• 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.

Polygon COD: Ghosts Review update: (XBONE better version)

Status
Not open for further replies.

Listonosh

Member
It makes sense though right, lowering the resolution would mean better performance. At least, that's how it works on PCs. If I play a game on 1280x720, it will definitely run better.
 

open_mouth_

insert_foot_
720p @ 60fps vs. 1080p @ variable fps

For most games, it would be the latter, but for a game like COD where frame rate is king... XB1 gets the advantage if the reports are true
 
Just as a reminder, this is the website that people like Arthur Gies review for.

This only becomes news to me if a site with an ounce of credibility says the same thing.
 

BigDug13

Member
The main question to be gathered from this one is "Why didn't IW also drop PS4 down to 900p like Dice dropped BF4 in order to get the framerates up?"

And LOL at what will inevitably be 20+ pages about a game that scored a 6.5 or 7.0. What a garbage IW release. The real talent is obviously long gone and working on Titanfall.
 

diggler41

Member
Meh bad game on any system. Lol Polygon just straight up don't care about credibility and quality it seems. Almost kinda admirable.
 

nib95

Banned
I think Polygon is smoking something awful if they can't tell the difference between 720p or 1080p, or don't mind over sharpening effects. But it seems it boils down to which you prefer, visuals or frame rate. Not that I'm buying the game, but usually I go visuals over frame rate, but really it depends on what kind of frame hits we're talking. As long as it's 45fps+ that's perfectly fine for me for a twitch shooter like this. Still better than 30fps or sub 30fps that's for sure.
 
LMAO... So I didn't see all the side by side comparisons done by DF where both dropped Frame rates and xbone version dropped actually lower??!?!!?!? am I high?!?!?! LOL Giessssssssss


someone post the gifs please
 

xxracerxx

Don't worry, I'll vouch for them.
IGN reporting in....

It’s difficult to appreciate the variation between current-gen and next-gen in TV commercials or a browser window, but up close and personal, the difference is drastic. Whereas the current-gen versions look muddy with blotchy textures, characters, weapon models, and environments are presented in vivid detail on PlayStation 4 and Xbox One. The Call of Duty engine fares surprisingly well on next-gen, but even then Ghosts lacks a lot of the added atmospheric effects and visual panache that makes competing games look so realistic. I’m eager to see what a future Call of Duty looks like when maintaining 60 frames-per-second on current-gen is no longer a concern.

When comparing the PS4 and Xbox One versions side-by-side, there’s little to no variation in textures and effects, but there is a discernible difference in resolution. While both are displayed at 1080p, the Xbox One version upscales the game from 720p resolution. In contrast, the PS4 version runs natively at 1080p, which makes character models, weapons, and environments look noticeably sharper and more detailed. The difference is especially apparent on larger-sized TVs, where pixel density weighs more heavily in picture quality.

It’s certainly going to be a sticking point for those who demand the highest fidelity experience, but the difference is harder to identify in absence of a side-by-side comparison.

Oddly, the Xbox One version makes no use of the haptic feedback motors built into the controller’s triggers, and the DualShock 4’s trackpad is used solely as a button to toggle the in-game scoreboard during multiplayer.

There is, however, one notable exclusion from current-gen. Historically, Call of Duty has limited a majority of its modes to 12 players, but offered an additional playlist that supports 18-player matches known as Ground War. While the larger-scale matches live on with the PS4, Xbox One, and PC, owners of the Xbox 360, Wii U, and PS3 versions are capped at 12 players. It’s a surprising step back for the series, and the larger maps could have benefited from the higher player count.

It should also be noted that my smooth multiplayer experience was hosted on a dedicated server hosted by Activision – and most of yours will be, too. Activision says that all platforms will use a hybrid of dedicated servers and peer-to-peer matchmaking, which should eliminate many of the lag issues we've seen in the past. If all goes well, the days of being tossed into a game hosted by someone 2,000 miles away on a dial-up connection will be behind us.

http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/11/05/call-of-duty-ghosts-review
 

quickwhips

Member
This is all neogaf's fault. If we hadn't made fun of rise 900p version we would have a 60fps 900p version of cod for ps4. Shame on you gaf.
 

Nibel

Member
It's possible that the PS4 version looked somewhat sharper, but that may have just been my imagination after confirming the hard resolution difference.

iO6m0xRBTNXxw.gif
 

Jigolo

Member
How come reviewers never took off points for better/worse framerate on PS3 or 360? Even though most current gen multiplat titles 360 had better frame rate but no points were taken from the PS3 version.

Wait, I know. This is going to be used as clickbait for this upcoming gen. Why doesn't Xbone get minus points for lower resolution then?

Fuck reviews
 

Dezzy

Member
So...

Xbox One CoD
1080p 0% of the time
60 fps 100% of the time

PS4
1080p 100% of the time
60 fps 95% of the time

Xbox One wins. Weird math. Or they do reviews on 27" TVs.

Infinity Ward should have just made it 900p on PS4.
 
It's possible that the PS4 version looked somewhat sharper, but that may have just been my imagination after confirming the hard resolution difference.

You can't say that... OMG... that sounds so biased.
You either saw a difference or you didn't.
You can't say you THINK you did, and then say it was your imagination. Wtf.
 

Deadly Cyclone

Pride of Iowa State
Their write-up makes sense. I don't see the need for controversy here. They note that framerate is king, and CoD already doesn't look all that great, so the resolution difference won't help a ton besides a bit more crisp-ness.
 

Frodo

Member
Seems fair enough if the XBone version is perfectly smooth and the PS4 version isn't. Framerate is more important than resolution, though I'm surprised they couldn't tell the difference between 720p upscaled and native 1080p.

What do you mean, fair? It can't be! PS4 should be higher regardless of anything! How can I justify my $400 (plus the money to pay the subscription to play online) and get a version that scored 0.5 (ZERO POINT FIVE!!!) lower than the X180? Not fair at all...
 

Snuggles

erotic butter maelstrom
I'm not sure I follow the tone of this thread.

Sure, they may not appreciate the difference between 720P and 1080P as much as you'd like, but if what they've said about frame rate is true, I understand why the Xbox One version would score incrementally higher. If I had to choose, I'd go with framerate over resolution pretty much any day, especially when we're talking about maintaining 60FPS in and FPS game.
 

Kacho

Member
It’s difficult to appreciate the variation between current-gen and next-gen in TV commercials or a browser window, but up close and personal, the difference is drastic. Whereas the current-gen versions look muddy with blotchy textures, characters, weapon models, and environments are presented in vivid detail on PlayStation 4 and Xbox One.

You know, that's what I was hoping for and expecting. Sounds great to me. Everyone wins.
 

Chamber

love on your sleeve
Viewing the Xbox One release next to the PS4 , I had difficulty telling them apart. It's possible that the PS4 version looked somewhat sharper, but that may have just been my imagination after confirming the hard resolution difference.

iby52XIiTzv1FT.png
 

methane47

Member
Hmmm I'll wait to see what other reviews say. If theres a framerate advantage on PS4. I NOW EXPECT a .5 difference in score because of it.
 

calder

Member
I wonder why the PS4 version is 1080p if they couldn't get it running smoothly at it.

I think the big takeaway from this is that COD is very much running on fumes. Clearly the dev cycle for this series was really tough for a cross-gen title, but this is more evidence for that whole "IW is just a shell" theory.

As to this review, if the framerate is solid on XBO and shaky on PS4 even ignoring the resolution I can buy the scores being the way they are as FPS has always been the hallmark of the franchise. Shitty luck for PS4 owners that IW clearly dropped the ball like this, they should have explored the BF4 quickie solution.
 

Exokell

Banned
of course xbox one will be more stable, its fucking 720p. It has almost half the resolution. Shit let me see it do 1080p, what fucking kind of framerate will it have?
 

LCfiner

Member
So if it turns out that the PS4 version's framerate issues are frequent, maybe IW should have rendered it at 900p or some other sub 1080p res.

Either way, it appears that all versions of Ghosts have ridiculous technical problems or high requirements considering how unambitious it is visually.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom