Support NeoGAF

[fasTRapid]

You guys know the Xbox One version of ghosts outsold the PS4 version right?

 

[daman824]

Keep pushing the pixels on the XB1 version and the PS4 version just ends up looking better. Keeping the resolution at 720p would be an easy way to have effects as similar as possible to the PS4 while closing the gap in resolution means either toning down the effects or compromising framerate. Although, given the response to resolutiongate, I get why they'd prioritize it.

It actually doesn't mean that......at all.

 

[PodcastFips]

What is a PC was plugged into the HDMI port? It':s still technically captured on an XBox One...

 

[ReturnOfTheRAT]

Are they the lead platform?

 

[TetraGenesis]

U guys act like its gonna look like a wii game vs a ps4 game lol.if they wanted to show the superior version to the public they would show PC footage. All versions will look fine.

I think all versions will look fine but you're crazy if you think their marketing deal with Microsoft allows them to show anything other than the XB1 version.

 

[revimack]

I wonder what we'll be looking at for the 360 version. Hopefully the same as Black Ops 2.

I wouldn't be surprised to see a 30fps last-gen version, at least in singleplayer.

 

[Rembrandt]

What the hell are you going on about?


The Last of Us looked amazing, for 8 year old hardware.


Just about everyone at the time of release was mentioning how the IQ was muddy and textures as well. It was a beautiful game but very clearly hindered by old hardware. Which is why everyone was clamoring for (and ND is releaseing) a PS4 version.

People have cared about resolution and framerate since the N64 days.


Remember the expansion pack? Turok 2's "HD Mode" or Perfect Dark's Framerate?

Graphics matter. A lot. Some people don't seem to understand this.


Games are no where even close to looking "Good enough"

Yeah, possibly, but this is nothing more than a dick measuring contest masquerading as false concern about resolution. Graphics matter, but I'm not about to count the pixels of a screenshot to justify my purchase. I was impressed with Ryse at 900p,so it's not the end of the world coming from last gen consoles where a lot of games were barely pushing 720p but still looked good, in my eyes.

 

[Always-honest]

Someone else posted about Ryse too... I never experienced any frame rate issues in the 3 playthroughs and countless hours of multiplayer either.

Ah okay. I didn't play it so i wouldn't know. But i do think it looks fantastic at 900p.

 

[AmyS]

I have no idea what Sledgehammer will actually set the native resolution to for the final, shipped PS4 version of CoD: Advanced Warfare, but I'd say native 1080p on PS4 is very possible, given the fact that PS4 GPU has twice the number of ROPS that Xbox One's GPU has (32 vs 16).

Which gives PS4 twice the pixel output per GPU clock cycle, and very nearly twice the final pixel fillrate when all is said and done, given the small difference in clock speeds of their GPUs - Xbox One GPU is clocked slightly higher: 853 MHz, PS4 GPU is 800 MHz.

PS4 fillrate: 25.600 Gpixels/sec (32 * 800)
Xbox One fillrate: 13.648 Gpixels/sec (16 * 853)

If Sledgehammer can get the Xbox One ver. to native 900p then they probably shouldn't have too much difficulty getting PS4 ver to native 1080p, and hopefully, both will be a consistent 60 FPS.

Edit: I am not factoring in anything about Xbox One's ESRAM, one way or the other.

 

[Respawn]

How is this a positive?

I'm thinking the same thing.

 

[BruiserBear]

Are they the lead platform?

When the first trailer for a game announces it's XB1 footage, you can bet it's the lead platform.

 

[PaulExcellent]

How was ghost on 360? I expect the same as that.

No clue. The ridiculously dumb story put me off from buying it. :/

I wouldn't be surprised to see a 30fps last-gen version, at least in singleplayer.

That would be fine with me, unless the PC version actually works well this time.

 

[TetraGenesis]

If past PS4/One titles are anything to go by, we're probably not going to see effects differences between the next-gen versions of AW. The PS4 version will probably just render at a higher resolution relative to the One version.

Right, but the PS4 is probably already planned 1080p so it doesn't have any growing to do in the resolution department. Unless developers choose to waste the extra power that could mean more reliable framerates or improved effects. That's what I meant.

 

[Metfanant]

It is fair to expect the new consoles to hit 1080p, based on the history of 3D consoles, but it is an unrealistic expectation to expect 1080p60.



And yet I have seen people claiming 30fps is "unplayable" now, from a gameplay point of view. Which is, of course, utterly ridiculous.

Agree

When the first trailer for a game announces it's XB1 footage, you can bet it's the lead platform.

I highly doubt it actually

 

[pixlexic]

I didn't say that. I'm just saying that 720p wasn't exactly expected for new consoles when every previous generation has had a substantial resolution boost. I'm fine with 30fps and I understand that you need to make serious compromises for 60fps.

I was just saying that people acting like console owners shouldn't care about resolution and framerate differences all of a sudden have a severely flawed argument, especially when the console that's getting considerably outperformed costs $100 more.

The cost argument is pretty lame. If the person was only interested in games that appeared on both consoles then don't buy a xbone. no problem.

but that is not the case. You are not paying $100 more to play COD only.

You choose to pay the price because of the exclusives , services and features as a whole. Yes that even includes kinect.

so just to compare games that are on both and say "$100 more" is not taking into account everything that a person may decide upon to make that purchase.

 

[Piggus]

lol, and people gave me the evil eye when I said the game looked like was running at around 900p.

 

[daman824]

Right, but the PS4 is probably already planned 1080p so it doesn't have any growing to do in the resolution department. Unless developers choose to waste the extra power that could mean more reliable framerates or improved effects. That's what I meant.

You don't get it. The game isn't running at 882p because of the gpu or the cpu. It's the esram. So your "higher effects" argument doesn't make sense. The xbox one isn't being bottlenecked by it's gpu or cpu yet.

 

[Metfanant]

You don't get it. The game isn't running at 882p because of the gpu or the cpu. It's the esram.

It's a combination of everything...period...not one single component...

 

[Vinc]

I was gonna play it on PS4 if the game turns out decent (read: much better than Ghosts) anyway. I'll play all multiplatform games on there.

 

[BruiserBear]

I don't know where people got the idea or expectation that frame rate increases with successive console generations. For 20 years 30fps has been the standard with increases in resolution each generation because, for most people, the benefits of increased resolution and effects makes much more of a difference than 60fps vs 30fps.

Since the inception of 3D graphics console games have been 30fps (mostly) because the trade off to get 60fps simply isn't worth it. That won't change this generation after being the case for 20 years.

It is fair to expect the new consoles to hit 1080p, based on the history of 3D consoles, but it is an unrealistic expectation to expect 1080p60.



And yet I have seen people claiming 30fps is "unplayable" now, from a gameplay point of view. Which is, of course, utterly ridiculous.

30fps has always been unacceptable for a COD game. That's why they're always 60. Also, there are already plenty of games that run at 1080p/60 on PS4.

I highly doubt it actually

And what platform do you believe is the lead platform for this game?

 

[daman824]

It's a combination of everything...period...not one single component...

I think it's pretty safe to say it's the esram. Which would also explain the absolutely huge difference between ghosts and aw on xb1. You think the xb1 gpu was bottlenecked by crossgen games? When assest are made with 250gflop gpus in mind? come on.

 

[jimbobsmells]

When the first trailer for a game announces it's XB1 footage, you can bet it's the lead platform.

Marketing deal?

 

[SquiddyCracker]

Just to clarify:

You can be a lead platform despite being worse off visuals-wise.
For example, the PS2.

It's just that in this case, the lead platform for the game happens to be the second-worst selling console in addition to being the second-weakest console.

 

[xkramz]

Dat hyperbole. Most people don't give a fuck/won't even notice this.

Exactly I'm being one of them.

 

[RoboPlato]

The cost argument is pretty lame. If the person was only interested in games that appeared on both consoles then don't buy a xbone. no problem.

but that is not the case. You are not paying $100 more to play COD only.

You choose to pay the price because of the exclusives , services and features as a whole. Yes that even includes kinect.

so just to compare games that are on both and say "$100 more" is not taking into account everything that a person may decide upon to make that purchase.

I was talking purely multiplatform comparisons and why it's been such a heated issue lately. There's plenty of reasons to get an Xbox One, but multiplat performance is not one of them.

 

[Goddard]

1080P should be the target, so this is not boosted, it is falling short.

This. Reminds me of developers bragging about having a game that runs at 60fps when really that is what is should normally be.

 

[Norml]

Should upgrade PS4 to 1920x1280 then.

 

[MisterXDTV]

When the first trailer for a game announces it's XB1 footage, you can bet it's the lead platform.

The weaker platform (in both Power and Sales) can't be the lead platform: PC and PS4 should be the priority this generation....

The fact that MS pays Activision means nothing; they run the Ads Microsoft wants, release the DLC earlier and that's it.

 

[Piggus]

You don't get it. The game isn't running at 882p because of the gpu or the cpu. It's the esram. So your "higher effects" argument doesn't make sense. The xbox one isn't being bottlenecked by it's gpu or cpu yet.

This is not necessarily true. The GPU is hampered by the number of ROPs (see above post about ROPs) which are crucial for resolution. The lack of ROPs makes running games at 1080p very inefficient. Why do you think AMD's own recommendation is 32 ROPs for 1080p gaming? The Xbone GPU has HALF that.

 

[BruiserBear]

Marketing deal?

Yes, and because of that they've always had the Xbox versions lead. Because that's the version they have to show off on stage at E3, and that's the version that had to be ready for the multiplayer reveal in August. It's always worked this way with COD. The version they're showing off is the one that's most complete.

The weaker platform (in both Power and Sales) can't be the lead platform: PC and PS4 should be the priority this generation....

The fact that MS pays Activision means nothing; they run the Ads Microsoft wants, release the DLC earlier and that's it.

You can say "should" all you want. Doesn't make it so.

 

[Metfanant]

I think it's pretty safe to say it's the esram. Which would also explain the absolutely huge difference between ghosts and aw on xb1. You think the xb1 gpu was bottlenecked by crossgen games? come on.

It's just not that simple...there were lots of choices that influenced the overall hardware design,,,I'll tell you one thing...WITHOUT the ESRAM...it would be much worse...

 

[Respawn]

Great news, would have bought it even if it was 720p.

What other new gen system that you own that you could've bought it for

When the first trailer for a game announces it's XB1 footage, you can bet it's the lead platform.

What are you even talking about?

 

[Bgamer90]

Just to clarify:

You can be a lead platform despite being worse off visuals-wise.
For example, the PS2.

It's just that in this case, the lead platform for the game happens to be the second-worst selling console in addition to being the second-weakest console.

"Second worst" and "Second weakest" is a funny way to put it considering there's just 3 consoles this gen.

But anyway, yeah, many EA games were advertised/shown via their PS2 versions that gen even though they were the worst looking versions.

 

[Salvor.Hardin]

Just to clarify:

You can be a lead platform despite being worse off visuals-wise.
For example, the PS2.

It's just that in this case, the lead platform for the game happens to be the second-worst selling console in addition to being the second-weakest console.

Regardless of total console sales, the CoD crowd seems to prefer XBO. Ghosts on xbox outsold Ghosts on the PS4.

 

[BruiserBear]

What are you even talking about?

Have you watched the trailer that is the basis for this thread?

 

[daman824]

It's just not that simple...there were lots of choices that influenced the overall hardware design,,,I'll tell you one thing...WITHOUT the ESRAM...it would be much worse...

Yeah sure, but the ram situation is the main bottleneck of the system. And RAM has very little to do with effects.

 

[Hydrargyrus]

- Actiguy: This awesome game, at 720p
- MS rep: Please, anything better than 720p, if not I won't buy it. 900p
- Actiguy: Meeeen, I can't give you 900p. This is too high!. 800p
- MS rep: 888p, well balanced, that's my final offer
- Actiguy: 882p and one pog.
- MS rep: Ok, deal. At least is 50% better than before

 

[jimbobsmells]

Ghosts on xbox outsold Ghosts on the PS4.

I'd like to see you and the real napsta should back that up with a source.

 

[Killing_Joke]

I'm a noob when it comes down to specs but i assumed this was a launch problem not an on going problem?

 

[kuYuri]

Every platform did.

Game runs just fine on 360.

 

[Metfanant]

And what platform do you believe is the lead platform for this game?

if it's not the PC...then PS4...

Yes, and because of that they've always had the Xbox versions lead. Because that's the version they have to show off on stage at E3, and that's the version that had to be ready for the multiplayer reveal in August. It's always worked this way with COD. The version they're showing off is the one that's most complete.



You can say "should" all you want. Doesn't make it so.

I disagree...last year at E3 they just showed monster PC's with Xbone controllers hooked up and tried to pass it off as the Xbone version

 

[daman824]

This is not necessarily true. The GPU is hampered by the number of ROPs (see above post about ROPs) which are crucial for resolution. The lack of ROPs makes running games at 1080p very inefficient. Why do you think AMD's own recommendation is 32 ROPs for 1080p gaming? The Xbone GPU has HALF that.

Forgot about that. Still doesn't undermine the point of my argument. Simply being able to raise the resolution on the xb1 version doesn't all of a sudden mean that it's going to take a hit on effects.

If the xb1 version ends up at 900p, the resolution difference will be the biggest difference between it and the ps4 version. They will use the same assets.

 

[BigTnaples]

I would like to see the PS4 version use super sampling like the lego games. Or just have a better AA solution.

 

[SolidSnakex]

Regardless of total console sales, the CoD crowd seems to prefer XBO. Ghosts on xbox outsold Ghosts on the PS4.

It may have sold more in the US, but it certainly didn't worldwide. If you look at European charts you'll see that the PS4 version was always ahead of the Xbox One version. And Europe does account for a large amount of sales for that series.

 

[DR2K]

I guess it takes a month to render the DLC in full 1080p.

 

[Rogue_Ledr]

How is this a positive?

My sentiments exactly.


The feel of 900P.

 

[BruiserBear]

if it's not the PC...then PS4...



I disagree...last year at E3 they just showed monster PC's with Xbone controllers hooked up and tried to pass it off as the Xbone version

Tons of games were shown on PCs at E3 last year, because the hardware for either console was hard to get your hands on. That was an anomaly year.

 

[RoboPlato]

Yes, and because of that they've always had the Xbox versions lead. Because that's the version they have to show off on stage at E3, and that's the version that had to be ready for the multiplayer reveal in August. It's always worked this way with COD. The version they're showing off is the one that's most complete.



You can say "should" all you want. Doesn't make it so.

It's worked that way in the past but that was also because the 360 version was much easier to develop for than the PS3 and the games usually ran better on it anyway. The only reason they'd be leading on XBO now is because they need to give it a lot more attention than the PS4 version to get it running up to snuff.

 

[Salvor.Hardin]

I'd like to see you and the real napsta should back that up with a source.

If you're that interested, it shouldn't be too hard to track down the NPD and UK console breakdowns.

 

[fasTRapid]

The fact that this game, which is actually based in a new engine...

It's the same old modified Quake engine, the last Call of Dutys have used as well.

Are they the lead platform?

Rumors have it, Xbox One isn't leading. We don't know at this point which platform is the lead.

Regardless of total console sales, the CoD crowd seems to prefer XBO. Ghosts on xbox outsold Ghosts on the PS4.

I don't read the threads I post in either.

If you're that interested, it shouldn't be too hard to track down the NPD and UK console breakdowns.

LMAO, I'm having a Deja Vu here!