Here is a comparison.
Well that just concretes it more for me - anything below 720p looks mediocre but 720p looks pretty fucking great and uses less than HALF the fillrate - can fill that up with so much other stuff.
-
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.
RUMOUR: Xbox One version of Call of Duty: Ghosts is 720p, PS4 version is 1080p?
- Thread starter Amir0x
- Start date
- Status
Well that just concretes it more for me - anything below 720p looks mediocre but 720p looks pretty fucking great and uses less than HALF the fillrate - can fill that up with so much other stuff.
Correct...and it's also why they can say its a "design choice" because it is...In a sense...
You can approach this from two different angles...
Approach 1: design your characters and environments and the overall look of your game...and then find a resolution/frame rate that works with your hardware (Ryse)
Approach 2: settle on a resolution (and/or framerate) that you want...and design the rest of your assets accordingly without compromising resolution/framerate (KZ:SF)
Approach 2 is something I think IW/Treyarch should be commended for during this current gen...they had an uncompromising stance on the performance of the games and I believe it paid off for them...never as pretty as their competitors...but performed better where it mattered...
Oh god... I have never thought that the "its good enough" arguments would come up this quick after the lesson that the latest format war gave us...
LOL what?
It certainly seems like an interesting field, very counter-intuitive, must make it a consistent challenge.
How does the point stand?
He said it looks amazing, you don't even believe him, how is that not bullshit?
It looks like crap on PS4, and if the PS4 version really is more than double the pixel density, the XBO version is going to look fucking awful.
Here is a comparison.
SMH at using interlaced resolutions on static image comparison shots.
Alx
Member
Doesnt make it any better when resized and scaled propotionally.
Well actually it does make it better.
That's why I said it was interesting, why did he feel the need to downgrade it more than necessary if the right degradation is supposed to be convincing enough ?
Sandy Nipples
Banned
I saw Ryse first hand, it didn't look that great, and was rendering at a low arse resolution and, if I remember correctly, not such a hot framerate either. Comparably, it looked like a beefier Gears of War, you know what, not even, aesthetically Gears looks miles better. Ryse made a very weak impression to me.
Seriously, 1080p with KZ art direction will melt faces in comparison to Ryse.
But you're right, competent technical directed games stand the test of time, because, well, they were well technically directed, I just don't see Ryse falling into that category.
Only about a month to get the answers.
And since the initial shipments are sold out, probably no answer on how this and other differences like price and available games affects sales until February/March.
SenjutsuSage
Banned
Cut it out. Besides native rendering resolution, a lot of what you're saying isn't any more objective than what anyone else who thinks Ryse looks better has to say, and pretending otherwise doesn't make it true.
Please, do tell. What is the polygon counts per frame of these two games? All I know for certain is that Ryse's main character has a poly count close to twice that of the highest LOD level in Killzone, and all the cutscene models in Ryse are the same models, in terms of overall detail and fidelity, as those used during gameplay, but even I can see that this alone tells us nothing. I'm amazed that you know so much about the texture resolution of these two games. Rendering resolution and texture resolution aren't necessarily guaranteed to be the same two things, so I don't know where you get that from. You have textures on all different kinds of surfaces in games, ranging from characters, to terrain, to weapons, to vehicles etc. Knowing what the texture resolution is on one or two aspects of a game doesn't exactly tell you everything else.
Texture variety and shader complexity? How do you know how complex Ryse's shaders are, or even how complex Killzone's shaders are? You're making a lot of claims you simply can't back up with anything other than your opinion that all this looks significantly better in Killzone compared to Ryse. Texture variety? Really? You've seen enough of these two games to talk about texture variety? Another bogus argument, really. The silliest way I've seen people try to downplay how good Ryse looks is to say, "Oh, well, you're just seeing art, and you think it looks better based on what you 'see,' and that's of course subjective. Nothing technical there. The game I think looks better is the only correct answer here, because my opinion is more 'technical'," but that's largely nonsense for a simple reason: A lot of what people are actually going on with regards to Killzone is also based on what they look at and deem most attractive, because a lot of the innermost technical details are things that few of us even know about, or will ever know about. If you think lighting, as well as some of the things you mention such as texture variety and shaders aren't also a subject of 'art,' then you, quite frankly, don't know what you're saying.
Killzone is a beautiful looking game. An absolutely beautiful fucking game. I don't need a bunch of technical baloney to tell me that. I can look and see for myself, and that's how the majority of people judge a game also. They look, they appreciate details, they appreciate technical accomplishments, they appreciate art. There's no question about how beautiful a game Killzone is, but there's also no question about how beautiful a game Ryse is. You and anyone else are certainly free to think it's the better looking game, and, yes, that's your opinion. It isn't fact, because there are people who also think Ryse is the better looking game, and that, too, is also an opinion. It is an opinion that no amount of uninformed and incorrectly applied technical babble, attempting to completely separate what people are seeing and prefer most with their own two eyes from anything that could be deemed technical to suit your own view, is going to change. People judge the graphical and technical impressiveness of a game based on what they see, even if they couldn't name every single technique that is on display. To demand such a ridiculous standard reduces the beauty of videogames, which for all intents and purposes is an artform, to nothing more than a challenge to see who can name and describe the most impressive sounding graphical techniques with zero consideration for how those techniques are used and applied. How it all comes together artistically is absolutely crucial to how impressive a game looks, and because you can't possibly decide that this particular piece of art is superior to anything else, and actually have everybody everywhere unanimously agree with you, there's zero guarantee that you are any more correct than someone else who has a different view.
You can't regulate nor come up with a set of rules or a mathematical formula to say who is right from who is wrong, and what looks prettier than what. Are you insane? So, please, enough with that nonsense. Killzone not only does not look significantly better than Ryse, but Ryse is the better looking game based on what has been shown of both games so far. Do I deny that this is my opinion, and not the universal law of the land? No, I do not, but you might as well stop treating your own opinion as fact or the only thing that can pass the 'test,' because nothing could be any further from the truth, and the resolution doesn't change that, and neither does the fact that Killzone's MP is 60fps most of the time. I'm comparing SP to SP. There are even larger environments in Ryse than what has been shown so far. at least Crytek has said as much. And even if Killzone did have larger playspaces, I'm not even sure what the heck that's suppose to even mean in a discussion regarding how good people believe the two game's look, particularly when they're two vastly different kinds of games. Ryse could take place in a single, solitary hole in the ground, and you would still be no better served by telling us how much larger Killzone's environments are. Games have different goals and visions. This is a surprise to no one. It's similar to how silly I thought it was for people to be complaining about Guerilla telling us that FPS starts to drop after 24 AI are on screen, and I defended the game, pointing out how little sense I thought it made to somehow hold that against the game.
I don't know how much you know about any of this stuff, and I'm sure as hell no expert myself, but I know enough to understand that there is no check list formula for determining how great or fantastic a game looks among different people with vastly different opinions of beauty, at least sure as hell not one that everybody will actually agree with. I think Blue Dragon is easily one of the most beautiful games I played this generation. Do I expect everyone to agree with me? No, but that doesn't make my opinion invalid, so, please, if people happen to think Ryse is the best looking game they've seen, they have every right to their opinion, just as much as people have every right to believe Killzone is the best looking game they've seen. 1080p vs 900p does virtually nothing to change this. They are two entirely different games. Now, if COD: Ghosts is 1080p on the PS4 and 720p on the Xbox One, then there's absolutely no question that the PS4 version is the better looking game, because they're the same damn game in literally every way possible. There's not much room for discussion there at all, but between Ryse and Killzone? Yea, best believe that case isn't so easily closed.
TheApatheticOne
Member
Ugh. I'm getting both systems, and had already switched NFS: Rivals, BF4 and AC4 from the XBO version to the PS4 to join KZ:SF and NBA2k14.
Still interested in XBO, still want Forza, DR3 and yes, Ryse. Titanfall is my most highly anticipated next gen game.
I'll still get both because I comfortably can, but damn, what terrible news (if confirmed 100%).
Still interested in XBO, still want Forza, DR3 and yes, Ryse. Titanfall is my most highly anticipated next gen game.
I'll still get both because I comfortably can, but damn, what terrible news (if confirmed 100%).
Well actually it does make it better.
That's why I said it was interesting, why did he feel the need to downgrade it more than necessary if the right degradation is supposed to be convincing enough ?
Because there are always zealots and fanatics that use hyperbole to fuel the war and get their agenda through. But in the end. Objectively the image quality will be considerably worse and that is something visual and noticable. We are not talking about some low res textures, or low res shadows here and there but an 56% resolution difference.
If that's true though, would it really be intentional gimping? Couldn't it be possible that IW decided to change to 720p for both consoles for (whatever) similar reasons?
Heh, really wish we get some info soon.
killatopak
Gold Member
That's just an image used in a simple google search.
call_kotaku
Member
But by that logic I can say that Shadow of the Colossus on PS2 or Wind Waker on Gamecube looks better than either game, even if the platforms were magnitudes weaker because it's all subjective, but that's hardly useful. Nobody is saying that games on Xbone can't look good or can't be great games, but the system is much weaker than it ought to be, especially given its price point and the amount of power its competitor offers. It's up to the devs to use that power well, but the PS4 definitely has a lot more of it.
Your argument is only valid if graphics don't matter (in which case why buy either system) or if devs can't properly use that extra power (in which case why buy either system).
iceatcs
Junior Member
Yep. Whoever based in US, will know first what PS4 version have. One week later will know how Xbox One version doing.
Few moment later we will have the first compare on next gen multi-platform title. I don't think COD will be first. BF4 will be the one to be first test.
silver.tongue
Member
I see the topic hasn't slowed down from last night.
Meltdowns, Funny Images, and Walls of Text... seems about right.
Meltdowns, Funny Images, and Walls of Text... seems about right.
Salvor.Hardin
Banned
Which should be when? Post launch?
MysticGoujon
Banned
It's been confirmed numerous times that the tour version was pre-upgrade.
Maybe he thinks it looks awesome? It's an opinion, your post suggests that he straight out lied, which he didn't, he just got the MS treatment as per.
lol @ damage control
How about both, 1080p and the "other stuff"? Even if 720p were good enough and they went with it on PS4 as well, they could put in even more "other stuff" on PS4 than on Xbone.
This is not so much about the resolution of this particular game, it's more about the power difference between both consoles.
I have no idea what he means with efficiency, but at least it's a reason. Why should you make the hardware work harder to run a game in 1080p is no difference is perceived compared to 900p?
Audioboxer
Member
Oh Sethos, lol.
MysticGoujon
Banned
Bring on the hyperbole.
Wait until the day shift in North America hits. BOOM.
Alternative argument/point is that there is another machine that can have other stuff filled in, running at full HD ...
We've been through this with the previous generation. It's time to move on ...
Most likely a few days after the initial launch because review codes are mostly send out for one system.
GribbleGrunger
Dreams in Digital
It's out in the wilds:
http://www.gamepur.com/news/12532-t...leaker-issue-clarification-also-comment-.html
http://www.gamepur.com/news/12532-t...leaker-issue-clarification-also-comment-.html
SilentFlyer
Member
Damn, missed a lot in a few hours....
Lool .. That is it.
Phat Michael
Banned
is that comparison 720P or 720P upscaled to 1080P? TBH - ive never seen back to back 720p vs 1080P games i guess.
Dont care so much for COD as i was never buying it, but am very keen on Titanfall.
Complete and utter BULLSHIT and i would say it in the middle of Crytek's offices...anyone with half a brain can see right through that nonsense...it doesn't make any sense...
If they can achieve the same quality in all other areas (textures, shadows, lighting, etc...) without a performance hit...then there is absolutely 100% ZERO reason to choose 900p over 1080p...NONE...
I knoooooow. I'm loving this shit. It's 2006 all fucking over again. MS is doing basically everything Sony did. It's truly hilarious. These people don't learn. They don't get it. They are so out of touch and so full of themselves. I love seeing them self destruct. Pure entertainment.
But I hope they eventually get their shit together. I do want a Xbox One, but not anytime soon.
killatopak
Gold Member
I think you can compare some aspects and technicalities of both games. There are Power Point presentations and PDF files of both games showing what tech they used and such. I just don't know if one is better than the other. I don't know if the poster you replied to has a knowledge of such aspects though
Source:
Killzone: Shadow Fall -http://www.guerrilla-games.com/prese...Postmortem.pdf
http://www.guerrilla-games.com/prese...ostmortem.pptx
Ryse: Son of Rome - http://www.crytek.com/cryengine/presentations
No, he does not. That is not a reasonable opinion to hold. Moreover, the tweet is an attempt to reassure, yes it's phrased as a subjective statement, but it's reassurance from an official source. It's disingenuous, or 'bullshit', to use the word I chose.
JimmyRustler
Member
Yeah, I imagine minds being blown at Sony HQ as to what is going on. It's like MS deliberately does all these fuck ups and gives Sony free commercial.
Except they aren't filling it with other stuff, they are compensating for the less powerful hardware. Besides looking at a comparison like that doesn't tell hardly anything about the game looks. You need to see it full screen and in motion or the comparison is useless.
And do people really want to stuck at 720p for another eight years? That shit was bad enough ten years ago.
hooijdonk17
Member
Halo 3/ODST were sub-720p and nobody melted..
Granted, I thought their visuals really suffered terribly for it, so for me it was a big deal..
HiredN00bs
Member
You know, Albert has convinced me that rendering resolutions and graphical fidelity are subjective things that aren't really relevant to playing awesome games so in addition to my PS4 I will now also be purchasing a Wii U. Still not picking up a bone.
Holy crap this GIF is amazingDamn, missed a lot in a few hours....
MysticGoujon
Banned
So because you've heard a rumour, it's bullshit to have the opinion that something looks awesome. Wow.
GrizzleBoy
Banned
Went to bed at 27 pages.......................SUDDENLY ONE HUNDRED PAGES!!!!!
And still no confirmation 0_0
And still no confirmation 0_0
"Nobody cares about Call of Duty"
What? It was a shitstorm. People were still joking about getting a Halo 3 HD remaster weeks ago on here.
What are you talking about? I've seen the game on PS4, it looks shit. Unless it looks hugely better on XBO, and there's no way it does, it looks shit there too. How much shitter? We shall have to wait and see.
- Status