http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-ryse-runs-at-900p
I do take issue with the comparison where they say that 1080vs900p won't be a huge difference.
I had to lower the res of some games from native 1080 to 900 on my old laptop and it was certainly enough to notice. Not sure how much upscaling improvements can mask that but native was always better.
With Crysis 3 and more recently with Bioshock Infinite, I preferred to drop settings here and there than the resolution to 900p. A few visual settings here and there you barely notice, but 900p makes the entire image slightly blurrier. I should add though, it's MUCH less noticeable on a HD TV at normal viewing distances than up close on a monitor, so despite my opinion that Leadbetter is bias and all too often privy to trying to defend or better the image of Microsoft, I think he's not too far off the money here.
Though I imagine if roles were reversed and the PS4 was on the receiving end he'd have heavily lambasted it instead of downplaying the difference. His most recent quotes about how the 10% cpu bump over the PS4 was "significant", whilst a ~40% GPU advantage with the PS4 was just "very evenly matched" got a laugh out of me.
Gotta spin those news. It's embarassing, really. Well, no Ryse for me then. Probably no Dead Rising 3 either if the dynamic resolution is true.
Do you usually base your game purchases off the resolution they're running at? :S