• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Xboxone Resolutiongate (Eurogamer)

The differences are damn near impossible to see.
cherylcolenqytx.gif
 
I definitely agree. I don't think that any console will dominate like the PS2 did again since the PS2 was a perfect storm -- cheap DVD player + that large PS1 to PS2 graphical jump alongside a ton of games.

However, it is an example of people paying "$100 more for less power" since (again) more people bought a PS2 after the GameCube launched -- at it wasn't like the GameCube had terrible multiplat support either. Many EA games came out for it.

Anyway, it's definitely going to be interesting to see how all of this will play out for the upcoming gen. There have been examples in video gaming of more consumers buying the more expensive product regardless of power but that's usually due to game quality. We won't know how well the games/features on each system are received until after the consoles are out.

What an absolutely asinine argument.


  • The PS2 launched a year before the Gamecube or Xbox, but lets ignore that.
  • Sega discontinued the Dreamcast shortly after the PS2 launch which briefly left the PS2 alone as the the only current-gen console available, but lets ignore that.
  • The PS2 came off the overwhelming sucess of the PS1, but lets ignore that.
  • The PS2 had 3rd party support that no other console could touch (especially the Gamecube), but lets ignore that.
But hey the PS2 was $100 more then the Gamecube when it launched! Lets lash on to that and draw comparisons! See guys, see, sometimes the more expensive hardware does come out on top!

Oh, by the way, the PS2 got a $100 price reduction shortly after the Gamecube launched but lets ignore that too.
 

njean777

Member
What an absolutely asinine argument.


  • The PS2 launched a year before the Gamecube or Xbox, but lets ignore that.
  • Sega discontinued the Dreamcast shortly after the PS2 launch which briefly left the PS2 alone as the the only current-gen console available, but lets ignore that.
  • The PS2 came off the overwhelming sucess of the PS1, but lets ignore that.
  • The PS2 had 3rd party support that no other console could touch (especially the Gamecube), but lets ignore that.
But hey the PS2 was $100 more then the Gamecube when it launched! Lets lash on to that and draw comparisons! See guys, see, sometimes the more expensive hardware does come out on top!

Oh, by the way, the PS2 got a $100 price reduction shortly after the Gamecube launched but lets ignore that too.

He has brought this argument up so many times that I think he believes it. It just isn't a good argument at all. The industry was different then and nothing like it is today, except that all three players in that gen are still here.

This argument of as long as the games are fun is true, but kind of annoying. I don't understand why we can't and don't want both?

It is used as a sort of justification for the glaring differences. I like both as well, and we deserve both for throwing down hundreds of dollars on new tech.
 

James Sawyer Ford

Gold Member
The differences are damn near impossible to see, besides one looking a lot cleaner and smoother, and the other seeming to have more visual pop with what seems a more aggressive lighting. BF4, as far as videos I've watched, is damn near identical on the two systems. .

Come on man, use your head.

All the videos we're seeing on the internet are highly compressed and not fully representative of what you're going to see directly at home. As a result, the quality is degraded, details get blurred and washed out. It makes the weaker version look not as noticeable as it really is.

Direct feed footage playing directly on the consoles side by side and you will absolutely notice a difference -- the Eurogamer article even suggests that everyone he talked to could tell a difference.
 
This argument of as long as the games are fun is true, but kind of annoying. I don't understand why we can't and don't want both?

I don't see why we can't have both either, but I do get annoyed at the people who are in denial. I understand the Xbox One is weaker, but it still has games I'm interested in. I can only afford one at launch, so its easy for me to go with the PS4.
 

Demon Ice

Banned
The differences are damn near impossible to see, besides one looking a lot cleaner and smoother, and the other seeming to have more visual pop with what seems a more aggressive lighting. BF4, as far as videos I've watched, is damn near identical on the two systems.

You are straight making up shit now. "Aggressive" lighting? Gimme a break. DF crushed the blacks because they fucked up the capture. Even they admitted that.

"Damn near impossible" to see the difference? What a joke. The differences were immediately apparent even on a terrible quality Youtube video.

I get that you're the resident XB1 fan and you really like the Kool-Aid but come on.
 

Into

Member
The point i was making, was that nobody was "upset" that the PS2 was tech wise behind the GameCube/Xbox, because there was a understanding amongst even the most uninformed consumers that the PS2 came out first, after all they saw it first in stores way before Xbox or GameCube ever appeared. And older tech is usually always worse than newer tech, its the nature of the beast.

This is why comparing the price/power of PS2 vs. GC/Xbox is completely useless. Had they all launched at the same time, the PS2 and its games would have been laughed out of the building by every single person in the world.

This is why people are so pissed off regarding resolutions and more importantly the price point, Microsoft is simply asking more money for less. Whether the resolution differences mean 1% or 15% difference to you, it almost does not even matter how big of a deal this is from a visual perspective, its the sheer principal of "here is less, now give us more"

What i am trying to say is that the price difference is amplifying this, in my opinion, rather small difference in visuals, i dont particularly care about 720p vs 1080p and i play on a 50 inch HD screen and can tell the difference.

It also might explain why these supposed "game journalists" do not quite get it, many of them get games and even consoles for free, or its a part of their job so they pretty much have to get them all, thus they are bewildered why this is a such big deal to the rest of us. Because unlike them, we have to make a decision on which product gives us most bang for the back, and that is where Microsoft has completely shit the bed and everyone knows it.
 

nib95

Banned
I hate to defend the guy...but I think those that have spent the past few months blasting Leadbetterand his anti PS4 bias can now shut up...

This is about as scathing an article as you can possibly expect from a mainstream journalist...

Without directly doing so, he is calling MS' bluff on all their chatter...using that quote from the MS Technical Fellow to start this article is a direct stab at MS...

He admits his own comparison article didn't show the true gap...


And he basically lays out his belief that the Xbone architecture just doesn't have the juice (sauce?) To keep up with the PS4...

Leadbetter never admits he's wrong. Not properly any way, and he didn't in this article either. He never said his dumb comparison was wrong, just that there must have been other metrics in play that made or added to the difference. That assumption whilst not necessarily wrong, is itself misguided given the omission to accept the basic comparison was flawed to begin with.

His original comparison was flawed because the chosen GPU's were out of line with those in the systems. He chose a GPU that is computationally much more powerful than the Xbox One's GPU to represent it, and the same with the PS4's comparative GPU. He essentially raised the performance hit limit for both comparison GPU's, but this greatly benefited the Xbox One far more than the PS4 in the comparison, because the Xbox One's GPU is the one that in actuality has worse performance and a much lower performance hit ceiling.

The 7770 and the 7850 always were better comparison GPU's. Not completely accurate, but more so than the one's he chose. And that is starting to show already. GAF > everyone else as is the case 99.9% of the time. In-fact, we've been right about most things pertaining to this next generation. Maybe that's why there's so much venom for this place right now. Who needs journalism and gaming sites when you have GAF?
 

scandisk_

Unconfirmed Member
Provocative articles (spinning and downplaying the advantages of the PS4 that is) will only create more negative buzz toward the XB1 at this point. Good for them to steer away from those topics. Back to normal perhaps?
 
Come on, dude. Be serious. Bro, be serious.

I just put $700 down on a 1080p HDTV specificially for next-gen. IMO it's very easy to tell between 720p and 1080p. That being said, I don't require for my next gen games to run at 1080p but I would certainly like for them to.
 

Nozem

Member
http://misterxmedia.livejournal.com/

The David Icke of videogames.

According to his insiders (aka the voices in his own head), the Xbox One is a 3-4TF machine, with dual GPUs and 64MB of ESRAM. It is just waiting for MS to release a special 'stereo driver' to unlock it.

Reading misterxmedia blog gives me braincancer, but I still love to do it. It's like watching a bus driving into a ravine in slow motion, while the passengers perform incredible mental gymnastics to convince themselves everything is gonna be a-ok. It's great stuff.
 

mr_toa

Member
I hate to defend the guy...but I think those that have spent the past few months blasting Leadbetterand his anti PS4 bias can now shut up...

That's never going to happen, as we're all prone to the Bias Blind Spot:
The bias blind spot is the cognitive bias of failing to compensate for one's own cognitive biases
 

Kosma

Banned
So its safe to say the gap between the ps4 and xbone is like the gap between the ps2 and xbox? Bigger maybe?
 

Aaron

Member
So its safe to say the gap between the ps4 and xbone is like the gap between the ps2 and xbox? Bigger maybe?
It's not really comparable that way because the PS2 architecture was such an oddity that developer had to do all kinds of things to squeeze the power from it, but the upcoming consoles are straight up PCs where it won't take long to get the most of, and so won't be long before we see the full difference. Not in these launch games though that are being rushed for a deadline.
 

old

Member
Still to be seen how well the XO multitasking will work out. If it does then I'll be happy to sacrifice resolution to have multitasking without needing to suspend the game. Or has Sony announced the PS4 can run a game (not suspend it) while also browsing the web?
 
I don't recall anyone ever calling it a "win" for Xbox. Only downplaying it. That would be preposterous.
I recall a few people saying 720p will scale better than 900p because of mathemagic in the Battlefield thread, but I don't know if there's any basis to that whatsoever.
 
I predict the gap in multi plat to get smaller in the next 2 years or so, and then widen again. Reason for that is that I believe as we get deeper into the generation, developers will start using increasingly more advanced rendering techniques, and the PS4's advantage in power will become more noticeable.

Disparity between exclusives however should be a steady state of affairs, with Sony's most talented 1st party being able to push the envelope more than MS's. The compute advantage should provide a pretty significant difference, and not only will PS4 games look better, they will also push physics a step ahead.

The differences are damn near impossible to see, besides one looking a lot cleaner and smoother, and the other seeming to have more visual pop with what seems a more aggressive lighting.

More visual pop and aggressive lighting lol

The words fail me.
 

madmackem

Member
Still to be seen how well the XO multitasking will work out. If it does then I'll be happy to sacrifice resolution to have multitasking without needing to suspend the game. Or has Sony announced the PS4 can run a game (not suspend it) while also browsing the web?
Yes you can multitask on ps4. You cant put the console to sleep and resume game later not yet that will come later in a patch.
 

quetz67

Banned
Don't know if people saw this already.

Looking at it on my iPad. Holding it 4" away I can notice differences. Some of these are pro xbone as the textures on some objects (that seat fabric) look more defined and less washed out. Those cables in the distance sure are superior for fhe PS4 version.

Holding my iPad 10-12" away all I notice are diferences in textures and brightness and some other details changing.

Overall I would say the xbone version looks more like a blu-ray transfer with some visible film grain, which I prefer for movies.

I am sure I can't notice any difference when playing at my usual distance from TV nor would I be able to tell when not looking at both versions side by side.
 
However, it is an example of people paying "$100 more for less power" since (again) more people bought a PS2 after the GameCube launched....
While this is true, it's a meaningless quibble because even you don't think the situation is the same this time. It's like somebody saying "I doubt the Seahawks will win by 200 points over the Raiders" and you responding "Well, don't forget about that old Georgia Tech game." It's a total non sequitur.
 

SaracenSam

Neo Member
Looking at it on my iPad. Holding it 4" away I can notice differences. Some of these are pro xbone as the textures on some objects (that seat fabric) look more defined and less washed out. Those cables in the distance sure are superior for fhe PS4 version.

Holding my iPad 10-12" away all I notice are diferences in textures and brightness and some other details changing.

Overall I would say the xbone version looks more like a blu-ray transfer with some visible film grain, which I prefer for movies.

I am sure I can't notice any difference when playing at my usual distance from TV nor would I be able to tell when not looking at both versions side by side.

The XB1 version looks like someone just hired the sharpness option on your TV to the max. There seems to be no anti-aliasing filter on at all either.
 

Kosma

Banned
It's not really comparable that way because the PS2 architecture was such an oddity that developer had to do all kinds of things to squeeze the power from it, but the upcoming consoles are straight up PCs where it won't take long to get the most of, and so won't be long before we see the full difference. Not in these launch games though that are being rushed for a deadline.

Im not thinking of architecture per se, just how games looked. Splinter Cell xbox vs Splinter Cell Ps2 for example, and tjay was a much smaller jump in res.
 

Metfanant

Member
Overall I would say the xbone version looks more like a blu-ray transfer with some visible film grain, which I prefer for movies.

If by that you mean a DVD transfer with DNR and Edge Enhancement cranked to 11 then I would agree with you...

Film grain!? Where do you see anything that resembles film grain in that shot?...everything about that shot is the anti film grain...
 

quetz67

Banned
The XB1 version looks like someone just hired the sharpness option on your TV to the max. There seems to be no anti-aliasing filter on at all either.

I can agree with the sharpness option. It makes detail in texture more visible in the xbone version at a standard viewing distance. That detail is still there in the PS4 version but looks washed out when not looking very close. So this might be a fight of people playing close to huge monitor or sitting at standard viewing distance from a TV. I know which group is the majority here on GAF and which is in the real world.

I think I like the lower res look a little better (playing Alan Wake PC on TV lately and set res to 720p as I preferred the look over 1080p, just feels more 'natural' to me).
 
I can agree with the sharpness option. It makes detail in texture more visible in the xbone version at a standard viewing distance. That detail is still there in the PS4 version but looks washed out when not looking very close. So this might be a fight of people playing close to huge monitor or sitting at standard viewing distance from a TV. I know which group is the majority here on GAF and which is in the real world.

I think I like the lower res look a little better (playing Alan Wake PC on TV lately and set res to 720p as I preferred the look over 1080p, just feels more 'natural' to me).

Natural feel of 720p. MS should hire you for advertising.
 

Metfanant

Member
I can agree with the sharpness option. It makes detail in texture more visible in the xbone version at a standard viewing distance. That detail is still there in the PS4 version but looks washed out when not looking very close. So this might be a fight of people playing close to huge monitor or sitting at standard viewing distance from a TV. I know which group is the majority here on GAF and which is in the real world.

I think I like the lower res look a little better (playing Alan Wake PC on TV lately and set res to 720p as I preferred the look over 1080p, just feels more 'natural' to me).

Yeah and the sharpness also makes it a pixel crawling jaggy festival of nightmares in motion...

Its funny you would prefer the "natural" look of a "lower" resolution( more on that later) in Alan Wake...while the PS4 sports the exponentially more "natural" look in BF4 yet you prefer the sharpness of the Xbone...

Gee that's a coincidence is it not?

I set 8ft from a 67" 1080p Samsung...which group am I in?

As for the second half of your comment...you know your TV can only display its native resolution right? So you're seeing the same resolution no matter what the 360 is outputting...
 
I can agree with the sharpness option. It makes detail in texture more visible in the xbone version at a standard viewing distance. That detail is still there in the PS4 version but looks washed out when not looking very close. So this might be a fight of people playing close to huge monitor or sitting at standard viewing distance from a TV. I know which group is the majority here on GAF and which is in the real world.

I think I like the lower res look a little better (playing Alan Wake PC on TV lately and set res to 720p as I preferred the look over 1080p, just feels more 'natural' to me).

What does this even mean? How does lower resolution feel more natural? Is your vision in 720p?
 

quetz67

Banned
Yeah and the sharpness also makes it a pixel crawling jaggy festival of nightmares in motion...

I set 8ft from a 67" 1080p Samsung...which group am I in?

GAF Elite obviously. Upper 10,000. Whatever you want to call it. I am surprised 1080p is enough for you, I recommend PC + 4K TV.
 

Metfanant

Member
GAF Elite obviously. Upper 10,000. Whatever you want to call it. I am surprised 1080p is enough for you, I recommend PC + 4K TV.
Are you going to deny the Xbone version is full of aliasing issues??...someone cue up that gif of the power lines!

Whenever Sony, Sammy, or Panny get around to making an affordable 4k set in 65" or better I will...


Care to respond to the rest of the post please?
 
Symbolically, it's weird how there's more clouds in the PS4 version.
They're there in the Xbox One version, in the exact same spot actually. They're just a much lighter color and blend into the sky. It's odd that they'd be a different color. Maybe a different implementation/shader or something.
 

quetz67

Banned
What does this even mean? How does lower resolution feel more natural? Is your vision in 720p?

This is kinda different discussion. What do you believe looks more "natural", a movie on a SD TV or Doom 1 in 1080p resolution? I would not be surprised if many here opt for the second option.

Resolution increases what people call the IQ but not the look of the "content". Higher IQ can make polygon edges look more smooth but it can't hide missing polygonal detail or effects/shaders/lighting. Especially faces still look far from realistic if you put them side by side with a photo. Higher resoultions just make these difference more obvious.
 

Rockondevil

Member
It does suck that the X1 is going to probably continue to have lower graphics than the PS4 but I am still going with the X1 just because of my own reasons, nothing against the PS4.

If I am playing on a PC monitor I can tell the difference between 720p and 1080p in an instant but on my Television not so much.

I am very much more excited that we are finally going 60fps which I think will be awesome.

Just a question to anyone who feels they want to answer. Do you often notice graphics anyway when you get immersed in a game. Like really immersed, not just enjoying the game but you actually feel you are there...?
 

Metfanant

Member
This is kinda different discussion. What do you believe looks more "natural", a movie on a SD TV or Doom 1 in 1080p resolution? I would not be surprised if many here opt for the second option.

Resolution increases what people call the IQ but not the look of the "content". Higher IQ can make polygon edges look more smooth but it can't hide missing polygonal detail or effects/shaders/lighting. Especially faces still look far from realistic if you put them side by side with a photo. Higher resoultions just make these difference more obvious.

You're still dodging my response...

Your argument holds no water in the discussion at hand...

In BF4 there are no geometry differences...so its not like comparing real life to Doom at all...

You still originally said you liked a more "natural" look of the lower resolution Alan Wake...now you're saying you want the "natural" look of the SDTV over Doom in 1080p...

Then you go and flip the argument on its head and say you like the sharpness of the Xbone for BF4...

You're trying hard to hide your bias...I do commend you for that...

And again...as for your Alan Wake stuff...your TV is 1080p isn't it?
 
Assuming that Microsoft's eventual new management won't say "fuck the console business, we're out", I can only see two ways of trying to snatch victory from the jaws of defeat:

1. Kill the Xbox One fast, I mean like in four years, and release a new console like they did with the first Xbox.
2. Go all out on moneyhatting, buying up exclusives (timed or otherwise) left and right.

I think the second scenario is more likely, coupled with a huge marketing effort. The PS4 is the better system, no doubt about it, but the battle is still far from over.
 
Top Bottom