Lion Heart
Banned
These are the kind of articles I use to mockingly say DF would be writing once console specs where revealed. Good to know I wasn't full of it.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Digital Foundry :- Does resolution really matter?
- Thread starter DHC-Shannow
- Start date
- Status
Maastricht
Member
in the early days of the generation prospective buyers are more likely to research their purchases and highlight differences.
Perhaps more sites can start embedding stuff like this - just enabled it for iframes today
http://www.techingames.net/Games/Ga...g=ACUnity&partial=false&categoryName=Graphics
http://www.techingames.net/Games/Ga...g=ACUnity&partial=false&categoryName=Graphics
Perhaps more sites can start embedding stuff like this - just enabled it for iframes today
http://www.techingames.net/Games/Ga...g=ACUnity&partial=false&categoryName=Graphics
http://www.techingames.net/Games/Ga...g=ACUnity&partial=false&categoryName=Graphics
TAJ
Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.
Resolutions higher then 1080p are always nice, but the difference can be staggering with games that suffer from a lot of shader aliasing, like Chronicles of Riddick: Assault on Dark Athena.
thelastword
Banned
DF is done, they're not as comprehensive as NXGAMER in the least bit and all their articles are the same nonsensical pieces. It's more surprising that there are persons who defend them as fair and reasonable.
This article was simply; "the audacity of these pollees choosing resolution as the most important decision in buying PS4 over XBOX", what were they thinking? "resolution is not that different guys, barely a yawning difference for crying out loud. My goodness, you guys really fell for that? high five suckers indeed! "it's all about fun people, eff higher resolutions this generation. "I really hope you guys come to your senses come next poll, because this shit is plain ridiculous from where I'm standing"
This article is so funny that I read it way before it was posted on GAF and I'm still shaking my head. I can't believe a tech site would write such "garbage" in a nutshell.
The author suggests that framerate is high priority to him, that he'd take 900p and good frames anyday over 1080p and a struggling framerate and/or bad IQ, yet later in the article he mentions ryse, goodness, a game that averages around 25-26fps and falls to 16fps. Clearly, the resolution needed to be lower, maybe 720p or 576p perhaps and boy what of the anti-aliasing and PP that leadbetter suggests cleans up jaggies so well at sub native rez? I'd guess crytek would need quadruple that at 720p and lower to work their magic.
The other question is, what counts as better framerate to the author? He indicates that CODAW and FC4 have higher performance profiles on the XBONE, apart from the fact that he's wrong on both counts, let's look into where he was right. The SP portion of CODAW runs at 1360 * 1080 on the xbone, they never proved that it goes higher than this, yet they indicated it's variable, but at this point who are we kidding.
It's 1920 * 1080 on PS4. The game run mostly at 60 fps on both platforms. At very rare times, maybe once or twice (mostly) in the beginning of the game, it would drop a few extra frames on the PS4 when a huge explosion happens, but other than that the game is the same performance wise. Is DF using a 2-3 frame disparity (in one scene) over an entire game to make their case of performance over resolution? In the MP portion which most people play and where framerate is most important the PS4 version maintains it's 40% pixel advantage and has a superior framerate too, but the author never mentions that, he's only concerned about lower resolutions and superior framerates on a certain console for the article in question. I mean how apparent could one guy be.
FC4 is better on the PS4 too, not only framerate. HRAA works better at the native resolution. As for framerate, everytime you go to heavy foliage areas, frames drop massively on the xbone version of FC4. If you just wondering about, frames drop quite a bit when the lod kicks in, it's not even a contest. Anybody who wants proof can visit NXGAMER's analysis on FC4. The author used these two games to make a point/jab and it's a laughable. This site is clearly not about proving what you say. I think it's all about the number one reason pollees chose the XBONE to be honest.
Even if you try to take this article seriously you can't, there are so many holes in logic and no good arguments are brought forward. Let's play along though, let's say for e.g. the author has a preference for 60fps, so he'd rather ryse be 60fps, at what resolution would he attain that type of framerate on the XBONE? Wouldn't that game need 16xMSAA , PP effects up the Wazoo and all the Crytek Subnative IQ magic dust you can muster, how would that work?
At this point I'm interested, I'd like to see this game that DF proposes, that would defy higher/native resolutions in graphics and IQ. I'd like a developer or Leadbetter himself to make such a game, my 60 is ready. 576-720p 16MSAA, PP effects like no other.
This article was simply; "the audacity of these pollees choosing resolution as the most important decision in buying PS4 over XBOX", what were they thinking? "resolution is not that different guys, barely a yawning difference for crying out loud. My goodness, you guys really fell for that? high five suckers indeed! "it's all about fun people, eff higher resolutions this generation. "I really hope you guys come to your senses come next poll, because this shit is plain ridiculous from where I'm standing"
This article is so funny that I read it way before it was posted on GAF and I'm still shaking my head. I can't believe a tech site would write such "garbage" in a nutshell.
The author suggests that framerate is high priority to him, that he'd take 900p and good frames anyday over 1080p and a struggling framerate and/or bad IQ, yet later in the article he mentions ryse, goodness, a game that averages around 25-26fps and falls to 16fps. Clearly, the resolution needed to be lower, maybe 720p or 576p perhaps and boy what of the anti-aliasing and PP that leadbetter suggests cleans up jaggies so well at sub native rez? I'd guess crytek would need quadruple that at 720p and lower to work their magic.
The other question is, what counts as better framerate to the author? He indicates that CODAW and FC4 have higher performance profiles on the XBONE, apart from the fact that he's wrong on both counts, let's look into where he was right. The SP portion of CODAW runs at 1360 * 1080 on the xbone, they never proved that it goes higher than this, yet they indicated it's variable, but at this point who are we kidding.
It's 1920 * 1080 on PS4. The game run mostly at 60 fps on both platforms. At very rare times, maybe once or twice (mostly) in the beginning of the game, it would drop a few extra frames on the PS4 when a huge explosion happens, but other than that the game is the same performance wise. Is DF using a 2-3 frame disparity (in one scene) over an entire game to make their case of performance over resolution? In the MP portion which most people play and where framerate is most important the PS4 version maintains it's 40% pixel advantage and has a superior framerate too, but the author never mentions that, he's only concerned about lower resolutions and superior framerates on a certain console for the article in question. I mean how apparent could one guy be.
FC4 is better on the PS4 too, not only framerate. HRAA works better at the native resolution. As for framerate, everytime you go to heavy foliage areas, frames drop massively on the xbone version of FC4. If you just wondering about, frames drop quite a bit when the lod kicks in, it's not even a contest. Anybody who wants proof can visit NXGAMER's analysis on FC4. The author used these two games to make a point/jab and it's a laughable. This site is clearly not about proving what you say. I think it's all about the number one reason pollees chose the XBONE to be honest.
Even if you try to take this article seriously you can't, there are so many holes in logic and no good arguments are brought forward. Let's play along though, let's say for e.g. the author has a preference for 60fps, so he'd rather ryse be 60fps, at what resolution would he attain that type of framerate on the XBONE? Wouldn't that game need 16xMSAA , PP effects up the Wazoo and all the Crytek Subnative IQ magic dust you can muster, how would that work?
At this point I'm interested, I'd like to see this game that DF proposes, that would defy higher/native resolutions in graphics and IQ. I'd like a developer or Leadbetter himself to make such a game, my 60 is ready. 576-720p 16MSAA, PP effects like no other.
DF is not in the habit of proving most things, but you will have persons running to their defense regardless. Dead or Alive Last Round is less problematic playing online on the PS4 version, I didn't read anywhere in that article that it's because of the better PSN infrastructure......of course with EVOLVE it just needed to be said. XBOX LIVE, AZURE SERVERS et al. It's beyond ridiculous at this point.
Read the article three times and I can't really see what the point of it was. Especially this line:
I don't see how this would benefit Xbox One at all. Resolution requirements have already been removed for a number of multiplatform Xbox One titles already.
This line ending the article didn't do it any favors either:
I don't see how this would benefit Xbox One at all. Resolution requirements have already been removed for a number of multiplatform Xbox One titles already.
This line ending the article didn't do it any favors either:
What the hell does this even mean? Quality of the gaming experience?
TheExecutive
Member
Saw a recent survey of a fairly broad gaming population that said a main deciding factor between ps4 and xb1 was resolution recently but I can't seem to find it.
Obviously resolution has nothing to do with quality... ? (I have no idea what he's saying).
Beerman462
Member
Why would they?
Well, the Xbox benefits if devs don't feel like they need to hit 1080p in situations where it may result in a worse overall experience (like when Diablo 3 got its res bumped).
As for the second line, context is quite important. It follows on from the previous paragraph stating that "there's still a long way to go" because we still have situations like Battlefield: Hardline and MGSV which run at resolutions low enough for them to be a real problem, despite the overall situation having improved quite a bit since launch. The "progress" hoped for seems to be that there won't be a load of future games that have these sorts of IQ issues, which would probably cause other differences between the machines to play a bigger factor in peoples choices.
EDIT: Quality of gaming experience though? I dunno, lol.
Leadbetter really does scrape the bottom of the barrell to justify xboxone performance woes , i mean the difference in framerat in cod AW and far cry 4 are so negligible the point hes trying to make is absurd and for a tech site to dismiss resolution i dont know who was the genius behind that idea
LabouredSubterfuge
Member
Look guys the reason this article was written was to denigrate the console you bought.
So make sure you tell your friends via social media that this article is full of deception.
So make sure you tell your friends via social media that this article is full of deception.
& compare them to Ryse and Dead Rising 3 articles.
RL is probably angling for a PR job @ MS, quite common for game journos, hence the heavy slant. People start thinking about pensions when they are closer to 40 than 30.
ChronotriggerJM
Member
Any resolution that will map 1:1 with the pixels is fine in my book. Resolution and a framerate that syncs and scale nicely are appreciated. I don't even mind if you need to take strange measures to get there.
krypt0nian
Banned
Poor Leadbetter. Long generation, hun.
Firmus_Anguis
Banned
We all know Leadbetter's full of it... But I'd still love an answer as to why he never implemented this new mentality of his last generation - there's just no doubt his answer would be entertaining!
I have a 60" 1080p tv in my living room and a 1080p monitor in my bedroom. I would like 1080p content more often than not (can I live with 720p and 900p? sure), I have all 3 of the current gen consoles and one of them sees the lion's share of my multiplat purchases. So yes as part of a game's overall visual package it does matter, and for comparisons sake which is what DF is for a technical analysis and comparison it's a factor that matters. Why question that aspect of a game's overall technical analysis now?
chromatic9
Member
Perhaps its possible PS4 might have to drop the native 1080p thing some time soon, or DF sees it like that. Devs might be 90-95% there in offering improved graphics over PS3 at 1080p but frame rate is not a consistent 30. Dropping to 900p gives you roughly 40% back in performance. DF suggests we're already seeing the cost of 1080p on PS4 but obviously many on here question that. If true though we might start to see a trade off for newer effects or more objects on screen on PS4. I doubt ND or PD will do that though, mainly those multiplats.
Does the PS4 have to stick to 1080p? How worse would Ryse look if Crytek stuck to a 1080p solid 30fps game? Would be interesting for Crytek to show the best 1080p build on Xbox One. I don't think messing around with entry level cards and settings on PC will show it clearly
Does the PS4 have to stick to 1080p? How worse would Ryse look if Crytek stuck to a 1080p solid 30fps game? Would be interesting for Crytek to show the best 1080p build on Xbox One. I don't think messing around with entry level cards and settings on PC will show it clearly
BlackBuzzard
Banned
Its gonna be so long for him, i wonder through how many hoops he will jump this gen. That will be entertaining to see.
toddhunter
Member
I would think the answer is relatively simple.
It gets more clicks this generation, the generation of which is his job.
PolarGamer
Member
A good read and nice illustration of the gaming press doing a good analytical piece. Not just reporting (on the poll) but also putting it in context with previous interviews and opening up the resolution discussion for a wider audience.
For me, the focus on 1080p/4k is reminding me of the megapixel race of digital cameras and smart phones.
For me, the focus on 1080p/4k is reminding me of the megapixel race of digital cameras and smart phones.
EASTC0AST_GH05T
Member
Her vision is deteriorating now from age or looking at screens to closely for long periods of time. How old is she if you don't mind me asking and is she wearing perscribed glasses?
JordanN
Banned
It's mostly a myth lower res = better graphics.
640p game (GTA 4)
720p (GTA 5)
And that was last gen. 1080p is fine for PS4.
chromatic9
Member
I'm posing the question playing devils advocate. Also darkx10 from DF has gone to great lengths to say how your comparison is null and void, not to mention 5 years of software improvements from IV-V. It's more about what can be done at 900p to enhance the game as its a good enough res in the article and also saying 900p over a inconsistent frame rate at 1080p maybe a better option.
Suikoguy
I whinny my fervor lowly, for his length is not as great as those of the Hylian war stallions
I figured he changed this gen, I was obviously wrong. I even defended him at one point since the ps4 released.
PS4 is a bad example of reducing res to help with performance. That's because the GPU is tailor made to run a majority of games at higher resolutions compared to the GPU of the XB1(IE with much lesser performance cost). The opposite is also true. Your going to get much less performance back(FPS wise) by reducing res on PS4 unlike XB1, because XB1 eats more by default.
So in general, the whole notion of reducing res to gain performance is suspect in the situations where the PS4 is CPU limited
So in general, the whole notion of reducing res to gain performance is suspect in the situations where the PS4 is CPU limited
HocusPocus
Member
On a computer monitor yes but on a tv screen it depends on the size of the screen and the distance you sit from It.
This article is pretty silly overall, but the last line makes no sense whatsoever. Wii U owners claimed the reason they purchased the Wii U was the "fun factor," there was no comparative element to it at all. Moreover, the respondents were giving the reason they bought the console in the first place, which means that the answer has nothing to do with their actual experience of the console.
The weird thing is, Nintendo has been recently lauded for its technical development prowess within the limitations of their hardware. And isn't part of the point of analyzing the technology behind games to show how they improve the experience for the player? Leadbetter's points are all over the map.
The weird thing is, Nintendo has been recently lauded for its technical development prowess within the limitations of their hardware. And isn't part of the point of analyzing the technology behind games to show how they improve the experience for the player? Leadbetter's points are all over the map.
Freshmaker
I am Korean.
The part that upset me deeply was the part where they claim games without next generation game design* are still fun viable games.
*Term Left Deliberately Undefined
PdotMichael
Banned
Thin veils falling like flies.
One thing I learned writing papers in college is that you can get away with lots of things when pushing a narrative - word choice and selective argumentation being paramount. The kicker is that the more the paper is scrutinized the greater the number of flaws that come out. Easy for us, one professor handling 20+ papers at the end of a term usually = a good/great grade.
It's hard to keep a narrative push from being scrutinized and spotted at a mass market level. Our "professional news press" is no different. Much less the enthusiast gaming press.
I don't even understand why Richard is so concerned with a survey. It's not like Nielsen is stating falsities or something, they are simply taking down what users said were the reasons they chose their console.
"Hoping" next year's results are different is so strange. It's not like you are hoping that something objectively false will be corrected next year or that even some misconception will be corrected next year. If I want to say I picked my Wii U because I like the console's curves, that's my prerogative, what the hell is it to Leadbetter? All he's hoping is that everyone thinks the way he does, and my guess is that he thinks everyone should prefer the Xbox One.
Oh yeah and that "quality of game experiences" quote?
Leadbetter: MS exclusive metacritic average is higher than Sony's, therefore there is a higher quality of game experiences on the Xbox One.
But wait what about the Wii U which has the highest exclusive metacritic average Mr. Leadbetter?
Leadbetter: Oh, the graphics fidelity is so disparate that I didn't even really bother to talk about the Wii U in my article, so the Wii U doesn't count. Therefore, next year I hope everyone who participates in this survey chooses the Xbox One and "higher quality of game experiences" is the number one reason listed.
That's my best guess as to what he means because who the fuck knows what "quality of game experiences" means.
"Hoping" next year's results are different is so strange. It's not like you are hoping that something objectively false will be corrected next year or that even some misconception will be corrected next year. If I want to say I picked my Wii U because I like the console's curves, that's my prerogative, what the hell is it to Leadbetter? All he's hoping is that everyone thinks the way he does, and my guess is that he thinks everyone should prefer the Xbox One.
Oh yeah and that "quality of game experiences" quote?
Leadbetter: MS exclusive metacritic average is higher than Sony's, therefore there is a higher quality of game experiences on the Xbox One.
But wait what about the Wii U which has the highest exclusive metacritic average Mr. Leadbetter?
Leadbetter: Oh, the graphics fidelity is so disparate that I didn't even really bother to talk about the Wii U in my article, so the Wii U doesn't count. Therefore, next year I hope everyone who participates in this survey chooses the Xbox One and "higher quality of game experiences" is the number one reason listed.
That's my best guess as to what he means because who the fuck knows what "quality of game experiences" means.
SteveWinwood
Member
more like leadworse
AMIRITE
AMIRITE
Pocky4Th3Win
Member
She's 32 and wears prescription glasses. She just got new ones and her prescription has changed in over 3 years. It's not her eye sight, she just doesn't notice the graphic differences.
She is a gamer so it's not like she's not interested in games. She has more hours in L4D and Borderlands then I do as well as has beaten Dark souls 2 more times then I have.
Jawbreaker
Member
I don't think he cared for the survey, rather he saw it as an opportunity to write up an inconsequential article with very little to say and no real technical analysis. Why he chose to do this is anybody's guess. Maybe he was bored? Albert Penello commissioned him? : p
I dunno, is 720p horrible on that setup? I've never used large TVs for gaming.
Did he really say this? Because funnily enough even that is factually wrong, MS have the lowest metacritic average of the three.
http://www.metacritic.com/feature/game-publisher-rankings-for-2013-releases
http://www.metacritic.com/feature/game-publisher-rankings-for-2014-releases
EASTC0AST_GH05T
Member
ah ok thanks for reply, I only asked because the leap between tlou on PS3 and PS4 graphically is like the hugest most obvious one I have seen of recent.
Can't really think of any outside of remasters, sports games, and shooters.
There's some crazy stuff in that post but I do want to note that this is wrong and I feel that you're doing exactly what you just critiqued. I bought the ps4 version myself and it's pretty good but there is a LOT more slowdown than you're suggesting. To act like it dips two or three times is completely disingenuous. I dunno about xo since I haven't played that version but the ps4 version wasn't as good as I would have hoped.
Far Cry 4, though? Yeah, that's better on ps4 in every way. I cannot imagine anyone suggesting otherwise. The ps4 version is excellent with a very very consistent frame-rate and wonderful image quality.
I'm thinking it could be cool to revisit patched games as well. I randomly messed with Lords of the Fallen this week and noticed that the ps4 version was patched many times and performance had been improved. It's not perfect but it's interesting to see those changes.
IndoAssassin
Banned
So I guess he's being apologetic for the xbox one and wants MS to make another underpowered console next gen.
Why are all the Xbox fans telling MS that it's ok to make an underpowered console? Do you really want a repeat of this with the next round of consoles?
Only reason that the PS4 is more powerful is because MS bet on apps and kinect, taking away some of the budget for gaming purposes.
Yet people are ok with MS deciding to forego giving its hardcore gamer base a more powerful gaming device in order to attract people who don't really give a shit about gaming in the first place.
We should be demanding more from them, not being apologetic. I'm confused about all of this
Why are all the Xbox fans telling MS that it's ok to make an underpowered console? Do you really want a repeat of this with the next round of consoles?
Only reason that the PS4 is more powerful is because MS bet on apps and kinect, taking away some of the budget for gaming purposes.
Yet people are ok with MS deciding to forego giving its hardcore gamer base a more powerful gaming device in order to attract people who don't really give a shit about gaming in the first place.
We should be demanding more from them, not being apologetic. I'm confused about all of this
Yeah, I don't understand why fans would be OK with the system. It was designed during a time when MS was taking a very anti-consumer approach and the hardware suffered. They're turning things around but still stuck with a troublesome box.
I've just finished CoD on the PS4 and it only really slows down where all the Cods slow down mostly and that is when the engine is completing a game save but that affects all versions. MP is a near flawless 60fps presentation.
Leadbetter used a slight fps drop when a threat grenade goes of on the ps4 which can't be seen by the eye anyway as it's a strobe effect to say that the One with its hugely lower resolution and similar fps drops possibly more fps drops was the better version.
Lol.
That is not true - at least not at launch. There were lots of dips throughout including whole sections (such as the hover bike intro area) which ran under 60 fps. Again, I haven't played it since the first week but it definitely was not consistent and dips went beyond the hitch you get during saving. It bothered me quite a bit.
Have they patched it? I might revisit it if so.
StrongBlackVine
Banned
Ground Zeroes on PS4.
And fighting games(GGXRD, DOA, Injustice, MKX this year)...and racing games(Project cars)...and indies....like last generation.
I guess the thrust of my post is asking what exactly it is that you are talking about.
justsomeguy
Member
i don't think they are. Look at the ps4 sales figures. A lot of those sales were to "xbox fans", MS will have noticed that.
People still buy consoles for reasons other than resolution remember. Love my xbox, wish it had a bit more grunt, but overall perfectly happy with my purchase. Will doubtless add a ps4 at some point when there's a couple of exclusives i want.
- Status