• 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.

COD:Ghosts PS4/XBO Comparisons show the same resolution (720p)?

Mr Moose

Member
Says 1080p native on my case:

BY8z4-wIgAAIdog.jpg:large

Full HD 1080p TV needed*
 

dark10x

Digital Foundry pixel pusher
Giantbomb mentioned in their Resogun QL that they were capturing the game at 720p, which I assume means they had it outputting at 720p as well, despite being able to run at 1080; I wouldn't be surprised if it's the same issue here; capture equipment prefers/requires a 720 signal, so that's what they ran it at. But we'll see.
The silver lining here is that it may be possible for the PS4 to output games at a lower resolution (rather than simply downscaling from 1080p).

I see this as a potential positive simply because it would allow us to choose to run games at a lower resolution should we desire. This could be useful in a situation where you're dealing with a game without a framerate cap that is unable to hold its framerate. Take Knack, for instance. It might be possible to drop the resolution to 720p and actually hit 60 fps instead of 30-60 fps we see now.

Hitting the native resolution of your display is very important, but an unstable framerate can spoil otherwise good image quality. Reducing image quality in order to solve framerate issues can be a good alternative even on the PC.

This was completely possible with some games last generation. A number of titles which operated at unstable framerates in 720p mode could be switched to 480p where they would then deliver a smooth 30 or 60 fps. Bionic Commando Rearmed 2 works like this (unstable at 720p, smooth as butter at 480p).

Not a great compromise but definitely something that might prove useful in some circumstances. Would be curious to see if KZ-Shadowfall supports 720p output as its unlocked framerate could allow for a higher framerate in SP mode (ie - closer to hitting 60 fps).
 
So basically a lot of people owe the Polygon reviewer an apology for jumping on his ass for not seeing the res difference which was not there to begin with?

How about the Polygon reviewer owes us an apology for not recognising that both versions are rendered in 720p when he cleary should have known that the PS4 version is rendered in 1080p?
 

Durante

Member
Quoting myself from yesterday:
Either the game is not rendering at 1080p on PS4 and 720p on XB1 or all these game journalists should go to an optometrist.
All these impressions don't sound like one version is rendering 2.25 as many pixels as the other. And the images certainly don't look like it. Someone, somewhere messed up, either at the capturing or the PR end.

Game looks like hot garbage on everything.
I don't think so.
F1PXykR.png

(source)
 

sTaTIx

Member
To restate my theory from the other thread, I am beginning to believe that some of the PS4 systems used to demonstrate the game at the review event may not have been set up correctly to run the game at 1080p. If the game was being shown on PS4 both at 1080p to some and 720p to others, this would explain why some of the reviewers could not see any difference, while others saw a clear advantage for Sony. It would also explain how the footage captured by IGN and Sixth Axis appears to be native 720p on both systems.

My assumption is that Marc Rubin did not lie, the PS4 can run at native 1080p, but not everyone who reviewed the game actually got to see it that way, and none of the comparison footage we have right now is representative of the resolution advantage.

How did this happen? I don't know. It could be a firmware bug with how HDMI connections were negotiated on the debug hardware they used, or it could be simple user error in how the machines were configured by Activision.

Truth.

Second time I've quoted this guy for truth now.
 

News Bot

Banned
In this image from the OP:

I MUCH prefer the XONE screenshot. It looks way better. Clearer, brighter ... the lighting looks better. It's just my opinion but I am suprised that the PS4 doesn't really 'pop' after all the hype.

Like the 360 and PS3, I'm fairly sure the difference is just because of different gamma output/color calibration. They're otherwise the exact same in that shot.
 
Amateur hour!
so am I getting this right, they compared the 720p PS4 with 720p Xboned?

when it infact should have been compared with 1080p PS4 vs 720p Xboned?
 
Quoting myself from yesterday:

All these impressions don't sound like one version is rendering 2.25 as many pixels as the other. And the images certainly don't look like it. Someone, somewhere messed up, either at the capturing or the PR end.


I don't think so.
F1PXykR.png

(source)

it's the only pretty screen for the game I saw. It doesn't help than on PC, with super high res, downsampling and crazy AA, you get a picture quality that even makes PS2 games hold up to standarts. But when you looks real gameplay the game is an insult to next gen. Infinity ward really hit the bucket
 

Taker34

Banned
In this image from the OP:



I MUCH prefer the XONE screenshot. It looks way better. Clearer, brighter ... the lighting looks better. It's just my opinion but I am suprised that the PS4 doesn't really 'pop' after all the hype.

mocoworm
ignore my opinion on everything...

Why are you even trying?
 

sTaTIx

Member
The silver lining here is that it may be possible for the PS4 to output games at a lower resolution (rather than simply downscaling from 1080p).

I see this as a potential positive simply because it would allow us to choose to run games at a lower resolution should we desire. This could be useful in a situation where you're dealing with a game without a framerate cap that is unable to hold its framerate. Take Knack, for instance. It might be possible to drop the resolution to 720p and actually hit 60 fps instead of 30-60 fps we see now.

Hitting the native resolution of your display is very important, but an unstable framerate can spoil otherwise good image quality. Reducing image quality in order to solve framerate issues can be a good alternative even on the PC.

This was completely possible with some games last generation. A number of titles which operated at unstable framerates in 720p mode could be switched to 480p where they would then deliver a smooth 30 or 60 fps. Bionic Commando Rearmed 2 works like this (unstable at 720p, smooth as butter at 480p).

Not a great compromise but definitely something that might prove useful in some circumstances. Would be curious to see if KZ-Shadowfall supports 720p output as its unlocked framerate could allow for a higher framerate in SP mode (ie - closer to hitting 60 fps).
Oh please. Some people are VASTLY overstating the importance of a completely, 100% stable framerate. All the previous Call of Duty titles on console targeted 60fps, but had regular drops down to 40-50fps during intensive scenes. No average gamer could even tell.

Another example, and a game I finished recently, is The Last of Us, which is one of the most acclaimed games in years. Yet the framerate would noticeably dip below 30fps at some points.

So long as this newest Call of Duty runs at a minimum of 40fps, and averages around 55-60fps, then not a single person would be the wiser.
 

Fredrik

Member
The silver lining here is that it may be possible for the PS4 to output games at a lower resolution (rather than simply downscaling from 1080p).

I see this as a potential positive simply because it would allow us to choose to run games at a lower resolution should we desire. This could be useful in a situation where you're dealing with a game without a framerate cap that is unable to hold its framerate. Take Knack, for instance. It might be possible to drop the resolution to 720p and actually hit 60 fps instead of 30-60 fps we see now.
THAT would truly be worthy of the Greatness Awaits slogan. After a debate in another thread it was clear to me that I couldn't clearly spot the difference between 720p and 1080p unless I sat 1 meter from my TV, the couch is 4 meters away though. Having the option to run everything in 720p instead and get 60 fps locked would simply be mindblowing for me.
 
whether or not the final PS4 version runs in 1080p, if it's true that the reviewers were all playing it at 720p (for whatever reason)... I mean, it just makes all of them look like idiots. I mean, I'd stop piling on polygon for that thing about how they couldn't tell a difference with a gun to their head, and how if they saw a difference they maybe imagined it...

But it exposes that the press don't have a clue about resolution... and that review events have even more issues than I previously knew about.
 

Lihwem

Member
I MUCH prefer the XONE screenshot. It looks way better. Clearer, brighter ... the lighting looks better. It's just my opinion but I am suprised that the PS4 doesn't really 'pop' after all the hype.

mocoworm
ignore my opinion on everything ever
 

kinggroin

Banned
True story, the PS4 kiosk at my local BB is set to 720p on a 4k display.

Yep.


Dark10x, Knack at 720p was still 30fps, just uglier than ever.
 

dark10x

Digital Foundry pixel pusher
Oh please. Some people are VASTLY overstating the importance of a completely, 100% stable framerate. All the previous Call of Duty titles on console targeted 60fps, but had regular drops down to 40-50fps during intensive scenes. No average gamer could even tell.

Another example, and a game I finished recently, is The Last of Us, which is one of the most acclaimed games in years. Yet the framerate would noticeably dip below 30fps at some points.

So long as this newest Call of Duty runs at a minimum of 40fps, and averages around 55-60fps, then not a single person would be the wiser.
Not a single person? Not true.

I'm not overstating this at all. A stable framerate is supremely important to me and I do whatever I can on the PC to hit that.

The slowdown in The Last of Us was not acceptable. I still enjoyed the game but I would have enjoyed it a hell of a lot more if the framerate had been stable. I really only put up with it due to the quality of the game mixed with the fact that I understood it was running on old hardware. They were overly ambitious for the platform.
 

sTaTIx

Member
I'm apologise to you for entering a discussion. Is your opinion more valid?

Actually, his opinion IS more valid, considering the vast majority of people out there would prefer to not play in colorblind mode (resulting in less accurate colors).

Your opinion was also incredibly disingenuous, considering the comparison screenshot was completely flawed (the PS4 was accidentally set to output at 720p instead of 1080p).
 
THAT would truly be worthy of the Greatness Awaits slogan. After a debate in another thread it was clear to me that I couldn't clearly spot the difference between 720p and 1080p unless I sat 1 meter from my TV, the couch is 4 meters away though. Having the option to run everything in 720p instead and get 60 fps locked would simply be mindblowing for me.

1080p UI downscaled to 720p can look pretty bad.
 

Mr Moose

Member
Means nothing, last gen. was same.

Which part? I know the scaling things are always on the back, but the comment about for full HD 1080p part isn't mentioned on any of my cases apart from the PS4 Ghosts one.
"Video output in full HD 1080p requires 1080p native display."

Edit: (Can they claim full HD 1080p if it's upscaled?)
 

madmackem

Member
whether or not the final PS4 runs in 1080p, if it's true that the reviewers were all playing it at 720p... I mean, it just makes all of them look like idiots. I mean, I'd stop piling on polygon for that thing about how they could tell a difference with a gun to their head, and how if they saw a difference they maybe imagined it...

But it exposes that the press don't have a clue about resolution... and that review events have even more issues than I previously knew about.

They will no doubt have low end people setting up all the tvs and consoles at these events, have you been to a gaming show the tvs are normal set in fucking blowout mode ive been to somewhere they hooked up the console with the supplied compsite leads in the early years of this gen.

As for media i think we give alot of them too much credit they all wont be techy people they are there to write and review games it doesnt mean they know shite about res, gamma levels colour levels sharpness settings etc etc. If youve ever listened to podcasts they lay bare how little some of them know about this stuff.
 
So basicly : IW lies, or Polygon lies/does a bad job ?

It's not Polygon's fault if Activision screwed up the system configuration. Reviewers probably weren't even allowed to mess with the system settings. I can forgive a non-technical writer for not recognizing the issue.
 

Alej

Banned
Maybe when PS4's output is 720p, the game is rendered at 720p too. It was the case for some games on PS3, like Gran Turismo.
 

sTaTIx

Member
Not a single person? Not true.

I'm not overstating this at all. A stable framerate is supremely important to me and I do whatever I can on the PC to hit that.

The slowdown in The Last of Us was not acceptable. I still enjoyed the game but I would have enjoyed it a hell of a lot more if the framerate had been stable. I really only put up with it due to the quality of the game mixed with the fact that I understood it was running on old hardware. They were overly ambitious for the platform.

Call of Duty sells 20+ million copies every year, and has almost every gamer out there convinced that it runs at a locked 60fps 100% of the time. Shocking that something so "supremely important" or "unnacceptable" could still lead to millions upon millions of sales, right?

And I shouldn't have said "not a single person" would notice. Good job, you caught me in the semantics game.
 
Top Bottom