• 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.

Digital Foundry hands-on Quantum Break (XB1)

This is not true though. Videogames are an input driven audiovisual form of entertainment. The visuals are always a big part of the equation, especially in a game that aspires to be a cinematic story driven one. Being 720p means the overall experience is somewhat worse than if the game were to run at a higher resolution.

Standards and expectations have changed over time. If we are going to sit here and say that graphics aren't an important part of what makes up the overall experience then new consoles wouldn't come out, new graphics cards wouldn't come out and the whole industry would be stagnant from a graphics technology standpoint.

A flagship title being 720p/30fps in 2016 is far below expectations.

The game being 720p does not make the gameplay, story, music, etc any worse.

The fact the game is 1280x720 does not make it worse than of a game than it would be at 1920x1080

Star Wars Battlefront on consoles is fun. Looks great. Both sub 1080p.

I say this as someone who owns no consoles, only a PC.
 

tesqui

Member
I play on my monitor which is horrible at upscaling. This is gonna look like trash..

I guess I could attempt to get this to run on my 670 as an alternative.
 
Every bit of footage I've seen of the game has blown me away.

I honestly couldn't give a flying fuck how many p's a game has when the end results give us a game that looks like Quantum Break. Really just hoping the frame rate holds up when your zipping around the play area blowing shit up.
 

Gurish

Member
720p?

That explains a lot. They're basically cheating.

The Order 1886 remains king.
Res is not everything, I find QB to be much more impressive than TO1886 and I'm a PS4 gamer (imo U4 beats them both though).

At least it's more impressive based on the Youtube videos, maybe if I'd see it in person running on XB1 I might feel the IQ is horrible and I would change my mind, but from what I've seen it looks better.

And on PC it's going to look spectacular, might get that game that take full advantage of high end hardware.
 

GHG

Gold Member
The game being 720p does not make the gameplay, story, music, etc any worse.

The fact the game is 1280x720 does not make it worse than of a game than it would be at 1920x1080

Star Wars Battlefront on consoles is fun. Looks great. Both sub 1080p.

I say this as someone who owns no consoles, only a PC.

Would you not say that your overall experience would be better if you could play all of your games at a higher resolution and framerate?

You mentioned sound there and same argument can be made for that. Are you going to tell me that you would have an equal level of experience playing with mono sound instead of stereo or even 5/7.1?
 

nynt9

Member
Nah. If I remember right they've said several times it's the Xbox ver.

I hope you'll understand that I'd be skeptical of this considering how many times we've seen Microsoft (and other companies) have had a PC hidden in a booth that is made to look like an Xbox One booth, and other similar incidents.
 

gamz

Member
I hope you'll understand that I'd be skeptical of this considering how many times we've seen Microsoft (and other companies) have had a PC hidden in a booth that is made to look like an Xbox One booth, and other similar incidents.

I can care less if you're skeptical or not.
 
Would you not say that your overall experience would be better if you could play all of your games at a higher resolution and framerate?

You mentioned sound there and same argument can be made for that. Are you going to tell me that you would have an equal level of experience playing with mono sound instead of stereo or even 5/7.1?

Xbox one point five got you covered. We could always ask for more. If the games good its good. Resolution won't affect that really
 

cakely

Member
No hyperbole here. It's 2016 and I'm not pleased when a gen 8 console game gets released with sub-1080p resolutions.

720p is extra-disappointing. It's what we were seeing from Xbox One launch titles.
 
Hmm. I suspected 900p since the game looked unsually blurry at times, but I didn't expect 720p. That being said, I'm more bothered by the low quality shadows and disturbing popping issues. (shadows and objects like trees)
 

TSM

Member
This is not true though. Videogames are an input driven audiovisual form of entertainment. The visuals are always a big part of the equation, especially in a game that aspires to be a cinematic story driven one. Being 720p means the overall experience is somewhat compromised in comparison to if the game were to run at a higher resolution.

Standards and expectations have changed over time. If we are going to sit here and say that graphics aren't an important part of what makes up the overall experience then new consoles wouldn't come out, new graphics cards wouldn't come out and the whole industry would be stagnant from a graphics technology standpoint.

A flagship title being 720p/30fps in 2016 is far below expectations.

But when you are actually playing a game 30 fps is a far bigger detriment to a game than 720p vs 1080p. If it were 720p60 there would be a whole lot of people in here going "You know what? I can live with that." The other side of the coin is just making a game as pretty as you can for screen shots which often means sub 30 fps at a sub 1080p resolution. Asking for ultimate spectacle seems to be self defeating if you also demand 1080p.
 

SOR5

Member
I mean, it's a technical discussion thread so I don't know what you want from this thread if that doesn't interest you.

The technical aspects do interest me, the implication that the entertainment of a game solely rests on its resolution also interests me.
 

DOWN

Banned
On the bright side, it's clearly 720p because the graphics are so good they had to scale down resolution. It's not pushing graphics industry wide like some PS4 titles, but it's still really competitive and the best Xbox One has done yet. Really impressive so I'm still buying.
 

GHG

Gold Member
Do numbered specifications really dictate the amount of fun you have?

No. What I see on the screen contributes towards my overall experience and how much fun I'm having. If the game has jaggies, shimmering, vsync issues etc then those are all things that can take you out of the experience.

A game being 720p instead of a higher resolution means that the overall experience is compromised. Unless you are playing on a 720p TV of course.
 

gamz

Member
Would you not say that your overall experience would be better if you could play all of your games at a higher resolution and framerate?

You mentioned sound there and same argument can be made for that. Are you going to tell me that you would have an equal level of experience playing with mono sound instead of stereo or even 5/7.1?

What I find so odd that if you care about rez and framerate so much why in the world are you so against another iteration of a more powerful console?
 
The article seems mostly positive. It's kinda funny they bring up Uncharted 4 from the get go since they haven't reviewed that one yet. I mean, InFamous Second Son was doing 1080p 2 years ago and the Digital Foundry article on that talks about Alan Wake. Weird.
 

Bgamer90

Banned
I agree. It looks absolutely amazing in motion. It has flaws, but I think it's the best looking game on Xbox One.

Star Wars Battlefront (720p) still impresses me to this day so I wouldn't be surprised if I end up feeling similar.

I never expected Quantum Break to be 1080p (again, Alan Wake on the Xbox 360 was far below 720p) but I will admit that I expected 900p.

I'll be fine with 720p though if that's what the game turns out to be.
 
I agree. It looks absolutely amazing in motion. It has flaws, but I think it's the best looking game on Xbox One.

Dark I was noticing in the last preview build that things didn't look so hot overall. Effects looked absolutely incredible but everything underneath - Animations, textures and lighting seemed more dull and flat. Was that just a bad level?
 

-griffy-

Banned
Looks like it was by design.

Watching the rest of the video and the shooting actually looks fine in most cases, but that specific bit at the beginning where he's crouched to the left and snapping into the default aim pose, paired with shooting through the pillar, looked especially janky.

It makes sense to snap the camera in immediately to make aiming feel snappy and responsive, but it looks a bit odd that the character doesn't seem to have any animation, even if it lags behind the camera/aiming control by a couple frames.

What stands out more is the ghosting, which I assume is down to the anti aliasing (but it looks like some of the screen space effects also have a bit of a delay when drawing in, which creates another form of ghosting on reflections). It's similar to The Division actually in that regard, though more severe here.
 
I do remember bringing up the tearing in the preview videos awhile back and users in here stated it was old build and it had been eliminated. Seems they where lying.

720p and dips is really bad for a 2nd gen HD console.
 

SOR5

Member
No. What I see on the screen contributes towards my overall experience and how much fun I'm having. If the game has jaggies, shimmering, vsync issues etc then those are all things that can take you out of the experience.

A game being 720p instead of a higher resolution means that the overall experience is compromised. Unless you are playing on a 720p TV of course.

I agree with you on this, however in reference to QB specifically, do you see alot of jaggies and v sync issues? Do you see a visually and aesthetically pleasing game? Not a trick question either.

My stance is as long as the final image thats perceivable is a satisfactory one, this is what matters most.
 

Theorry

Member
I do remember bringing up the tearing in the preview videos awhile back and users in here stated it was old build and it had been eliminated. Seems they where lying.

720p and dips is really bad for a 2nd gen HD console.

Depends on wich version they played now. Could be the same one.
 
Dark I was noticing in the last preview build that things didn't look so hot overall. Effects looked absolutely incredible but everything underneath - Animations, textures and lighting seemed more dull and flat. Was that just a bad level?

That's been my view on this game for a while now. Some of the effects look great but much of it seems flat. The first level IGN showed off a few weeks back sticks out to me.
 

BeeDog

Member
Watching that 20 minute gameplay video the other day, the low resolution didn't stand out at all, which I would consider a plus. The lack of details in the environments, or rather the low-poly environments, was a bigger issue to me.
 
I do remember bringing up the tearing in the preview videos awhile back and users in here stated it was old build and it had been eliminated. Seems they where lying.

720p and dips is really bad for a 2nd gen HD console.

DF wasn't on final build either, it was assets from a press event, likely the MS San Francisco event, around the time the game goes gold so the press demo is likely weeks old. Devs don't usually build demos specifically for one press event, they just pick the latest milestone build and provide it to the publisher.
 
This is not true though. Videogames are an input driven audiovisual form of entertainment. The visuals are always a big part of the equation, especially in a game that aspires to be a cinematic story driven one. Being 720p means the overall experience is somewhat compromised in comparison to if the game were to run at a higher resolution.

Standards and expectations have changed over time. If we are going to sit here and say that graphics aren't an important part of what makes up the overall experience then new consoles wouldn't come out, new graphics cards wouldn't come out and the whole industry would be stagnant from a graphics technology standpoint.

A flagship title being 720p/30fps in 2016 is far below expectations.

I disagree. Art is far more important to the look of a game than resolution. You're assuming a 720p game can't look good, and I disagree with that. I prefer the Nintendo approach which is to make a good game with a good art style to the raw power, high-res approach. There are loads of 1080p games that don't actually look that great.

Of course it would be nice if it did run at 1080p, but high-res doesn't make a bad game good, just like 720p doesn't make a good game bad. That's why I mentioned The Order. There is a game that prioritised looking good over everything else and it sucked because of it. The compromise for the fancy graphics was a dull, linear experience.
 

Vuze

Member
Game looks fantastic and I'm sure it'll be a worthwhile TPS. Excited to pick it up on PC after hearing about how this specific version fares.
 

gamz

Member
I am?

That's news to me.

Shit my bad! I probably have you confused with someone else. Sorry bout that.

I do agree that framerates and rez are important to me too, but not enough to downgrade my enjoyment of the game.
 
Top Bottom