-
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.
1080p will come to Xbox One games, but at a cost
- Thread starter TTUVAPOR
- Start date
El Sabroso
Member
afaik Bayonetta 2 is 720p60 but everything else is 1080p render resolution
geordiemp
Member
WRONG
You just made that up. Its 1080p60 on Ps4, Xb1 is 912p....
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2014-metro-redux-performance-analysis
digoutyoursoul
Member
Yes i remember last generation and how DF came to being. it certainly did not stop people buying copies of inferior versions back then.
For me it is no where near as intense as it is now. It's almost every day. I should be clear this is from my own experience and opinion.
I either need to go to sleep or I am misreading what you wrote.
Did you just post that you want devs to NOT target a game for 1080/60 so that they don't need to max out the PS4 hardware?
Or do you mean you hope devs should always try to make every game to be 1080/60 so that the PS4 power won't go to waste...
Meh, forget it. My head hurts reading the 3rd sentence.
In my opinion as long as devs don't develop for the lowest common denominator that's good. If it's truly console multiplat, don't program for the Wii U as the ceiling. If it's PS4/XB1, don't program for the XB1. If it's PC/PS4/XB1 don't program for the PS4 and XB1 as the ceiling.
I want to see every game push the limit of what's possible with regard to graphics fidelity and effects.
I'm hoping they don't target 1080p/60 specifically for the XB1 because in all likelihood that means leaving GPU processing power on the table for the PS4 version, if it is a straight port with little additional work. For a console game, they should max out the game for the PS4 and let the XB1 version fall where it may. For a PC & console multiplat, they should max out the PC version and let the PS4 and XB1 versions fall where they may.
rokkerkory
Member
So basically as the generation progresses, the graphics will diminish? Wut
Every single generation, the graphics have jumped from beginning to end of the generation. Why is this any different for X1?
geordiemp
Member
Oh dear...WiiU is not exactly competing with Xb1 or Ps4 in graphics.
2D / fixed camera and racing games are much easier to do in 1080p60 on all consoles...Tetris runs at 1080p60 on my toaster LOL.
Give the user control of the camera in a 3rd or first person and its a different ball game.
Try picking common game as a benchmark - say COD ghosts runs 1080p60 on Ps4,or AC4 or something.... what does it run on WiiU ?
Give it another year or two and well be seeing sub HD games on both consoles and 60fps will be rare. It's just the way the industry works, devs want better graphics and resolution/framerate take the hit.
As for anything under 1080:60 being unacceptable because pc can do it well you have to realise a vast majority of pc gamers don't even play at that standard. Most people play with gimpy settings on old hardware.
As for anything under 1080:60 being unacceptable because pc can do it well you have to realise a vast majority of pc gamers don't even play at that standard. Most people play with gimpy settings on old hardware.
Resolution Gate - Most Xbox One games not reaching native 1080p
This is all because somewhere during the development of Xbox One's APU, Microsoft specified to AMD, they would only fit 16 Raster Operation Units. This was MS's decision, AMD only built what their customer (MS) wanted.
The Xbox 360's Xenos, the PS3's RSX and Wii U's Latte GPUs all had 8 Raster Operation Units each. So Xbox One GPU having only twice as many ROPs as those much less powerful consoles, is clearly not good enough.
PS4 GPU with its 32 ROPs has 4 times as many as Xbox 360, PS3 and Wii U did, and twice as many as Xbox One.
Why are ROPs important? # of ROPs x GPU clockspeed = Fill Rate.
Fill rate is spent on resolution, framerate and other things, and while it is more complex than just that, memory bandwidth is huge factor also. But put simply, the more fillrate you have, the more pixels can be spent on a combination of higher resolution and/or framerate, provided the memory bandwidth is there to support it.
Fillrate comparison
PS4: 25,600 Mpixels/sec (32 ROPs * 800 MHz)
Xbox One: 13,600 Mpixels/sec (16 ROPs * 853 MHz)
Wii U: 4400 Mpixels/sec (8 ROPs * 550 MHz)
PS3: 4400 Mpixels/sec (8 ROPs * 550 MHz)
Xbox 360: 4000 Mpixels/sec (8 ROPs * 500 MHz)
This does not even take into account the number of texture units.
PS4 GPU has 72 texture units - Xbox One GPU has 48 texture units.
Anyway, if developers choose to run Xbox One games at native 1080p, and they most certainly can, it is a choice, then other things get sacrificed. Namely, framerate. Unless devs scale back the graphic assets, which they are unlikely to do, as screenshots wouldn't look as good with less detail.
This is all because somewhere during the development of Xbox One's APU, Microsoft specified to AMD, they would only fit 16 Raster Operation Units. This was MS's decision, AMD only built what their customer (MS) wanted.
The Xbox 360's Xenos, the PS3's RSX and Wii U's Latte GPUs all had 8 Raster Operation Units each. So Xbox One GPU having only twice as many ROPs as those much less powerful consoles, is clearly not good enough.
PS4 GPU with its 32 ROPs has 4 times as many as Xbox 360, PS3 and Wii U did, and twice as many as Xbox One.
Why are ROPs important? # of ROPs x GPU clockspeed = Fill Rate.
Fill rate is spent on resolution, framerate and other things, and while it is more complex than just that, memory bandwidth is huge factor also. But put simply, the more fillrate you have, the more pixels can be spent on a combination of higher resolution and/or framerate, provided the memory bandwidth is there to support it.
Fillrate comparison
PS4: 25,600 Mpixels/sec (32 ROPs * 800 MHz)
Xbox One: 13,600 Mpixels/sec (16 ROPs * 853 MHz)
Wii U: 4400 Mpixels/sec (8 ROPs * 550 MHz)
PS3: 4400 Mpixels/sec (8 ROPs * 550 MHz)
Xbox 360: 4000 Mpixels/sec (8 ROPs * 500 MHz)
This does not even take into account the number of texture units.
PS4 GPU has 72 texture units - Xbox One GPU has 48 texture units.
Anyway, if developers choose to run Xbox One games at native 1080p, and they most certainly can, it is a choice, then other things get sacrificed. Namely, framerate. Unless devs scale back the graphic assets, which they are unlikely to do, as screenshots wouldn't look as good with less detail.
I just went off this, and thought I had heard it before too
https://www.google.com/search?q=bay...s=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a
all the results said 1080p, but I can see it maybe getting dropped to 720p, unless thats already confirmed?
and yes Smash is confirmed 1080p, and there are 60 fps video of the game all over.
OsirisBlack
Banned
No its 1080p on one and 912p on another I will leave you to figure out which.
The second point is quite laughable saying a dev is incompetent or lazy because they cannot get inferior hardware to perform exactly like vastly superior tech is baffling. What does he expect PC depending on set up is > PS4 which in turn is > XB1 it's not rocket science. The thing that does concern me about this whole resolution/power fiasco is what happens later on down the line?
Certain games that are going to be PC/PS4/XB1 only are really going to push graphical fidelity forward. What happens when a game has to be 900p or 720p on PS4 how will the XB1 stack up performance wise? Right now the debate is pretty silly to me yes there is an obvious difference between 1080p/900p/720p or whatever weird number a certain company tags a game with. Later on in the gen this shit is going to get ugly.
ethomaz
Banned
You need to check your facts.
Yeap output in 1080p is different from the game rendering in 1080p.
That bullshit upscale needs to end.
IMO.
Lactose_Intolerant
Member
Options to turn down the graphics so you can reach 1080p/60fps would be ideal. People talking about just go play on pc that costs more than consoles are missing the point of what TTUVAPOR is saying
People have always complained about this stuff... even in the 80s and 90s, they just used to call it slowdown. I myself can't stand NOT playing at 60fps, which is the standard I grew up with from the 80's until now. Controls feel so goddamn unresponsive and sluggish at the "whatever man just enjoy the game" framerate.
That's why the next generation consoles could be on shelves by Fall 2018 or 2019, five or six years after PS4/X1 launched.
Exactly, the graphics get better as the generation moves on. Graphics =/= resolution. The XBO is not going to be able to handle the more graphically demanding games at 1080p, and the more graphically demanding that games get the fewer games will bet at 1080p on the XBO. Something has to give, and it will be up to developers to decide if that something is resolution, or if it is graphical effects. When the gap between the GPU's of the two consoles is as big as it is, the easiest thing to cut on the XBO is the resolution. I am expecting ~900p to be the standard on XBO for the entire generation.
Poodle Cannon
Member
How about focusing on frame rate first. The xbox is weaker, there is no way around it but I think most gamers would prefer a smooth experience with locked frame rates, than a nicer picture but less consistent frames per second.
That would make my console experience better for me anyway. I have a decent gaming pc for when I want a little eye candy with the frames per second, but what can I say, I love the social aspect of playing with pals on the console. meow.
That would make my console experience better for me anyway. I have a decent gaming pc for when I want a little eye candy with the frames per second, but what can I say, I love the social aspect of playing with pals on the console. meow.
We should be more worried about a locked 30/60 than 1080p.
(console wise)
I fully support simple graphic options in console games though.
disastermouse
Banned
PC users often HAVE to tune their PCs AND fiddle with the software to even get their games to play at all.
You can easily allow choice on consoles without destroying console gaming 'ease of use' though, since the hardware remains stable. I'm most interested in the effect that this would have on reviews, or at least on reviews not affected by sexual nepotism.
Huh? This is true for extremely old DOS games perhaps.
I've never tried a PC game made in the last 10 years that didn't "play at all".
But certainly there are times that you have to go into a config to turn off mouse acceleration or some such.
Exploratory
Banned
Newman....
StrongBlackVine
Banned
Sub HD as in lower than 720p? I seriously doubt that. In fact I believe both consoles will improve with further optimization.
The reviews would be damaging to the X1 games because reviewers will talk about how they would need to turn down the graphic/effect for a game to be able to play the bare minimum of 1080/60 like the PS4 version since the X1 hardware is difference.
Adding settings for graphic on multiplatforms games would be a deathtrap to the weaker console maker.
Heck, it would destroy sales for the devs too since no one would buy an inferior product knowing that they need to fine tune the game to get to 1080/60.
And vice versa as well if there is parity between the two systems because now, the devs are under-performing on purpose and offering an inferior product to everyone.
I'd say that's a bit untrue...make that very untrue, lol.
I usually only change settings on my PC because the default settings are too freak'n low. The game is "running" too well...lol.
Gotta slow it down from 230 fps at medium settings..
SIGGRAPH awards aren't based on resolution.
Embarrassing post.
Shpeshal Nick
aka Collingwood
I see no issue with 900p as the standard. As long as the framerate is up and the AA is good it doesn't matter. The vast majority won't tell the difference.
Hell, SIGGRAPH couldn't.
Hell, SIGGRAPH couldn't.
ethomaz
Banned
Yeap solid framerate (30 or 60) have to be a standard too.
OsirisBlack
Banned
A friend of mine said this when Forza first released and had to make that many sacrifices to achieve 1080/60 I thought the notion was silly at that time but now I am not so sure. I just cannot see MS allowing Sony's system to enjoy a long generation with an obvious power discrepancy.
I think the newest Batman,Mass effect, GTAV and Metal Gear Phantom Pain will be our first glimpse into what happens when both of these machines are pushed pretty hard and I also expect exclusives to truly showcase the power differences in these systems.
ThoseDeafMutes
Member
Maybe if they're running Linux and trying to play their PC games through WINE or something, sure.
SuperEpicGuy
Banned
But then they'd have to create better assets or just leave ps4's power for nothing. I'd rather that they just decrease the resolution so the games look good on ps4 and pc. Xbone owners should already know that they are buying a console that is 33% less powerful than ps4 so the absence of 1080p/60fps is expected.
Yeah, probably. This will always be a debate, as developers will always make concessions in areas that people may not like. This was true last gen as well, it's just a bigger issue this generation because of the much larger hardware gap between the two systems.
yep ever since that horrible watch dogs article, I will avoid giving them ad impressions at all costs
I know, I know, it was sort of a rhetorical question.
Which is quite the chore when you have to restart your computer every five minutes to update your drivers.
TheLostBigBoss
Banned
...But that's impossible. If you want PC gaming quality, you get a PC. That's of course if you want to play all your games on ultra settings @ 1080p. Most people play at console settings or less.
Robert Pulson?
what does that have to do with what I was responding to?
Regardless I would say a lot of these games looks really great, WW has full camera control, and I am guessing Bayonetta as well, though that is 720p/60 it seems. Lets not move goal posts though. Of course anything can be 1080p/60 if the graphics are low enough. I was just correcting inaccurate info, that implied WiiU cant do 1080p.
Putting in some easy-ass configurable settings to toggle between different resolutions/frame rates like what TLOU did with shadow quality would please a lot of people and hurt no one. Lock the options away in a hidden menu and keep your "artistic vision" as the defaults to quell any cries of PC-fication.
How can you say that? Do you prefer HD TV or standard def? The resolution and fps is basically the same. Once you play 1080p at 60fps...going backward is like watching standard def tv.
Freedom = $1.05
Banned
Or whenever your disc drive break and you have to cross your fingers that there's a no cd patch available.
It's even worse when you can't find the latest patch to your game and thus can't get online to play because your version doesn't match everyone else's version.
Don't even get me started on when someone at your house picks up the phone.
I'm willing to play at less graphically in order to achieve 60fps, but I can't do that on consoles...the point is, we should get that option on consoles.
Halo 3 for example had HDR lighting...not necessary in my opinion, so why not give an option to disable it in order to achieve higher fps?
