People got caught with their pants down over this. A lesson learned. Resolution is overblown for casuals which is why resolution and IQ nitpickers are always fighting uphill. Damn the people eh.
Have you ignored all the posts of people complaining about the multiplayer's image quality at launch?
Actually, that's quite significantly different. The dynamic framebuffer is simply upscaled. Here you apparently have a spatial and a temporal sample (or actually a range of temporal samples?) per 2 pixels which are fed into some heuristic to derive the final color values.I think this is pretty clever compromise to hit a high framerate in MP. How responsive is it?
If viewed as a horizontal image compression, the math can make a better interpolation with better detail than retaining of detail when scaling in X&Y pixels..
Also Not to different than tricks used by Liverpool - Wipeout HD Dynamic Frame Buffer
I don't recall anyone saying it wasn't 1080p, specifically, though I'm sure a minority did. And that certainly wasn't the consensus.
I'd be willing to bet there's motion blur making it look worse. Here's another screen captured by the same person:Too bad I have no interest in this game, if I ever looked at it I might have noticed something
That screenshot Dictator93 posted is pretty terrible.
Now, question: Should this even matter if nobody noticed in the first place? I'm sure there will be some people who now probably say they noticed this all along, or knew something was up, but come on, that's not really true now, is it? Nobody's going to believe that.
If our local 1080 paparazzi truly thought that something was up, or even worth investigating with the game's resolution, a pixel count would have been done ages ago. That didn't happen, regardless of what people may be saying currently. So, what it all boils down to is that this is just one more example of a game (if this is all accurate and no mistakes were made) in which something that was supposed to be so effortlessly spotted and identified, was missed completely by just about everybody. I distinctly remember posts of people mocking developers and posters who sometimes said that it was tough to notice the difference between certain resolutions, and that it wasn't always as easy to spot as people claimed it was.
We now have an example with Killzone that's very close to a 720p resolution for the MP, an MP that many people, even myself, were impressed with visually, and nobody seemed to notice anything amiss with the resolution despite this. That just about tells you all you really need to know.
Nope, the guy is right. Everybody missed this. Since when has a developer telling people a game was 1080p stopped people from doing a pixel count anyway? I think I'm only being fair in saying that if the game was an Xbox One title, a resolution analysis would have almost certainly taken place no matter what the developer claimed, and I think everybody knows that. But the best part here is that if people thought the game's MP looked great before (lots of people did) then nothing should be different about today.
Ryse's temporal supersampling takes place over the entire 1600x900 buffer. And I wouldn't be surprised at all if the game is overall doing more work for reprojection than KZSF MP.
Even if they had to bleed half a 1080p buffer into DDR3, that wouldn't be that big of a deal. A single pass over a 960x1080 buffer isn't likely to be very catastrophic for a 68GB/s memory pool.
It's hard to say in the case of this particular technique what's motion blur and what is lack of sharpness due to camera motion. Because obviously, frames where the camera doesn't move at all will look "almost 1080p", while presumably the reprojection will fail and produce blur (or worse, artifacts) with fast camera movement.I'd be willing to bet there's motion blur making it look worse. Here's another screen captured by the same person:
Notice that you can still see the artifacts from the temporal reprojection, but the image as a whole seems sharper--except for the motion blur on the very near rock faces.
No, those just used anamorphic rendering + scaling. To the best of my knowledge, this particular technique wasn't used before.Wasn't the same technique used for either GT5 or MGS4 or both? I vaguely remember reading about a technique where the game was rendered thin then stretched sideways.
Not surprising. A certain subgroup over there has been salivating whilst waiting for a moment to 'attack'. And here it is.people on reddit having a field day with this.
It's hard to say in the case of this particular technique what's motion blur and what is lack of sharpness due to camera motion. Because obviously, frames where the camera doesn't move at all will look "almost 1080p", while presumably the reprojection will fail and produce blur (or worse, artifacts) with fast camera movement.
People got caught with their pants down over this. A lesson learned. Resolution is overblown for casuals which is why resolution and IQ nitpickers are always fighting uphill. Damn the people eh.
Wasn't the same technique used for either GT5 or MGS4 or both? I vaguely remember reading about a technique where the game was rendered thin then stretched sideways.
It's so pathetically smart. It essentially renders 1080p at the moment you most likely would notice 1080p and renders a faux 1080p or a blur when it knows you won't be paying attention.
Not surprising. A certain subgroup over there has been salivating whilst waiting for a moment to 'attack'. And here it is.
Although going nuts over this whilst deriding 'SonyGaf' for pointing out XBOne deficiencies is rather hypocritical.
I felt KZ:M looked fine in MP because of the blur, but KZ:SF always looked off in the MP.Killzone Mercenary did a kind of similar thing didnt it? Native resolution when there is little movement and then dynamic resolutions to hold the framerate during movement.
But if this was an xbox game it would have a thread of 1000 posts by now!
I felt KZ:M looked fine in MP because of the blur, but KZ:SF always looked off in the MP.
But if this was an xbox game it would have a thread of 1000 posts by now!
But if this was an xbox game it would have a thread of 1000 posts by now!
Hmmm well GG needs to get to the talking to explain themselves over this because this is kind of ridiculous.
However what's with the co-signing in here and the fake anger? When did all of a sudden people care so much about Killzone now? I get that this obviously is a resolution issue but I see a lot of dwellers coming out the woodworks as if they played the game to even be mad. People who actually played the game probably noticed. I don't know why DF didn't come out an break this earlier. It seems lame for this to come out now with this well after launch. This should of been called out from early and I'm kind of disappointed by Sony, GG and DF who probably knew there was a small fine print of it all but didn't report and own up to it.
Killzone Mercenary did a kind of similar thing didnt it? Native resolution when there is little movement and then dynamic resolutions to hold the framerate during movement.
GT3 and GT4 on PS2 had interlaced resolution as well.
No. There is no interlacing, and the upscaling is limited to very small areas of the screen (and may not be "true" upscaling at all). This isn't the same technique as Killzone Mercenary, or the Gran Turismos. Shadow Fall is apparently the first game to ever use this new method.This sounds like the PS4 is rendering interlaced images and the PS4 is in effect de-interlacing to get a final 1080p image?
This is basicly the crux of it. Everyone was originally assuming KZ:SF would be 1080p 30fps in multiplayer, when they said 60fps it was kind of a wow moment, but looking at what they had to sacrifice to do that, I think id rather it be 30fps
Except we have hundreds of posts in threads about the multiplayer from the first Gamersyde footage to the multiplayer impressions thread with people arguing that there was a very visible blur in the MP that is not present in the SP.Resolutiongate, the placebo effect at its best. Tell everyone a game is 1080p when it isn't and no one notices anything wrong. Months later it's found that (god forbid) it isn't actually the p's they were promised and of course people 'always thought something looked off'.
I would like to see this method on the singleplayer footage to see how much of an impact this has on the final image. Because this is employed in the MP you can't isolate of how much an impact it has.It gives better results than the old methods, and more accurately approximates what a native 1080p screen would look like. As a tradeoff, it also creates scattered artifacts that look a little like dithering (but aren't really related to old uses of that either).
Resolutiongate, the placebo effect at its best. Tell everyone a game is 1080p when it isn't and no one notices anything wrong. Months later it's found that (god forbid) it isn't actually the p's they were promised and of course people 'always thought something looked off'. I hope one day we'll be able to just enjoy games and appreciate them for how good they actually look, rather than going back and forth over counting pixels. The game looks great, and performs well in multiplayer which is absolutely crucial.
Man, never imagined Sony's 'For the Player's motto will backfire so fast. Shutting GT5 online servers, Santa Monica stuff and now not being truthful\misleading regrading aspects of a game.
lmaoMan, never imagined Sony's 'For the Player's motto will backfire so fast. Shutting GT5 online servers, Santa Monica stuff and now not being truthful\misleading regrading aspects of a game.
Placebo effect? Alright!Resolutiongate, the placebo effect at its best. Tell everyone a game is 1080p when it isn't and no one notices anything wrong. Months later it's found that (god forbid) it isn't actually the p's they were promised and of course people 'always thought something looked off'. I hope one day we'll be able to just enjoy games and appreciate them for how good they actually look, rather than going back and forth over counting pixels. The game looks great, and performs well in multiplayer which is absolutely crucial.