Chobel
Member
This is getting ridiculous. When the fuck did everyone say that they can't notice the difference? Most noticed the difference between MP and SP.
At least read the thread before embarrassing yourself.
-
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.
Killzone: Shadow Fall Multiplayer Runs at 960x1080 vertically interlaced
- Thread starter RoboPlato
- Start date
This is getting ridiculous. When the fuck did everyone say that they can't notice the difference? Most noticed the difference between MP and SP.
At least read the thread before embarrassing yourself.
Most of those people are in here discussing that and most of them noticed the huge lack of clarity in the multiplayer in the game. There's no hypocrisy. The final image doesn't have the usual telltale signs of sub-native res, outside of added blur, because the final composite image is reached using a new method. Now we know what to look for to identify if that method is used in the future.
Mihael Mello Keehl
Banned
Thats what Ive been trying to say
Metalingus5150
Member
I think it's pretty clear who's bias is being exposed.
lol
lol
I guess the end justify the means
At this point we should be skeptical of developers saying what the native resolution is
BTW how about Second Son? I guess we won't know until the final game releases, did Sony say what the native resolution was?
Chobel
Member
They said native 1080p
And you'd be wrong again because literally everyone noticed that the image quality of the multiplayer was worse and just assumed it was some aggressive form of FXAA.
Everyone noticed the decreased image quality. That is what resolution does. There was just no reason to assume that it wasn't 1920x1080 so everyone chalked it up to an awful AA solution. Funnily enough, getting the reason wrong doesn't change the fact that people did see a difference between the single player and multiplayer image quality. In fact, this Killzone resolution situation is actual proof that people can see the difference in resolution even if they are told falsehoods about the game's resolution.
Yeah I agree about the resolution, but being so used to all games being fullscreen(aprt from beyond, which seem to work because it was like an interactive movie) I think its a definite step back that detracts from the experience.The wider view is no way worth the screen space, and that argument is pretty flawed because if you want a wider view why stop there? make it thinner and an even wider field of view? no no no 3rd person action shooter have be fine with fullscreen, and to anyone who says ''well you have not even played it so how you know it will make it worse'' well how do you know it will make it better?
Its nice to see u sawyer, that was just a general rant not aimed at you
Uh, you realize that in computer science, interleaving is a very general term, right? There are all kinds of interleaving that address all kinds of problems. What they're doing is absolutely a type of interleaving -- I can't imagine why you're fixating so hard on a specific type of interlacing as defined in certain legacy standards.
Liabe Brave
Member
You're in a thread with over 1600 posts in 24 hours; I'd say there's plenty of noise.
First, lots of people did notice the difference. And second, the difference they noticed is smaller than that from 720p to 1080p. Shadow Fall renders more pixels than 720p, and its unique method means it's actually better IQ than games that render more still, but use traditional upscaling.
Mihael Mello Keehl
Banned
No I wouldnt be wrong. People believed it was the AA solution and not the resolution when it was. Thats where I believe the fault is. Not that some people noticed something was wrong but failed to acknowledge it was a resolution issue because sony said so.
James Sawyer Ford
Gold Member
We had pixel counters on this board verify that the image captures were 1080p (which they are).
You have to specifically inspect the artifacts in order to find signs of what's going on with their processing method.
uhh, what?
Killzone always looked great. It's probably the best looking game on the market. The recent "revelation" does nothing to alter this perception.
I still don't understand your point. It uses a different method of producing a final image than traditional upscaling and it can even fool pixel counts in certain situations which is why no one identified it before now on top of us being told that it was native 1080p. We came up with the most reasonable explanation for the blurriness in MP that we could from the info that we had. You can bet that we'll be looking for the artifacts created by this method from now on.
Whoa there buddy, calm down. The single player is still full HD 1080p and arguably the most impressive next-gen game out there visually.
Having a relatively less impressive multiplayer does not take anything away from the sheer visual impressiveness of the single player.
That said, Guerilla certainly dropped the ball on the multiplayer engine. DICE certainly whooped them hard.
1.21Gigawatts
Banned
We just called it resolutiongate because these discussions were sparked by resolutiondifferences in multiplatform games.
But the same discussion was sparked by the framrate difference in TombRaider.
Its not about the resolution, its just about differences in multiplatform games in general, because differences show that one console is ahead of the other in terms of power. Thats what people care about.
I don't think people would care about these numbers if it weren't for the differences between the Ps4 and XboxOne version.
If TombRaider ran with 30FPS on XboxOne and Ps4 nobody would've cared. But since the Ps4 version runs at a higher framerate everybody goes nuts.
James Sawyer Ford
Gold Member
Heh, I completely disagree with this. BF4 looks plain boring in comparison to the graphical wizardry going on with KZ:SF in multiplayer.
BF4 single player looks pretty decent but the multiplayer is really underwhelming and doesn't give off a next-gen impression. KZ:MP on the other hand totally does.
lightning2k3
Member
This thread isn't a contest about what is the best looking game.
Yes some people did notice a graphical difference.but that does not negate the fact of a lot of boasting about the multiplayer being 1080p 60fps!
I downloaded the KZ mp vids from gamersyde and thought it looked great, you say KZ MP uses some unique method etc, which is my point resolution is not the most important thing.Look at forza 5 its 1080p but still has aliasing that I did not expect on a next gen system.
No it would be lazy devs and MS moneyhats.
Liabe Brave
Member
"Interleaving" and "interlacing" are different terms. The first one has plenty of generalized uses, and I have no problem with applying it to Shadow Fall. "Interlacing" is much more specific, and as far as I'm aware in the tech field applies solely to methods of displaying imagery over time. The "legacy standards" you mention are in fact current standards; they're supported by hardware and used in content that's being produced even as we speak. Since that type of interlacing is still in existence, using the same term for a new type of method and effect is willfully confusing.
At the very least, I'd suggest a modifier to "interlacing" (someone half-facetiously suggested "interlace+" earlier, which is a bare minimum start). But really, the implementation and results of Guerrilla's approach are different enough that a totally separate term would be clearer. Several different ones have been proposed by technically savvy GAFfers in this thread; I'm simply following their usage.
MrCunningham
Member
Not really, that's half of 1920 vertically, which is what would be required to run the game interlaced.
lightning2k3
Member
I vote for 1080π
boredandlazy
Member
I guess they will...
Liabe Brave
Member
Yes, I and others did believe Killzone MP to be 1080p, and we were wrong. In our defense, the way it isn't native 1080p has apparently never been seen before, and eliminates many of the telltale markers previously used to tell. Hence reservations and disappointments about the IQ being chalked up to a different source were not out of venom or partisanship.
Whether resolution is the most important thing is a personal preference. This is why PC gamers like having graphical sliders: they can prioritize resolution, framerate, effects, or any combination that they like. But whatever your personal hierarchy, that doesn't mean resolution isn't important at all. Forza 5 at a lower res with better AA might indeed be nicer for you and others, but Forza 5 at a lower res with the same aliasing would unquestionably be worse, no matter what anyone's priorities are.
For any game, each person will have a checklist of desires and dealbreakers, and some (or all!) won't be technical. But technical talk about resolution or other matters doesn't ignore that. Indeed it embraces and respects it, by offering accurate information so that people who do care can be well-informed.
boredandlazy
Member
Do you need a shoulder to cry on or something?
Solid Samus
Banned
did you read any of this thread before posting this
This is one of the most shittest posts I've ever seen on here. Congrats.
1.21Gigawatts
Banned
Some might say that, but there sure as hell wouldn't be a 40 page thread.
Syphon Filter
Member
I think he means that xbox fans said it looks fine for them,games like BF4,etc but others laughed at them.
Apparently not. Why this is being used as some sort of vindication to the claim that resolution doesn't matter is baffling given that there where people who complained how poor the IQ on MP was.
he probably doesnt even know difference between KZ SP and MP.
I think the revelation is Sony/GG lied about ther MP resolution. Not that I care since I beat it and its collecting dust. SP was the worst of all the series and MP has the shitties GUI I have ever seen. It makes playing MP a chore. But its disappointing that GG/Sony weren't upfront about it. I mean lots of people saw a difference but they couldnt pin point why the image was inferior to SP. Now we know.
DirgeExtinction
Member
Geez, IGN is saying KZ:SF MP is running at 960p. :/ Idiots.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jrSjCg0WclA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jrSjCg0WclA
IGN said:
I really disagree with this statement. Killzone's single player is by far the best looking next gen game but the MP looks like crap, especially in motion. Yes, I thought it was due to some motion blur or something but could tell difference right off the bat. Also, game feels unresponsive compare to other FPS on the PS4. BF4 on the hand, has amazing lighting, particle effects, and destructible environments which all seem to be next gen touches plus it has better IQ then Killzone's MP when in motion. Paracel Storm map is a perfect example of what next gen gaming should look like. Also, I have Ghosts as well and I think that looks better then Killzone's MP as well.
James Sawyer Ford
Gold Member
I don't think Killzone is a big step down from the single player, and runs at a smoother framerate.
Hard to take someone seriously when they say it "looks like crap". Forest / Park / Wall look marvelous.
As for unresponsive, nope. Killzone has the most fluid controls of any shooter. The auto-aim in BF makes the gunplay noticeably worse. Killzone isn't a twitchy shooter, but it most certainly is extremely responsive and precise.
I can't go back to other shooters with ridiculous snap on / auto-aim now.
AgentP
Thinks mods influence posters politics. Promoted to QAnon Editor.
You are either disingenuous or ignorant, possibly both. KZ:SF is only on one platform, so this isn't about 720P vs 1080P like with COD or other games on multiple platforms. This isn't about a choice between two consoles with a $100 price difference. This is about a 1080P game that look great, where the devs used a clever trick to boost the fps in multiplayer. It is a temporal algorithm, it is not equivalent to 720P or any other res.
The only news here is that GG wasn't forthcoming. The technical aspects, while interesting, are not that surprising. Many people suspected something, the artifacts were even labeled "interlacing" long ago at B3D. So you are either disappointed in GG or just using it for fanboy fodder, which is it?
Now, I know you did not play BF4 at all, to call it a twitch shooter is a joke.
boredandlazy
Member
It's like someone at GAF farted and IGN used it as a base for their story.
At least GG made a game you could play at launch. And today.
What are you talking about?
There are a lot of people here at Gaf that really like the PS4 for its 1st party studios and architecture design and because of that ...are a fans of PS4 so don't let the handful of fanboys give you a rotten opinion of the majority of us that are just fans of gaming and happen to like the PS4 more so than X1 for a lot of various reasons. I guess what i am saying is that i do understand why you are saying what you are saying but there are a lot of us that are genuinely intrigued with PS4 for its strengths more so than X1 strengths ..so not all of us are turning a blind eye to this. Good example is the OP (RoboPlato)...he tends to keep things fair and if you look at his post history or seen his comments in various threads here at Gaf you will see he is more interested in the PS4 but yet definitely not some immature fanboy...he keeps it real like a lot of us do.
Yes some of us that are fans of PS4 want truth and transparency with PS4 games as well even if it means negativity towards the platform or PS4 dev studio.
PS: RoboPlato, Great find dude!
1.21Gigawatts
Banned
MP runs at 960p and singleplayer at 1920p!
SMH GG
You had one job and you fucked it up. (Actually you had two jobs, the second being a good single player, and you fucked both up)
I've never played Shadowfall's MP so I never got to experience the downgraded graphics.
You had one job and you fucked it up. (Actually you had two jobs, the second being a good single player, and you fucked both up)
I've never played Shadowfall's MP so I never got to experience the downgraded graphics.
DirgeExtinction
Member
Whoa! So SP runs higher than full HD! PS4 is a beast!
I laughed
Just played the SP again and goddamn is this game gorgeous. The more I think back to some of their comments, the more this starts to seem like they really decided late in the game, after E3 most likely, to try for 60fps. In DF's original deep dive, they mentioned that they had higher quality AA but dropped it to get a slight of a performance boost. I guess they were scrambling to find performance bumps wherever they could. I bet if they had aimed for 60fps earlier on the results would have been better. I wish they had just stuck with 1080p/30 with better AA and maybe even improved the motion blur a bit. Would probably have turned out more consistent overall.
Another strange thing is that this method didn't really up the framerate all that much, unless it was truly abysmal in multiplayer at 1080p. You think that drastic of a res drop would be more than about a 10fps gain. I'd rather a steady 30fps than such a huge resolution drop without getting a steady 60.
Another strange thing is that this method didn't really up the framerate all that much, unless it was truly abysmal in multiplayer at 1080p. You think that drastic of a res drop would be more than about a 10fps gain. I'd rather a steady 30fps than such a huge resolution drop without getting a steady 60.