I didn't meant it that way. I think I misread your post, because I read that as: 4k CBR games on Pro are below 15%, as in not counting 1800c or other games that fall below that mark but still use checkerboad.
But with are saying now the total of CBR games is below 15% adding all resolutions together?
Sorry for the lack of clarity. I mentioned two distinct facts about the Pro's enhanced library, one about native 4K as a percentage of AAA, and one about CBR as a percentage of everything. Here's the points again, hopefully clearer.
1) The portion of AAA titles--excluding indies and remasters--that are native 4K is
over 15%.
2) The portion of all titles that use CBR is
under 15%. It's actually under 12%, so I probably should've used that different figure to help avoid confusion.
Note that VR-only games, or VR-exclusive modes, aren't included. Also it may be important to say that this is only counting games already released, not any upcoming titles. I don't consider those confirmed until they come out.
Now for the full breakdown of percentages you asked for earlier. Again, VR games and modes are excluded, as are unreleased titles. I've shown the results two ways, once for rendering approach regardless of size, and once for size regardless of rendering approach. (Though note that all buffer sizes 1440p and below are native or dynamic.)
Code:
[B]RENDER TYPE[/B]
[U]All games[/U] [U]AAA only[/U]
Native 78.1% 67.1%
Dynamic 7.1% 8.9%
CBR 8.2% 13.9%
Dyn CBR 3.3% 6.3%
Other 3.3% 3.8%
[B]BUFFER SIZE[/B]
[U]All games[/U] [U]AAA only[/U]
1080p 27.9% 27.9%
1080p+ 1.6% 1.3%
1440p 15.3% 20.3%
1440+ 6.0% 8.9%
1800 7.1% 10.1%
1800+ 1.1% 1.3%
2160 41.0% 30.4%
Well, you're arguing against the definition "as if everyone agrees" with you also. You didn't say "rarely ever" was subjective, you said directly that 15% is "hardly rarely ever".
This is a good point. I've edited my previous post to make explicit the subjective nature of my opinion. Will you acknowledge the same?
You also posited "AAA" games, as though we both will agree on the games that make up your 15%. For something like Shadow of Mordor or Battleborn we'd likely be on the same page... but I certainly wouldn't place something like a ports of Skyrim, Kingdom Hearts, or WipEout to be.
I didn't count any ports. There are 79 enhanced games on Pro I'd categorize as AAA: Here's the 13 that are native 4K:
Battleborn
Berserk and the Band of the Hawk
The Elder Scrolls Online
Everybody's Golf
FIFA 17
FIFA 18
MLB The Show 17
NBA 2K17
NBA 2K18
NHL 18
PES 2017
PES 2018
Samurai Warriors: Spirit of Sanada
I don't have as good a handle on One X titles across the board, so I'm taking the following info from
Banjo-Kazooie's
enhanced games thread. I used the same parameters as above: only AAA games that have released, or will release by One X launch, and which are verified to be native 4K. (Unlike the Pro stats, "verified" is mostly based on publisher claims rather than analysis, and is assuming anything called "4K" by a company is native, which may not be true.)
AAA Native 4K titles on One X at launch: 17
Destiny 2
The Elder Scrolls Online
F1 2017
FIFA 18
Forza Horizon 3
Forza Motorsport 7
Gears of War 4
Halo 5
Halo Wars 2
Killer Instinct
Madden NFL 18
NBA 2K18
PES 2018
Project CARS 2
Recore Definitive
Rise of the Tomb Raider
Super Lucky's Tale
Of course, the Pro has been out almost a year to amass its list, so perhaps we should just count all announced AAA games at native 4K, regardless of release date. However, even extending through 2018, this only adds 6 more titles:
Crackdown 3
The Crew 2
Evil Within 2
Middle-Earth: Shadow of War
Sea of Thieves
Wolfenstein II: The New Colossus
Currently, One X has more AAA native 4K games announced than Pro has released, but not quite double the number. Now, we should expect its list to grow, as new games are announced or titles currently known only as "enhanced" are verified to be native 4K. Some of this growth will be matched by additions to the Pro list, but of course that will be at a much slower rate. So the doubling will happen at some point (and further multiples beyond that, albeit more slowly). But right now, the gap is not as overwhelming as implied by occasional talk of "4K versus fauxK" and so forth. This is why the messaging is so very similar, even though some people interpret it differently due to the (real) differences in hardware details.
But "Dynamic 4K" is something they promote directly in commercials as opposed to "Native 4K", because it fits the expected aspirations of the console.
I'd argue they do so not primarily due to any technical exactitude, but mostly because "dynamic" is a much more exciting--and understandable--word than "native". The mere fact they're using "dynamic" to mean a bunch of different approaches, and not the engineering meaning of variable res, is
very strong evidence that they're not concerned about accuracy of technical description with this terminology.
But it's not expected for native 4K to be reachable from a 1080p image, because that would typically suggest the stock PS4 could have done notably better than 1080p for that game. It is however expected that you can get half of a 4K image, and go from there... and that has dictated their marketing approach.
I basically agree with your assessment of what the hardware can do. But the last step sounds completely implausible to me. I can't see any evidence that technical minutiae are the major driver of their messaging, and that the most important point they're trying to convey is that you shouldn't expect native 4K on Pro.
On the contrary, I think the primary impetus is simply to attach the buzz label "4K" to their offering. That then means, yes, that they protect themselves by carefully footnoting the phrase. But to circle back around to the original point of this whole discussion, that's not distinguishable from what Microsoft are doing with their marketing. Indeed, it's pretty much identical to how Xbox has attached caveats to the "4K Ultra HD" and "True 4K" labels. The marketing jargon from the two companies isn't meaningfully dissimilar, even if the products are.
