• 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.

Doom's lead graphics programmer thinks 4K isn't a good use of Xbox Scorpio's power

Should Xbox Scorpio owners demand better resolution and frame rates than the the the Neo delivers since they paid for such a high powered machine? Heck, should Microsoft step in to prevent any parity?
 
He's entitled to his opinion.

Doesn't mean he's right.

I'm feeling like people saying 1080p is enough or diminishing returns have never gamed at 4k. The difference is astonishing.

But the differences in the quality of the visuals will be even greater. The graphical sacrifices that will be made will not be worth the improvement in IQ.
 

bidguy

Banned
Should Xbox Scorpio owners demand better resolution and frame rates than the the the Neo delivers since they paid for such a high powered machine? Heck, should Microsoft step in to prevent any parity?

all games are gonna look and run better on the stronger hardware

kinda like right now you now
 

BeforeU

Oft hope is born when all is forlorn.
Its just a good marketing term, makes the device you buying futureproof.



2 years ago when I was shopping for a audio receiver I spend extra $50 to buy a receiver that will output 4K. And I still dont own a 4K TV. Probably later this year. But at least then I wont have to sell my old receiver and buy a 4K compatible.
 

KageMaru

Member
I'm definitely a fan of the reconstructing method found in uncharted 4 MP. While not as clean as 4K, it should be cleaner than 1080p and provide some freedom to add extra layers of graphical detail.

You know that 2K is 1080p right?

I get what you're saying but it really isn't the same. Standards don't always go by the vertical resolution.

no shiiiit


1080p 60 mandate plz

Should Xbox Scorpio owners demand better resolution and frame rates than the the the Neo delivers since they paid for such a high powered machine? Heck, should Microsoft step in to prevent any parity?

Please no mandates or parity policies. These manufacturers should just provide the hardware and tools and stay out of the developer's way. Policies and mandates usually just complicate things for the worse.
 

harSon

Banned
He's entitled to his opinion.

Doesn't mean he's right.

I'm feeling like people saying 1080p is enough or diminishing returns have never gamed at 4k. The difference is astonishing.

I think he's suggesting that 4K makes a difference in front of a computer, but the difference between 1080P and 4K isn't quite as profound when viewing things at a distance via TV/couch. But then again, the same arguments were made when talking about 720P vs 1080P...

I actually have a 4K television set, and never thought to test my PC on it for 4K gaming since I already have a 4k monitor....
 
He's entitled to his opinion.

Doesn't mean he's right.

I'm feeling like people saying 1080p is enough or diminishing returns have never gamed at 4k. The difference is astonishing.

That's not the reason people want games to stay at 1080p. The reason is because Scorpio, and even more so Neo, can't render at 4K with good fidelity. We are still far off from that on consoles.
 

Gamezone

Gold Member
Don't you need a huge 4K TV to see any difference? To be honest I don't see much different from 720p to 1080p on a 42 inch TV in my living room.
 

P44

Member
He's entitled to his opinion.

Doesn't mean he's right.

I'm feeling like people saying 1080p is enough or diminishing returns have never gamed at 4k. The difference is astonishing.

Yeah but we can't do 1080p well enough on consoles to be thinking about 4k.
 
4k or bust. A 390x or GTX 980 does around 30 fps in 4k with high settings Third party devs have always been poor at making decisions like this though.
 

Klocker

Member
That's awesome.. love it.. MS gets their message out to casuals about "4k, 4k!" And then devs can take the power and work magic on the eyes... can't wait to see what they come up with.

MS games may suffer a bit by hitting 4k to prove the point ... (would prefer to see Forza at 1440 and all weather and daylight on the fly) but oh well
 
Don't you need a huge 4K TV to see any difference? To be honest I don't see much different from 720p to 1080p on a 42 inch TV in my living room.

On my 65" while gaming I notice a huge difference from 1080 to 2160. With movies it isn't as noticeable because 1080p blu-rays are downsampled from 35mm film or 4K+ digital cameras.
 
Its just a good marketing term, makes the device you buying futureproof.



2 years ago when I was shopping for a audio receiver I spend extra $50 to buy a receiver that will output 4K. And I still dont own a 4K TV. Probably later this year. But at least then I wont have to sell my old receiver and buy a 4K compatible.

Oh but you may still need a new receiver that is hdcp 2.2 compliant!
 
How difficult would it be to program a graphics tuner into console games?

Consoles seem to be bucking their trends as of late so why not allow the player to make a choice similar to PC?

Why not both a 4K medium setting or 1080p ultra setting to your choosing?
 

10k

Banned
1440p (preferably IPS) makes a huge difference in my opinion. I would say it's the ideal resolution for gaming.
God yes.

1440p60 with gsync on my IPS monitor is so goddamn colourful and beautiful. Gives that feel if higher then 1080p but still delivers the smooth framerates of 1080p.
 
Viewing distance (to screen size) of the general console gaming public is certainly a factor, but people are going to yell about this and say only blind people can't tell the difference. :)

While I don't entirely disagree I'm pretty sure in any normal gaming or living environment if you had say 2 50inch TV's one with a game at native 1920x1080 and one at native 3840×2160 most people would agree which one looks better. I mean the arguments about spoofing a 4k output with temporal reprojection hold some weight too.

That said I think devs using Scorpio for Rock Solid 1080p60fps with a host of post processing and glamour features will likely see the most praise from gaming communities. The 4K outputs won't look half as good outside of overall IQ and 1080p in that scenario is fine so long as it's pretty and clean 1080p
 

120v

Member
i'm fairly certain the console's "4K capability" is a marketing gimmick of sorts. sort of this gen's "blast processing". comparison isn't exactly 1:1 i know but it's clearly a rabbit hole that makes no sense to go down
 

SapientWolf

Trucker Sexologist
I think 90% of the people claiming they'd rather see 1080p have never actually seen a game running at native 4K. There's a massive jump in image quality. I actually tested this theory out on my 65" 4K HDR TV last night running Battlefront (took a framerate hit obviously)...but 4x the pixel count just makes the game much more immersive...there's no jaggies, even with AA off and the image is just clean.
I have, and I went 144hz instead of 4k and never regretted my decision. There are other less GPU intensive ways to get clean imagery other than throwing more pixels at it. We aren't getting 4k textures any time soon and the diminishing returns are real.

I think we're only now at the point where 1440p makes sense for the mainstream PC gamer.
 

Alo81

Low Poly Gynecologist
I couldn't tell the difference between those screenshots if they weren't placed side by side like that. I can tell the difference between 30fps and 60fps immediately. When you consider these images are going to be on large televisions viewed from a distance, I can't see that difference being a huge deal. I'll take 60fps over 4K any day.

One important thing that screenshots don't show is the huge increase in motion stability. Having way less pixel shimmering with movement is a big deal and adds to an overall sharp and clean looking IQ.

I have, and I went 144hz instead of 4k and never regretted my decision. There are other less GPU intensive ways to get clean imagery other than throwing more pixels at it. We aren't getting 4k textures any time soon and the diminishing returns are real.

I think we're only now at the point where 1440p makes sense for the mainstream PC gamer.

4K textures isn't a thing, unless you're literally saying every texture has a 4K resolution which is silly.
 
http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/176486

Here is a Bloodstained screenshot Durante posted. Showing the difference between 1080p and 4K. It is fairly significant. Notably a lot of the detail is being eaten up by LOD issues and the UE4 AA solution.

Now what many of those tweets propose is reprojecting a 1080p framebuffer to 2160p and doing postproc on that. Hopefully it should produce better results, but they'll never be as good as this. Lots of tiny details is definitely an area that benefits from 4K, even downsampled.

you are increasing total gpu workload almost 4 fold for that difference
 

nOoblet16

Member
I wasn't making an argument about what to do with Scorpio's power, but rather whether 4K results in good IQ. Like I said, I haven't made my mind up about 4K gaming. I'm not sure it's worth the performance cost on consoles.

TSSAA comes with its own set of problems. It causes blurring during motion, something that Doom hides with its motion blur (and it mitigated by some extent by its high framer rate), and something Uncharted 4 doesn't not do nearly as effectively (probably the lower frame rate here). There could be games on the Scorpio which lack the CPU power to hit 60 fps and might instead opt for 4K resolution at 30fps. In that case, using a simple post processing filter might be a good choice because they work the same, regardless of the frame rate and how quickly you turn your camera around (or when objects in the world move around). Witcher 2 used a sharpening filter to mitigate the blurriness of its filter to great effect and The Division uses one in conjunction with its TAA.
You are saying it hides blur with motion blur? ok.

But TSSAA does not causes blurring in motion, it can cause artifacting like dithering when in motion but not blurring and it certainly doesn't "hide it with motion blur"...there's no such thing as hiding something with motion blur. That particular statement has always bugged me. And again 30FPS has lower temporal resolution, unless you use motion blur the gaps between frames is so easily visible that I can point them out individually.
 

U_Know_Me

Member
4k is the easier sell to the general public. People see it as 1080p to 4k with nothing in between. I suspect that the will market the hell saying it's 4k but hopefully they up convert instead of wasting the power trying to run natively at 4k.
 

Detective

Member
Use the power for better graphics, bigger levels, better sounds, lighting, textures , AI 1080p 60fps

Halo 6

Like starry night :p

And I will be more than happy:D
 
D

Deleted member 325805

Unconfirmed Member
1080p/60fps rock solid in every game is the only thing I want from a console, until then I'll stick to PC (I only use my PS4 for exclusives) as that's the exact experience I'm currently getting.
 
I have, and I went 144hz instead of 4k and never regretted my decision. There are other less GPU intensive ways to get clean imagery other than throwing more pixels at it. We aren't getting 4k textures any time soon and the diminishing returns are real.

I think we're only now at the point where 1440p makes sense for the mainstream PC gamer.

Is there really a such thing as '4k' textures? When you render 4x the pixels you're automatically looking at 4x the texture resolution unless you're zoomed/scoped on the ground (which isn't how you play games anyway).
 
Top Bottom