Sounds like a slippery explanation.
Well, it is true that rendering some elements to a lower resolution render target is a perfectly normal and well-recommended practice.
Sounds like a slippery explanation.
Are there comparison shots somewhere?To me this technique looks better than normal upscaling
Here's a shot taken while rotating the camera at a medium steady rate (taken from a capture card rather than using the built-in sharing feature).
Considering the technique being used, I'm impressed with how artifact free the image appears in motion. From what I can see, this type of rendering has the most noticeable impact on thin objects (such as fences) but even then it simply looks as if it is part of the camera blur.
Here's the same area taken with maximum camera rotation speed. Motion blur is in full effect. If you look at the metal flooring you can see increased aliasing with larger steps but the image still looks good. Without the excellent motion blur it would certainly be more obvious.
I'd love to know just how many resources this technique frees up. It could be a real alternative to traditional rendering that would allow for a higher framerate without the massive loss in image quality associated with lowering overall resolution (which really only looks bad as a result of scaling).
Also, just for fun, here's a shot with the PS4 set to output at 720p. The system is downscaling the image so jaggies are minimized compared to what you'd get with a traditional 720p image. When blown up to 1080p it looks dramatically worse than the 960x1080 method they used.
Click on the images to see them at full resolution.
This!
So The Order devs could also say the game is native 1080p including balck bars ...
They should have said
They are giving us super HDR lighting so it's like TWO frame buffers so it's really like 2160p
Indeed and I'm glad they did.Very interesting and clear technical explanation for a lay person. I'm surprised they did this.
As long as it's internally rendered at 1080p including black bars (which I think The Order is), then yes, The Order is native 1080p.
They could. As long as they include what aspect ratio it uses, just as the majority of Blu-ray movies does.
Is it still better than native 900p? I can see people seeing this technique as a move to cling to saying a game still technically runs at '1080' and that it can promote laziness by devs that wish to target 1080p.
Interesting, never heard of this technique before. Regardless, they're not rendering a full 1920x1080 for each frame which is what they implied previously.
According to my understanding based on what I've read they didn't get caught.I'm not blaming The Order devs. since they are honest to us, so this is fine.
But I'm blaming GG for not telling the truth about their game, they got caught so now they tying to explain us what their definition of 1080p is ? seriously ... ?
Which it absolutely is. The game outputs a full 1920x1080 pixel progressive image. Ergo, its 1080p native. Its another thing when 280 vertical lines are filled with black. But technically speaking, its native 1080p.
Specifically referring to it as, still, native 1080p. According to their explanation it abides by the definition, but it's evident that it doesn't give the same quality as what we typically refer to as 'native 1080p'.
So I have no doubt they were being slippery when they were asked if the multiplayer was 1080p. Like when food manufacturers can put the minumum possible amount of meat into a product to call it that meat. It comes across, to me, as a loophole that they exploited to mislead people, on purpose.
Surprisingly, I kinda get the techno jumbo in this. So GG created a next gen(or current gen) technique of a sort dynamic resolution....thing. Im assuming like GC's Mercenary on vita.
Are there comparison shots somewhere?
Ok, basically the final output is 1080p but they are using 3 frames at a lower resolution to construct that frame.
This isn't native 1080p in my book, more like a pseudo 1080p. Nevertheless it's good to finally get an explanation.
They didn't imply 1920x1080, they said the MP runs at 1080p which it technically does. It's the 1920(i) part that wasn't disclosed.
It's actually triple-buffered based on the explanation.They should have said
They are giving us super HDR lighting so it's like TWO frame buffers so it's really like 2160p
This!
So The Order devs could also say the game is native 1080p including balck bars ...
:uglyclap:
so are all XBO games 1080p native because the scaler generates a full 1920x1080 pixel progressive image.
:facepalm:
:uglyclap:
so are all XBO games 1080p native because the scaler generates a full 1920x1080 pixel progressive image.
:facepalm:
I ask because PD said GT5 is native 1080p, which is true since it displays 1080 horizontal lines per frame without upscaling, but its not 1920x1080. Same with Wipeout which drops horizontal res to maintain 60fps, but you can still call it 1080p60fps.
Lots of people noticed something was off. It just couldn't be pin-pointed what was going on, because this method has never been seen before.It's hilarious how people go bonkers over this. What Guerrilla is doing is actually an ingenuous, really advanced method of achieving the same goal. I mean nobody actually noticed it wasn't "native" for months, did they?
Yes, and people are already aware of most of those techniques. No one knew what was going on with KZ:SF and this clarification is most welcome.Its explained in the OP.
In most cases, MP IQ will look worse than SP, especially where 60fps is being targeted. Some devs chose to drop the resolution and scale it, some chose to drop the resolution of textures, some chose to drop the resolution of other aspects within the rendering pipeline. Some will even do all of the above.
According to my understanding based on what I've read they didn't get caught.
They shared what they were doing with Digital Foundry who decided to wait until a few days ago to share it with their readership.
How about you both read the first paragraph in my quote.
"KILLZONE SHADOW FALLs single and multiplayer modes both run at 1080p."
Are there comparison shots somewhere?
I already said that I think this isn't native 1080p and that they are wrong to have insinuated it.Before the EG article they said SP and MP is native 1080p.
But this depends of what they define/understand by saying 1080p, and at least the "1080p" form the SP is not the same line the "1080p" form the MP in Killzone.
So they lied, or said "1080p" to two different things
"deal with it"
The game is not scaled and they are applying post-processing to a 1080p framebuffer which is then projected to your screen. They have every right to define their game as native 1080p if they wish.
We recognize the communitys degree of investment on this matter, and that the conventional terminology used before may be too vague to effectively convey whats going on under the hood. As such we will do our best to be more precise with our language in the future.
A good explanation and a genuinely impressive solution for when games need a little extra to reach a desires fps without simply lowering the internal resolution and killing the image quality.