True 4K means that the console is capable of running games at native 4K without using special tricks like checkerboard rendering. But MS doesn't dictate how developers use the extra power of the Scorpio. I think most 3rd party developers will use the checkerboard technique because they'll have to do this anyway for the PS4 Pro. They probably won't see the need to optimize the game to run natively on Scorpio because checkerboarding works well enough. But you'll definitely see the 1st party stuff from Microsoft run natively at 4K 60 FPS (e.g. Forza 7).
-
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: Assassin creed origins Xbox one x tech first look.
- Thread starter madmackem
- Start date
Lol. Where does it say that? It doesn't say that at all. That's how you've interpreted it, but it never says it. It never says anything about devs not needing to.
Debates are all well and good, and there is a debate to be had here, but don't blatantly make stuff up to suit your agenda.
I assume he was talking about MS first party titles, which to my knowledge are all native. Unlike Sony first parties which aren't on the pro.
Anyway marketing figureheads, spins things all the time you always got to take what they say with a pinch of salt.
Savantcore
Unconfirmed Member
The point is that the PS4 Pro has native 4K titles as well, so MS representing the 1X as the first and only proper 'True 4K' console is, well, a lie. And it's especially heinous in light of Phil's comments yesterday about the Pro not being a 'True 4K' console.
Darkstorne
Member
And to be fair, there are games on the PS4 Pro that run in native 4k. Skyrim and Elder Scrolls Online for example. That's where this "true 4k" nonsense gets annoying - both consoles can do it, but both mostly won't. Checkerboarding makes far more sense since it still looks gorgeous but allows extra GPU power to go elsewhere.
But that's not what he was asked, and that's not what he says. He was asked if he was worried about the Pro being $100 cheaper, and he responds with what was in my post. I was also responding to a post stating that this same figure head has always maintained that there are going to be different rendering techniques on this platform, and yet in the quote I posted, he blatantly makes it seem like, "that's what they're doing, not us."
Reckheim
Member
Umm, in a couple of years the ps5, xbox two will be announced.
Phil basically needs to correct his statements and acknowledge that PS4 PRO and 1X are direct competitors in the 4K space.
It reminds me of the quote from the Ori dev saying the Pro was "half-assed" and that the 1X was a full blown next gen machine. That isnt the case. Both machines utilize checkerboarding and dynamic techniques to achieve a 4K or near 4K resolution. Both are able to play certain games at native 4K.
Yes, the 1X is more powerful, everyone knows that but when the head of Xbox starts throwing shade on their direct competition it leaves him and the division open to criticism.
It reminds me of the quote from the Ori dev saying the Pro was "half-assed" and that the 1X was a full blown next gen machine. That isnt the case. Both machines utilize checkerboarding and dynamic techniques to achieve a 4K or near 4K resolution. Both are able to play certain games at native 4K.
Yes, the 1X is more powerful, everyone knows that but when the head of Xbox starts throwing shade on their direct competition it leaves him and the division open to criticism.
Exactly.
Read please.
I say it isn't if they don't often hit native 4K. One title in alpha doesn't suddenly mean all titles will not hit native 4K. Anyway, that's my own definition of a "true 4K" console.
I don't think it's a lie. Perhaps Phil could've said true 4K really depends on the developer, but the One X is technically superior to the Pro which is why it's $100 more. It has the faster processor, more GPU power, more memory, and a 4K Blu Ray drive. So it's more capable of running modern games at native 4K than the Pro is. How the developers chooses to use that power depends on them and how many One Xs are sold.
But yeah, consumers should definitely wait to see how well this is supported before buying.
This. Unfortunately instead of discussing how the game looks and runs, every time a developer chooses to use checkerboard or isn't 60 FPS because of a dev's design choice, we'll have to brace for the "True 4K", "Phil", and "LoLmemes". New hardware, same crap to fight through in Xbox threads.
Nikana
Go Go Neo Rangers!
Crap my bad. 😰😰😰
So what does the ratio have to be for one to be a "True 4K Console" & the other "Not a True 4K Console" ?
seems to me that you're making up the rules as you go.
But either way it's better to wait & see how things turn out in the final build , I have a feeling that this game & others might have settings that will let people run it at native 4K with lower settings.
Okami Haundo
Member
Interesting that one of their showcase games isn't "native" 4K, but still impressive to me! Can't wait to see how that looks on my 1080p set with supersampling!
Imagine the shitstorm when a game is going to just hit 1800p on this...
That case is all on the developers, though
Already happening with Ark.
You are cherrypicking one quote and I agree that specific quote is misleading. They designed the Scorpio to run an Xbox One game at 4k, and their own first party studios is doing that, but in the end its up to individual developers. They can't mandate that target on third parties.
Phil Spencer said:
LukasTaves
Member
Xbone has some 1080p games as well, it has probably a bigger number of high profile 1080p locked 60fps games than the PS4,but still, would anyone here say that's just as capable at 1080p as the PS4?
No right? Then what's so controversial about that quote?
Zombie James
Banned
If Phil had toned down the rhetoric and been more honest when speaking about Scorpio over the past year and a half, including their conference just a few days ago, this wouldn't be a problem.
Sony was pretty clear with their PS4 Pro reveal so I don't know why MS couldn't be, either. Nothing's going to take away MS' hardware advantages so I don't know why saying something like "more games will run at higher resolutions up to native 4K compared to the competition" is so hard for them to do. That's still a clear advantage for them and way, way closer to the truth than a blanket "TRUE 4K" thrown around everywhere.
What?
This is a fair point of view of course. I'll respond to this post again when not typing from my phone at work
LukasTaves
Member
There are native 1080p games on xbone, that doesn't make it a true 1080p console in the eyes of the same people that are having trouble about this statement, is that more clear?
Savantcore
Unconfirmed Member
Quoting yourself:
"True 4K means that the console is capable of running games at native 4K without using special tricks like checkerboard rendering." That applies to both consoles.
The Xbox One X is absolutely the more capable machine and will almost definitely run more titles at native 4K than the PS4 Pro, but the fact is that if 'True 4K' means 'capable of running games at native 4K', then both the Pro and the 1X are 'True 4K' machines. Phil straight up said that the Pro isn't a 'True 4K' console and claimed that they wouldn't use tricks that the Pro uses to hit 4K, yet here we are. There are ways to sell your console in market-speak but it's irrefutably a lie. It just gets my goat a bit.
But it is just as capable. I don't understand, the Xbox One has plenty of full HD 1080p games, so if someone was to come out and say 'The Xbox One doesn't do 1080p but the PS4 does,' that would be a lie as well. Again, I'm not denying that the 1X is more capable of hitting native 4K, but I don't like that Phil is purporting the idea that it's the only one capable. Sorry, but I don't think your comment makes any sense.
My response you quoted applies to whether they lied or not, which they haven't since they never promised every game to run in native 4K.
For me personally, when a company market their new console as a 'True 4K'-console, show that it is perfectly capable of doing native 4K, but at the same time are very clear that its up to the developers to choose what they wanna do with the extra power, and Ubisoft's Assassins Creed: Origin turns out to be checkerboard 4K, I don't feel mislead.
On the contrary, for me personally, its common sense and expected that not all games will run at native 4K on Xbox One X, even if they use the term 'True 4K' in their PR.
MosquitoSmasher
Member
What i think is happening here is that after Digital Foundries Scorpio reveal a lot of people probably thought that there would be many other games maintaining native 4K (like the Forza demo then)and 60fps with still room to spare, quite a bit actually.
So i'm guessing people thought ACO would be native 4K/30fps with room to spare as well, that would sure bring a huge difference with Pro, but that's clearly not going to happen. My guess is that both versions will use checkerboard 4K, where X probably reaches native 4K more often than Pro and with better visual fidelity and/or framerate. I'd be surprised if there aren't any clear differences at all, if we consider the extra power they get to work with.
So i'm guessing people thought ACO would be native 4K/30fps with room to spare as well, that would sure bring a huge difference with Pro, but that's clearly not going to happen. My guess is that both versions will use checkerboard 4K, where X probably reaches native 4K more often than Pro and with better visual fidelity and/or framerate. I'd be surprised if there aren't any clear differences at all, if we consider the extra power they get to work with.
Isn't that an issue with iterative console platforms? What do developers aim for especially when the cheaper, less powerful versions of consoles greatly outsell the higher spec machines in each console maker's line.
In going to guess you haven't seen a game running with checkerboard
I think there is a subtle difference between the Pro and Scorpio. Scorpio is designed to be able to run an Xbox One game at native, while Scorpio was always designed to do techniques like checkerboarding on most titles, even first party. But in the end they are definitely competing 4k consoles, and comparing the pro to the S is disingenuous.
CassidyIzABeast
Member
Would it be wrong to assume 1800c for Pro?
camequipped
Member
Yup but Sony doesn't go around saying the PS4 is a true 1080p console, hence the argument here.
When did Phil say this? Source?
MaximusPayne
Member
This is true. But I wouldn't mind this mindset as this is the platform I play most multiplats on that reach 1080p most of the time. I guess out of my consoles right now my PS4 is the true 1080p console.
TBiddy
Member
He didn't, but you and me both know that facts doesn't matter anymore. What he did say was, that there was absolutely no policies on how the developers used the extra power on XBOX.
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
So XB X is Checker boarded 4K and Pro version will most likely be the same 1800p CB like Syndicate.
Seems OK.
Seems OK.
Tripolygon
Banned
He did. And that is a fact but apparently you dont care about facts.
That post still don't make sense to me .
I mean I pretty much am making it up, its what I personally believe the definition of a "true 4K" console is. I said on the posts before its my interpretation of it.
Savantcore
Unconfirmed Member
Here you go
Turns out that the X1 uses those techniques as well. And again, the Pro has native 4K titles too. Can't get much more 'True' than that.
TBiddy, that has nothing to do with this conversation. I never mentioned anything about MS promising every game hitting 4K or insisting that developers hit targets. No one has ever said that developers aren't free to use the power however they want. This is about Spencer's portrayal of the 1X and Pro in relation to 'True 4K'.
GHG
Member
"When I think about techniques to somehow manufacture a 4K screen like what some other consoles try to do, this is different than that.
https://www.theverge.com/2017/6/13/15790162/microsoft-phil-spencer-xbox-one-x-vs-ps4-pro-interview
Wat?
I agree. He probably shouldn't have said that. Yikes.
SEGAvangelist
Member
Probably 1600c if Syndicate is any indicator. So maybe we see 1600c vs. 2160c with maybe some higher settings ticked on the XB1X version?
EDIT: That's about a 44% difference in pixels which sounds about right.
So what ratio equal "true 4K"
LukasTaves
Member
The argument (at least from what I'm seeing) isn't about the fact that Phil said it, it's about pointing that since Pro have some native 4k games and xbonex has some non native ones it's a false statement.
Either way I don't see why the outrage when even this game not being native is a much bigger leap already than any other game with Pro support thus far.
Not a single game on Pro made a jump this big in resolution from the base console, even without considering the other improvements such as high end pc settings, higher quality textures and smoother (apparently locked) framerate. Pro updates usually deliver on a single one of those points, often even then falling short, and never delivered all those at once. So I wouldn't say that's one example to single out how true or not that statement is. He haven't seen the Pro version yet, but from other games it does set xbonex apart from pro.
My problem is with the conference itself.
Checkerboard rendering is a very good technique and makes games look close enough to 4K that the difference is negligible.
Outside of the press conference, who cares what that developers use to get a game where it needs to be CBR still looks great, but Microsoft chose to showcase that game at the Xbox One X portion of the show right after saying it's a true 4k machine. Just makes it feel like they are insinuating that the games being shown there were true 4k.
I don't think it's some deep conspiracy but they should work on their wording and transparency.
Checkerboard rendering is a very good technique and makes games look close enough to 4K that the difference is negligible.
Outside of the press conference, who cares what that developers use to get a game where it needs to be CBR still looks great, but Microsoft chose to showcase that game at the Xbox One X portion of the show right after saying it's a true 4k machine. Just makes it feel like they are insinuating that the games being shown there were true 4k.
I don't think it's some deep conspiracy but they should work on their wording and transparency.