deserved it.
anyway. It is really interesting what is going on with both versions.
Call of Dogeshit?
Here's a quote from the second site:
Persecution complex and controller preference.
Two more sites saying they prefer the X1 version over PS4.
http://www.gamerevolution.com/manif...-great-on-xbox-one-i-actually-prefer-it-22533
http://www.hardcoregamer.com/2013/11/12/review-call-of-duty-ghosts-xbox-one/61727/
Resolutiongate a storm in a teacup afterall? Sessler redeemed?
console warriors. flip out over another game. Waste of breath here. It's like comparing resolutions of 2 pictures of turds.
Bravo.Call of Dogeshit?
lol, did you actually read what you posted?
The game looks like shit, we can all agree on that. Even on PC it's a shame.
Still, unless MS specifically paid for that, why would CoD devs ensure the weaker console has a better framerate ? It doesn't make sense at all, especially considering the big difference in specs.
After all, they could have gone with 900p on PS4, then it would have had better IQ AND better framerate. Why not do that ? Seems strange...
People keep posting this, which site claimed this? Just curious
On the merits of what we've seen so far, Battlefield 4 is already set to be a formidable launch window effort from DICE. Our observations so far reveal a clear gap in fidelity between PC and PS4, and again to Xbox One, but sub-pixel break-up aside, based on what we've seen so far, the Microsoft console manages to hold up despite the undeniable, quantifiably worse metrics in terms of both resolution and frame-rate.
Frame-rate drops on the PS4? That seems bad, since it's a game that hinges on precision
The game looks like shit, we can all agree on that. Even on PC it's a shame.
Still, unless MS specifically paid for that, why would CoD devs ensure the weaker console has a better framerate ? It doesn't make sense at all, especially considering the big difference in specs.
After all, they could have gone with 900p on PS4, then it would have had better IQ AND better framerate. Why not do that ? Seems strange...
They probably wanted dat 1080p selling point.
what did deserve it? The last of us is top tier game man...
They probably wanted dat 1080p selling point.
Since the embargo is going up today for several games, I thought it'd be good to list all the sites that have updated with COD impressions for XB1.
IGN - http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/11/05/call-of-duty-ghosts-review
VideoGamer- http://www.videogamer.com/xboxone/c...ew_call_of_duty_ghosts_and_battlefield_4.html
When comparing the PS4 and Xbox One versions side-by-side, theres 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.
Polygon- http://www.polygon.com/2013/11/5/5052646/call-of-duty-ghosts-review
Jeez, all over the place. Great job Infinity Ward. :\
Let me know if there's more to add.
No auto aim, just aim-assist.You don't need to worry about precision in CoD.... autoaim boosted to 11.
IW did say that MS engineers were on site during the development of the game so I can see them having better frame rate. Also at the end of the day Activision has a deal with MS to produce exclusive timed content and to promote their consoles when talking about COD. Wouldn't be shocking if they spent more time on the console that brings them in more money.
http://blog.jeffgerstmann.net/post/66790643652/so-does-ghosts-run-better-on-xb1-rather-than-ps4Anonymous asked:
So, does Ghosts run better on XB1 rather than PS4?
As of a few weeks ago, this was the case, yes.
They both prefer the XB1 version (even after admitting the PS4 version runs better) exclusively because they prefer the controller layout for the XB1 and the asymmetrical sticks. Nice try tho.They both prefer the X1 version and thought it looked "great". They don't make a big issue out of the resolution difference, so to the average person reading that, it's not going to come across as a big issue either. Thats what I mean by storm in a teacup.
Of course, this is only one game....
Journalists aren't a reliable source for tech analysis. Wait for Digital Foundry to get the final verdict.
Two more sites saying they prefer the X1 version over PS4.
http://www.gamerevolution.com/manif...-great-on-xbox-one-i-actually-prefer-it-22533
http://www.hardcoregamer.com/2013/11/12/review-call-of-duty-ghosts-xbox-one/61727/
Resolutiongate a storm in a teacup afterall? Sessler redeemed?
Why did you bold one and not the other OP?
Framerate > Resolution, but it doesn't even sound like the framerate is bad on PS4 so if I had the option I would pick that one even knowing the 1-month map exclusivity deal.
I've watched tons of matches on youtube and there's fun to be had, but yes, it does seem skippable. Some people are saying it's the best multi since CoD4 and gives them a mixture of Blops + MW2 in MW3 maps, but for the most part I think we can safely expect Treyarch's CoD next year to be much more entertaining and complete as a game, not to mention Titanfall in the Spring from OG Infinity.
The game looks like shit, we can all agree on that. Even on PC it's a shame.
Still, unless MS specifically paid for that, why would CoD devs ensure the weaker console has a better framerate ? It doesn't make sense at all, especially considering the big difference in specs.
After all, they could have gone with 900p on PS4, then it would have had better IQ AND better framerate. Why not do that ? Seems strange...
The thing is... the only reason why they have a good framerate is because they chose 720p for XBO and 1080p for PS4. It has nothing to do with MS engineers, just a lower resolution choice.
That's what bothers me. Why not simply choose something like 900p on PS4, then the best console at least gets the 100 % best version on every bullet point, as it should.
Of all games, it's strange that it happens only on this one, which is precisely known for its Xbox fans... Anyway.
COD, frankly, looks like crap compared to most next-gen games. The performance is nothing to sing home about either. Here are PC benchmarks:
There is nothing particularly demanding about the COD engine. It seems like console ports have gotten worse with next-gen. I thought the x86 architecture should mean good performance across the platforms? Having said that, if you need a 7970 to run Ghosts at 1080p60, then you're doing it wrong Infinity Ward. You're doing it wrong.
Two more sites saying they prefer the X1 version over PS4.
http://www.hardcoregamer.com/2013/11/12/review-call-of-duty-ghosts-xbox-one/61727/
Resolutiongate a storm in a teacup afterall? Sessler redeemed?
So ghosts runs better on x1 than pc?
IGN comparison video:
http://www.ign.com/videos/2013/11/12/call-of-duty-ghosts-in-1080p-ps4-vs-xbox-one-commentary
They say only the odd minor hiccup on PS4 regarding frame rate, smooth 60 otherwise.
Oddly, the Xbox One version makes no use of the haptic feedback motors built into the controllers triggers
Anyone else bothered by no haptic feed back in the triggers for the Xbone version..?
I was really looking forward to that. Does anyone know if Killer Instinct makes use of the rumble triggers?
IGN comparison video:
http://www.ign.com/videos/2013/11/12/call-of-duty-ghosts-in-1080p-ps4-vs-xbox-one-commentary
They say only the odd minor hiccup on PS4 regarding frame rate, smooth 60 otherwise.
Why does the Xbox version have a weird green tint in dark areas, is it my phone?
IGN comparison video:
http://www.ign.com/videos/2013/11/12/call-of-duty-ghosts-in-1080p-ps4-vs-xbox-one-commentary
They say only the odd minor hiccup on PS4 regarding frame rate, smooth 60 otherwise.