently I had never actually played on a X360. The reason for this is that all my friends had PS3 and so that was what we all had. I actually played on a friends X1 and really liked the controller when playing Forza 5 so decided to give a X360 controller a try and wow. I pretty much fell in love with it for games that require accuracy within minutes. I played Halo 4 on the X360 and was amazed at how well it handled. The analogue sticks and the triggers are fantastic.

 

So what exactly does my post have to do with the PS4/X1 resolution and frame rate discussion? Well to me I have realised that graphical superiority really isn't all that important if the rest of the package has weaker points. I use the PS3 and X360 as example. The PS3 has better visuals than the X360 which is quite clear when playing some taxing games such as GTA V, CoD Ghosts and BF4 however while they might look better on the PS3 they play better on the X360. Games that I had written off such as the CoD and BF series are actually fantastic on the X360. Halo 4 is not just beautiful visually but it plays and handles fantastically. Mass Effect is fun to play on the X360 whereas I never enjoyed it on the PS3 as I found it awkward aiming with the Dual Shock 3.

 

Obviously a lot of this is down to personal preference and I know there are many PS3 owners who think the Dual Shock 3 is the better controller. However I have to say I wish I had got an X360 long ago so that I could enjoy the games I had written off. So while the PS4 might have better resolution and frame rate if the controller is not up to par with the X1 that does not really matter to me. I would rather lower resolution and frame rate with great controls than higher resolution and frame rate with poor controls.

 

Actually multiplatform titles perform worse on the PS3 most of the time. Pretty certain every COD for example runs at a lower resolution on the PS3. We're not talking the kinds of resolution differences we are seeing now (like 660p vs 600p), but 360 favouring results anyway.

[DrunknMunky Veteran]

  On 05/05/2014 at 15:41, bithush said:

snip

 

The 360 controller is IMO the best controller ever made. Even better than the X1 which they shrunk for girls ( :p). The only thing I would change is the dpad but that's something most have learnt to live with for the last 8 years. If you're serious about fighting games you own a stick (which I do).

 

The DS4 is a huge improvement over the DS3 though, finally the weight and size are right and the triggers are much better. No more clip ons! Shame about the quality control on the thumbstick rubber though, although it seems to have been solved by now?

 

I'll still always prefer the asymmetrical layout of Xbox controllers. Somehow it just "makes sense" where your thumbs rest.

[McKay]

  On 05/05/2014 at 17:00, Andrew G. said:

The 360 controller is IMO the best controller ever made. Even better than the X1 which they shrunk for girls ( :p). The only thing I would change is the dpad but that's something most have learnt to live with for the last 8 years. If you're serious about fighting games you own a stick (which I do).

 

The DS4 is a huge improvement over the DS3 though, finally the weight and size are right and the triggers are much better. No more clip ons! Shame about the quality control on the thumbstick rubber though, although it seems to have been solved by now?

 

I'll still always prefer the asymmetrical layout of Xbox controllers. Somehow it just "makes sense" where your thumbs rest.

 

I've been on Xbox ever since it first launched, I'd given up on Sony after 7 of my PS2's failed with laser reader faults, when they 7th one broke they wanted money to fix it, because they were going off the original warranty date. Ive much preferred the Xbox controller ever since I hit 15 and had a huge growth spurt, but even now I have both consoles again, I admit the PS4 controller is actually good this generation. I can comfortably use it for hours, the old PS3 controller gave me hand cramps after more than an hours use. 

[DrunknMunky Veteran]

  On 05/05/2014 at 17:13, McKay said:

I've been on Xbox ever since it first launched, I'd given up on Sony after 7 of my PS2's failed with laser reader faults, when they 7th one broke they wanted money to fix it, because they were going off the original warranty date. Ive much preferred the Xbox controller ever since I hit 15 and had a huge growth spurt, but even now I have both consoles again, I admit the PS4 controller is actually good this generation. I can comfortably use it for hours, the old PS3 controller gave me hand cramps after more than an hours use. 

 

Similar story for me, maybe a difference of a year or two. Grew up with PS1 over N64, loved the original analogue/DS1 and then I held a Duke :wub: Couldn't go back to the DS2 after that. The GCN triggers were really nice too; they deserve a mention. The C stick always bugged me though. Would have much preferred a 2nd thumbstick.

 

I have issues with both the X1/PS4 controllers though. The X1s is a big step back if you have big hands from something that was already 99.99999% perfect on 360. I'd give up all the "advancements" and measurment changes to have a 360 controller on X1 any day.

[satysin]

  On 05/05/2014 at 17:00, Andrew G. said:

The 360 controller is IMO the best controller ever made. Even better than the X1 which they shrunk for girls ( :p). The only thing I would change is the dpad but that's something most have learnt to live with for the last 8 years. If you're serious about fighting games you own a stick (which I do).

 

The DS4 is a huge improvement over the DS3 though, finally the weight and size are right and the triggers are much better. No more clip ons! Shame about the quality control on the thumbstick rubber though, although it seems to have been solved by now?

 

I'll still always prefer the asymmetrical layout of Xbox controllers. Somehow it just "makes sense" where your thumbs rest.

 

Now I have a X360 I would have to agree with you. I always felt that the Dreamcast had the best controller so with Microsoft taking that design and improving it things are just fantastic with it. The triggers feel fantastic. They have just the right amount of friction to allow fine control over them without tiring your fingers. The bumbers have a fantastic low travel click to them. The d-pad sucks as you said but that isn't an issue for me. It is the analog sticks that put it at #1 for me though. They are just incredible. The sensitivity is perfect to me. Playing Halo 4 feels as good as it can possibly get with analogue sticks. Just brilliant. It makes every game I really didn't like on the PS3 play effortlessly. I am playing Dishonored at the moment, a game which I owned on PS3 but couldn't stand to play. I think I got about 3 hours into it and never played it again. On the X360 it is like a different game though. It is fun to play now. It is kind of shocking just how much difference the analogue sticks make to the game.

 

I have been wondering if a symmetrical layout with the sticks in the X360 position (such as the Wii U Pro Controller) would be even better. Will have to try the Wii U controller to find out. Shame the Wii U controller lacks analogue triggers for racing games though!

 

I really regret not getting an X360 earlier now though. I think I would have preferred it over my PS3 in hindsight. I would love to play The Last of Us with the X360 controller though! It was an amazing game but the DS3 made it less fun than it should have been for me.

[trooper11]

  On 04/05/2014 at 20:15, Audioboxer said:

Yeah, that's not how the internet works.

 

 

I think its funny when people use that line, as if it makes something ok because that is how it works on the internet.

 

Not saying your previous point was wrong, just reacting to seeing that line used a lot.

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

Sony are advertising Watch Dogs as 1080p/60FPS

 

 

http://www.playstation.com/en-us/games/watch-dogs-ps4?CMP=soc_us__gm_psblog_topbanner_3_4_14

 

Bet you 10$ it's like TR's unlocked framerate. No way open world is going to be stable at 60.

[McKay]

  On 10/05/2014 at 13:37, Audioboxer said:

Sony are advertising Watch Dogs as 1080p/60FPS

http://www.playstation.com/en-us/games/watch-dogs-ps4?CMP=soc_us__gm_psblog_topbanner_3_4_14

 

Bet you 10$ it's like TR's unlocked framerate. No way open world is going to be stable at 60.

 

Weird, I though Ubisoft said 30FPS, Im sure they did, it was the cause of an argument whether or not 30 was good enough a while back in here.

 

Oh well Im betting it will be unlocked, I think literally on 2 occasions playing Second Son, the Camera zoomed in so far while I was climbing a building that the framerate shot to 60FPS for a few seconds. 

[Showan]

  On 05/05/2014 at 17:00, Andrew G. said:

The 360 controller is IMO the best controller ever made. Even better than the X1 which they shrunk for girls ( :p). The only thing I would change is the dpad but that's something most have learnt to live with for the last 8 years. If you're serious about fighting games you own a stick (which I do).

 

The DS4 is a huge improvement over the DS3 though, finally the weight and size are right and the triggers are much better. No more clip ons! Shame about the quality control on the thumbstick rubber though, although it seems to have been solved by now?

 

I'll still always prefer the asymmetrical layout of Xbox controllers. Somehow it just "makes sense" where your thumbs rest.

As biased as I am towards the 360 controller, the Nintendo Wavebird is a beautiful and comfortable controller as well...

[GotBored]

Watch Dogs runs at 1080p/60fps on PS4, says Sony

PS4 version will offer "the best graphics on any console", platform holder boasts.

 

http://www.videogamer.com/ps4/watch_dogs/news/watch_dogs_runs_at_1080p_60fps_on_ps4_says_sony.html

[BajiRav]

  On 11/05/2014 at 04:54, GotBored said:

Watch Dogs runs at 1080p/60fps on PS4, says Sony

PS4 version will offer "the best graphics on any console", platform holder boasts.

 

http://www.videogamer.com/ps4/watch_dogs/news/watch_dogs_runs_at_1080p_60fps_on_ps4_says_sony.html

Posted in 760 and you are 763.

[GotBored]

  On 11/05/2014 at 11:38, BajiRav said:

Posted in 760 and you are 763.

 

Different article, but it does say the same thing yes.

 

But then again we could say this whole thread says the same thing (PS4 games run at higher frame rate and resolution then the Xbox One games).

[BajiRav]

  On 11/05/2014 at 11:51, GotBored said:

Different article, but it does say the same thing yes.

 

But then again we could say this whole thread says the same thing (PS4 games run at higher frame rate and resolution then the Xbox One games).

Same source. Audioboxer posted the original source.

That's the reason for this thread, to avoid multiple pointless threads.

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

Sony have finally removed the claim - http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2014-05-12-watch-dogs-will-run-at-1080p-60fps-on-playstation-4-sony-says

 

No surprise there, an open world game is not doing 1080/60 this early on.

[trooper11]

  On 12/05/2014 at 23:17, Audioboxer said:

Sony have finally removed the claim - http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2014-05-12-watch-dogs-will-run-at-1080p-60fps-on-playstation-4-sony-says

 

No surprise there, an open world game is not doing 1080/60 this early on.

I guess Sony thought that they could cash in on the whole resolution discussion by making this a big point. Maybe they changed their mind or they just decided to hold off a little longer.

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

  On 13/05/2014 at 03:03, trooper11 said:

I guess Sony thought that they could cash in on the whole resolution discussion by making this a big point. Maybe they changed their mind or they just decided to hold off a little longer.

 

I think someone in marketing just got carried away - All the website assets will be handled by marketing firms. Given the development hell of Watch Dogs and it being both a last gen and current gen title I have no confidence at all it's going to be maxing out the current consoles (1080/60). I still say 1080/30 locked, or more likely, 1080/30~60 unlocked.

 

All we have to go on is the marketing image and this (not conclusive)

 

  Quote

http://www.golem.de/news/watch-dogs-angespielt-anderthalb-stunden-und-eine-playstation-4-sind-zu-wenig-1405-106406-3.html

 

A german IT news site had a chance to play Watch Dogs for one and a half hour on the PS4 last week in Berlin.

They are reporting that Ubisoft talked about 1080p and 60Fps.

The reviewer couldn't notice any frame drops.

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

So here's the truth...

 

  Quote

Ubisoft: Watch_Dogs will run at 900p on PS4 and 792p on XB1, both at 30fps

 

The game also looks great on both generations of consoles. On new-gen systems the game will run at 900p on PS4 and 792p on Xbox One, at 30 frames-per-second on both consoles. While some new-gen games now offer native 1080p, Morin says it?s much more important to deliver an amazing next-gen experience than it is to push a few more pixels onto a screen. ?Resolution is a number, just like framerate is a number. All those numbers are valid aspects of making games,? he says. ?But you make choices about the experience you want to deliver. In our case, dynamism is everything. Exploration and expression are everything. You want to have a steady framerate, but you want to have dynamism at the core of the experience. The same goes with resolution. People tend to look at corridor shooters, for example, where there?s a corridor and all the effects are on and it?s unbelievable, and they forget that if you apply those same global effects to an open city with people around and potential car crashes and guys in multiplayer showing up without warning, the same effect is applied to a lot of dynamic elements that are happening in every frame. So it becomes magnified in cost.?

Source: http://blog.ubi.com/watch-dogs-next-gen-game-resolution-dynamism/

[Lord Method Man]

Wow, far cry from the 1080p/60 some were claiming.

[Houtei]

Though i imagine had they left that claim of 1080p 60fps most people that bought the game would believe it and be bragging about it.  I personally dont hardlly notice resolution differences unless the story is absolute crap and i have time to run around and examing everything and take screenshots.  I do notice FPS difference from 30 to 60 i dont care what people say about not seeing past 30.  Having said that it only really bothers me on racing games and some mp fps

[George P Global Moderator]

Open world games are harder to do, specially if they're more dynamic this gen than in the past.  It's also too soon to really get performance at it's best levels.  But whatever, I'm playing Child of Light and it's nothing much "graphically" but it's art style and gameplay are top notch, those two things can overshadow a lower res.  Also I'm still of the opinion that not every game has to be 60fps, shooters yes, open world third person games like Watch Dogs?  Not really.

[DrunknMunky Veteran]

So this rumour was true afterall but the numbers/details a little wrong.

 

Pretty silly of Sony to jump the gun on Playstation.com.

 

That's why I think it's fine to speculate on these stories that sometimes crop up, but not to take them as gospel and 100% fact until the devs speak out or we should wait for articles like DF/the game releases.

[BajiRav]

  On 13/05/2014 at 19:31, Audioboxer said:

So here's the truth...

 

Source: http://blog.ubi.com/watch-dogs-next-gen-game-resolution-dynamism/

 

Javascript is not enabled or refresh the page to view.

Click here to view the Tweet

 

not 1080p, not 60fps!