Support NeoGAF

[maneil99]

Compressed Facebook images so they're not too helpful but I had them handy

Campaign:

Multiplayer:

Look the same to me

 

[Mihael Mello Keehl]

This is insane.

The fact we're just realizing this now goes to show that the ability to actually identify resolutions and the backlash generated by resolutiongate is extremely disproportionate.

This so much.

 

[Chobel]

If the resolution was lower how come nobody could put a finger on why multi looked "off"? That is what I want to know.

Right in the OP

I always thought that the added blur in MP was due to a poor implementation of FXAA

 

[ItIsOkBro]

Still 1080p but with vertical black bars.

 

[REV 09]

This would have caused a storm of drama 4 months ago.

Every game has to cut corners somewhere. Interesting approach and it still looks great.

 

[Bornstellar]

You don't see the interlacing in the rain?

 

[EBE]

Too bad fun isn't one of them.

oh snap.

 

[antitrop]

Too bad fun isn't one of them.

Eh, I haven't played it, but I've heard a lot of good thing's about KZ's multiplayer. Not so much about the SP campaign.

 

[Kuro]

Too bad fun isn't one of them.

Nice drive by trolling

 

[Havel]

Its never been speculated....

It has. I remember when it was first released, I think there were a few B3D users who were talking about it.

 

[iceatcs]

...it can. Even PS3 could technically. The game has to be designed around that, and clearly KZ MP wasn't designed for both 1080p and 60fps. Probably designed for 1080p 30fps and then were pressured into 60fps, making them lower the res and have other poor optimizations at the last second, and they still couldn't get it to 60fps.

You mean 'never reach at 60fps' or 'fail solid 60fps'?

 

[MidgarBlowedUp]

No. The term "native 1080p" assumes a widescreen, 16:9 aspect ratio and 1920 vertical lines of pixels / 1080 horizontal lines.

hmmm...

960a x 1080a + 960b x 1080b will get you 1920x1080

But, it sounds like one half frame is held for 2 frames?
So, is it more like 960a x 1080a + 960a x1080b?

I feel discombobulated.

So, how does the game look in 1080i?

 

[RoboPlato]

Look the same to me

Compression hides it pretty well.

 

[theprodigy]

Right in the OP

then why didn't anyone go and check it themselves

 

[Synless]

I knew it. The MP always had an off look to it I couldn't put my finger on.

 

[pretty done]

Eh, I haven't played it, but I've heard a lot of good thing's about KZ's multiplayer. Not so much about the SP campaign.

Consider yourself lucky. The only redeeming quality over the other run-o-the-mill shooters is the lack of auto-aim.

 

[Loudninja]

Seriously DF has been missing alot of stuff lately.

 

[jacksepticeye]

Yeah, it is. Just barely.

960x1080 = 1,036,800 pixels

1408x792 = 1,115,136 pixels

This is gonna be fun lol

 

[GamingIsDead]

This is insane.

The fact we're just realizing this now goes to show that the ability to actually identify resolutions and the backlash generated by resolutiongate is extremely disproportionate.

Not really. Most people have complained about killzone's mulitplayer being much blurrier/uglier then the single player.

 

[VanWinkle]

Instead of resolution, GG should have lowered the visuals (lighting, textures, effects, reflections) to get a solid 60 fps. As it is right now, it's only a solid 60fps for 2vs2 games.

Yup. It's quite disappointing. I wouldn't have even been against native 1080p with 30fps, and great visuals.

Too bad fun isn't one of them.

That has literally nothing to do with this topic.

You mean 'never reach at 60fps' or 'fail solid 60fps'?

I don't know if it ever gets to full 60fps, but it definitely isn't a solid 60. Maybe close to that in the really small matches (say, 10 people or less). 24 player matches, which 90% of the people play, isn't even close.

 

[TheLight]

oh no how could they

 

[perfectsil]

Technically the resolution is still 1920x1080, but they are updating half the columns (960 is half of 1920) differently

 

[SniperHunter]

The multiplayer for BF4 on PS4 is equivalent to slightly below medium settings on the PC version, it shouldn't take THAT much effort to get that running at 900p with framedrops.

eh, this isn't true at all. it uses a mix of medium, high and ultra settings. textures are on ultra, lighting and shadowing is medium, effects are high, fxaa, HBAO, no MSAA, terrain is probably high and level of detail is also high or medium

the only thing PS4 needs is better shadow quality, but a more powerful CPU is needed...otherwise it is a great looking game. I know cause I played BF3 on ultra. With more dev time, I am sure Battlefront 3 will look much better on both systems.

 

[Lord Error]

Look the same to me

That's the ingenuity of what they've done. It doesn't quite look the same in motion though.

 

[Chuck]

can someone shrink this to 960x1080? for the funnies

 

[Mihael Mello Keehl]

Right in the OP

So people still assumed the resolution was 1080 no?

 

[Lima]

Not so much about the SP campaign.

First 4 chapters are like 10/10. Stunning visuals, beautiful music, the open level design etc.

After that it becomes a completely different game and turns into one of the lamest shooters of recent years. It's like the second half of the game was done by a different team or were some deleted scenes from Killzone 2 or 3.

 

[KJRS_1993]

There's a lot of talk about it because new hardware is out and we're all still trying to get a sense of what they're capable of. This will take many more months, so if you aren't interested in that conversation, why not stay out of those threads?

Nobody here needs to be reminded that resolution isn't the only thing that matters. Everyone knows it. People are focusing on resolution because that's the subject of the thread. Don't assume that's all they care about.

I just do wonder, for all the over-the-top outrage about resolutions and frame-rates (when clearly, the difference is not that clear), that even when you do have an idea of what the systems are capable of, what difference does it make?

The developers will do their best with the hardware, and make the trade-off's between frame rate, resolution and other effects to make a balance that best suits the game they are trying to create. I'm bewildered by the thought that people would rather pixel count, than just to sit and enjoy these games, like what we're meant to do!

And I'm evidently not alone in this confusion about the obsession.

 

[EatChildren]

If the resolution was lower how come nobody could put a finger on why multi looked "off"? That is what I want to know.

Because they failed to associate a knowingly blurry image quality with lower resolution. Most people couldn't pixel count for shit, yet they can still see the visible degradation of image quality at lower resolutions, as evident here. And that's what matters and why people like higher resolutions.

 

[Dictator93]

Compressed Facebook images so they're not too helpful but I had them handy

Campaign:

Multiplayer:

you can see the temporal dithering artifact from the upres-interlace.

I want to say, for posterity sakes, that I noticed this strangeness in the gamescom footage... but could not put my finger on it.

 

[ElTorro]

Look the same to me

IIRC, I had the impression that the multiplayer had more aliasing, which would go well with that resolution. That would be more noticeable in motion though.

 

[Chobel]

So people still assumed the resolution was 1080 no?

But they noticed the MP is blurrier than SP.

 

[leng jai]

People have stated that it looks blurrier in MP from day one. It's just harder to tell from our couches if it's because of the AA, post processing or resolution.

 

[vpance]

Compressed Facebook images so they're not too helpful but I had them handy

Campaign:

Multiplayer:

Have to say, that's not bad.

I want to see what kind of graphics they can pull off at that res @ 30 FPS.

 

[SniperHunter]

Too bad fun isn't one of them.

the multipalyer is fun.

 

[David___]

Infamous better be native or I'm going to be pissed. And here I hoped that 1080p would be the standard res.

Spoiler

Decided that if my PS4 breaks down I'm going to build a PC instead of replacing it.

 

[VanWinkle]

So people still assumed the resolution was 1080 no?

We were told by Sony/Guerilla that it was native 1080p. If a developer you thought you could trust tells you the game is native 1080p, but the game still looks blurry, you assume it must be something else other than resolution.

 

[la flama blanca]

Too bad fun isn't one of them.

Sadly, if it's not Killzone 2 MP, I don't care

 

[RoboPlato]

We were told by Sony/Guerilla that it was native 1080p. If a developer you thought you could trust tells you the game is native 1080p, but the game still looks blurry, you assume it must be something else other than resolution.

They also said that AA in Campaign and MP were different, so everyone just attributed it to that.

 

[iceatcs]

But they noticed the MP is blurrier than SP.

Even basic method of pixel counter will result 1080p.
Like no one doing horizontal pixel counter.

But likely Sony wording confused us first place.

 

[GrumpyOutlander]

The singleplayer was so much fun! Then the resolution of the multiplayer made me sell the game. I can't have fun below 1080P/60.

 

[MidgarBlowedUp]

well, this has certainly been a REFRESHING thread amirite?

no one?

ah man.

 

[kuYuri]

So not even Sony's flagship shooter could be consistent 1080p60fps for the MP?

 

[Tallshortman]

Too bad fun isn't one of them.

Well better than the garbage halo and others have turned into. Doesn't jump so deep into COD territory like everyone else feels compelled to.

 

[Loudninja]

The singleplayer was so much fun! Then the resolution of the multiplayer made me sell the game. I can't have fun below 1080P/60.

The topic is about the resolution,a game being fun or not has nothing to do with this.

 

[VanWinkle]

They also said that AA in Campaign and MP were different, so everyone just attributed it to that.

Right. We would have been more confused about it if campaign and MP both used the exact same AA implementation.

 

[SniperHunter]

Infamous better be native or I'm going to be pissed. And here I hoped that 1080p would be the standard res.

Spoiler

Decided that if my PS4 breaks down I'm going to build a PC instead of replacing it.

eh? This is was most likely a rushed launch game. They could fix the resolution and the frame rate with a patch. I think they will fix one of two, let's wait

 

[Chobel]

Even basic method of pixel counter will result 1080p.

Like no one doing horizontal pixel counter.

I would love to know how does that work? Serious question, I only know the normal pixel counting method.

 

[SparkTR]

eh, this isn't true at all. it uses a mix of medium, high and ultra settings. textures are on ultra, lighting and shadowing is medium, effects are high, fxaa, HBAO, no MSAA, terrain is probably high and level of detail is also high or medium

the only thing PS4 needs is better shadow quality, but a more powerful CPU is needed...otherwise it is a great looking game. I know cause I played BF3 on ultra. With more dev time, I am sure Battlefront 3 will look much better on both systems.

Yeah you're probably right about the textures, but there was a comparison taken here not long ago that compared medium settings to the PS4 version, and the PS4 version was noticeably missing foliage and had a lower draw distance, in addition to the shadows/AA/terrain being worse or exactly the same as medium settings.

 

[Jinfash]

Not really. Most people have complained about killzone's mulitplayer being much blurrier/uglier then the single player.

As I stated in my post, I'm mainly surprised by the disproportion. The number of people who noticed this, and the headlines they consequently generated are nowhere near the buzz resolutongate produced.

Basically, the obsession with the pixel numbers game greatly outpaces the actual tolerance. Which should come as a surprise to no one.