Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2 ... LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 106
  1. #26
    Forum Overseer

    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Addison, TX.
    Age
    32
    Posts
    32,762
    Rep Power
    198
    Points
    137,639 (0 Banked)
    Achievements IT'S OVER 9000!
    Quote Originally Posted by rene2kx View Post
    So you are saying that most cannot tell it, but you can? So if a game was natively rendered in 960x1080, 1440 x 1080 etc. and the scaled 1080p image was sent to your screen, you could tell by looking at your screen the exact rendered resolution H X V? Am i getting that right? You knew about killzone's mp not being native 1080p before the news broke out, unlike most people?
    Yes and good try, i don't own KZ. i have never owned this series.

    And on the last part about x1, what does workaround or optimization mean? Yes currently they are having issues hitting 1080p while keeping their asset fidelity intact, i said that already didn''t i. And the option is to render a little lower or else make some concession on the fidelity if they want native 1080p. But i do think they'll find a way eventually to do both together. There is a school of thought among many (you are from it) that they made a mistake on the esram and this is a lost cause for them forever. It's fine to carry that opinion. But i beg to differ.
    again, ESRAM is always going to be a limit because there isn't enough of it. again, that frame buffer size isn't going to change. they can find other ways, like GG did with KZ but it will not be native in the traditional sense.

    but hey, doesn't matter to you anyway right?

    For certain, we'll only know about midway or so into this generation. I remember some people writing off the ps3 when there were a barrage of inferior looking versions compared to the 360 in 2006/2007 (attributing it to 'teh cell') but in the latter years, ps3 was able to maintain parity with the 360, there were even some multiplats in the last few years that actually looked bit better on the ps3. So i'm not jumping to conclusions in the x1's case, though i do feel that architecturally some more thought should have gone into the design process and if they wanted to stick with esram, a bigger pool may have served them better)
    there's nothing wrong with X1's design, they knew what they wanted. it's actually a brilliant design. the limitations were known. they thought about it well enough. their focus was not the same as Sony's, that's all there is to it.

    and you fail to understand why PS3 eventually took over 360 in looks. i've asked you the reason twice, at this point i'm going to assume you don't know.

  2. #27
    Dedicated Member
    rene2kx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    1,186
    Rep Power
    31
    Points
    15,220 (0 Banked)
    Quote Originally Posted by Sufi View Post
    Yes and good try, i don't own KZ. i have never owned this series.

    again, ESRAM is always going to be a limit because there isn't enough of it. again, that frame buffer size isn't going to change. they can find other ways, like GG did with KZ but it will not be native in the traditional sense.

    but hey, doesn't matter to you anyway right?

    there's nothing wrong with X1's design, they knew what they wanted. it's actually a brilliant design. the limitations were known. they thought about it well enough. their focus was not the same as Sony's, that's all there is to it.

    and you fail to understand why PS3 eventually took over 360 in looks. i've asked you the reason twice, at this point i'm going to assume you don't know.
    'Yes' is not a satisfactory answer Do you use a tv or projector? The signal being fed to your screen is scaled 1080p from a slightly lower resolution. your tv/projector would still say 1080p. let me know how do you fetch the rendered resolution data(h x v) by looking at the screen.

    On the point about esram, you are merely repeating yourself. I said it is fine to carry that opinion that it'll always struggle on that front. But there are also people who think to the contrary. For certain, we'll only find out in the coming years.

    On the point about ps3/360, im not getting into the cell vs xenon (unnecessary) debate here as this will derail the thread and this thread wasn't even remotely created for the purpose of ps3 vs 360. In the appropriate sections though, i won't mind having a debate about the same in the near future if you are interested.
    Last edited by rene2kx; 03-11-2014 at 22:11.

  3. #28
    Forum Overseer

    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Addison, TX.
    Age
    32
    Posts
    32,762
    Rep Power
    198
    Points
    137,639 (0 Banked)
    Achievements IT'S OVER 9000!
    Quote Originally Posted by rene2kx View Post
    'Yes' is not a satisfactory answer Do you use a tv or projector? The signal being fed to your screen is scaled 1080p from a slightly lower resolution. your tv/projector would still say 1080p. let me know how do you fetch the rendered resolution data(h x v) by looking at the screen.
    you're making a lot of assumptions here. because you can't tell the difference, i would not go to the lengths of accusing others of not knowing.

    do i know exactly what 1080p should look like on my big screen? no because i have only seen higher resolutions on my monitor but that's beside the point because i could tell the difference on my monitor, we're talking about something that should give you a more obvious difference.

    what i would know is that if the game is 1080p in single player and gets fuzzier in MP, i would notice. just like i can notice a drastic difference in graphics going from GTA 5 SP to MP (primarily in draw distance and LOD) and also the obvious reduction in NPCs and ecosystem.

    i did notice the resolution going from 720p to 900p in BF4. I'm fairly sure i would notice 1080p (or an improvement over 900p) if BF4 was the latter resolution.

    i don't think 1080p is good enough for TVs, I think 4K should be more ideal.

    My TV is 46" and I sit 3-4 feet away so it feels much bigger than it is, in fact, i don't think i want to go any bigger than that unless i decided to sit further away.

    On the point about esram, you are merely repeating yourself. I said it is fine to carry that opinion that it'll always struggle on that front. But there are also people who think to the contrary. For certain, we'll only find out in the coming years.
    bro, i keep repeating that because "numerically", you can't reduce the frame buffer size. that's not going to change. 1080p takes up a whopping 23MB out of that 32MB. if you want the game to be corridor-style and/or low in graphical details/cheaper AA/LOD/draw distance, fine, you might see those for sure. but if you think that going directly against the PS4 in multiplats and actually making up while knowing the specs and the limitations of its design? keep dreaming. keep up the good fight. there's hope for you. it's called 'faith" because faith doesn't need facts.

    On the point about ps3/360, im not getting into the cell vs xenon (unnecessary) debate here as this will derail the thread and this thread wasn't even remotely created for the purpose of ps3 vs 360. In the appropriate sections though, i won't mind having a debate about the same in the near future if you are interested.
    lol nice save. i'm interested now, make a thread.

  4. #29
    Dedicated Member
    rene2kx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    1,186
    Rep Power
    31
    Points
    15,220 (0 Banked)
    Quote Originally Posted by Sufi View Post
    you're making a lot of assumptions here. because you can't tell the difference, i would not go to the lengths of accusing others of not knowing.

    do i know exactly what 1080p should look like on my big screen? no because i have only seen higher resolutions on my monitor but that's beside the point because i could tell the difference on my monitor, we're talking about something that should give you a more obvious difference.

    what i would know is that if the game is 1080p in single player and gets fuzzier in MP, i would notice. just like i can notice a drastic difference in graphics going from GTA 5 SP to MP (primarily in draw distance and LOD) and also the obvious reduction in NPCs and ecosystem.

    i did notice the resolution going from 720p to 900p in BF4. I'm fairly sure i would notice 1080p (or an improvement over 900p) if BF4 was the latter resolution.

    i don't think 1080p is good enough for TVs, I think 4K should be more ideal.

    My TV is 46" and I sit 3-4 feet away so it feels much bigger than it is, in fact, i don't think i want to go any bigger than that unless i decided to sit further away.
    you still don't have a precise answer in there anywhere. all that you are saying is you can merely assume that the image on screen doesn't look native 1080p and could be lower because AA/draw distance/lod etc. feels a little cheaper to you. what i asked you is how do you fetch the exact rendered resolution data by looking at the screen? let's say a developer renders a game which is a little lower than native 1080p, the horizontal scan lines are say 720 lower than the native resolution, i mean 1200 x 1080, this is what the game was rendered in, you are getting a scaled 1080p signal on your screen from this resolution, how do you fetch the exact rendered resolution data (1200 x 1080) by looking at the screen? last time i'm asking as this is getting old. if you don't have a precise answer next time, then let's bury this debate. no problem.

  5. #30
    Forum Overseer

    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Addison, TX.
    Age
    32
    Posts
    32,762
    Rep Power
    198
    Points
    137,639 (0 Banked)
    Achievements IT'S OVER 9000!
    Quote Originally Posted by rene2kx View Post
    you still don't have a precise answer in there anywhere. all that you are saying is you can merely assume that the image on screen doesn't look native 1080p and could be lower because AA/draw distance/lod etc. feels a little cheaper to you. what i asked you is how do you fetch the exact rendered resolution data by looking at the screen? let's say a developer renders a game which is a little lower than native 1080p, the horizontal scan lines are say 720 lower than the native resolution, i mean 1200 x 1080, this is what the game was rendered in, you are getting a scaled 1080p signal on your screen from this resolution, how do you fetch the exact rendered resolution data (1200 x 1080) by looking at the screen? last time i'm asking as this is getting old. if you don't have a precise answer next time, then let's bury this debate. no problem.
    i'm pretty sure i answered it previous and it seems that you have misunderstood what i was saying but let me reiterate. no, i cannot fetch the exact resolution but what i can do, like any other human being without some sort of a device, is to be able to tell that there's something different about the resolution. that it's not 1080p or 720p if it's far enough as you are suggesting. i would be able to tell the difference betwen 1200 x 1080, it would likely seem more like 900p to me as it's between 720p to 900p if you count the pixels. of course i would be able to tell the difference betewen 1080p and something less than 900p. are you kidding me?

    resolution is nothing new, we've had this on PCs for a long time. just as we can tell the difference between a locked 30fps or unlocked...just like i can tell that BF4 is not locked at 60fps but can probably go down to 50 or even lower in some cases.

    you want me to give you an exact number? no one can tell you that buddy but that's not the right question...the question is if you can tell if something is 1080p or 720p. that i can do. if it's a slight different where it's 700p instead of 720p, or 1000p instead of 1080p, i probably would not be able to tell but you're talking about about a drastic scenario of upscaling.

    there, does that answer your invalid question?

  6. #31
    Dedicated Member
    rene2kx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    1,186
    Rep Power
    31
    Points
    15,220 (0 Banked)
    Quote Originally Posted by Sufi View Post
    i'm pretty sure i answered it previous and it seems that you have misunderstood what i was saying but let me reiterate. no, i cannot fetch the exact resolution but what i can do, like any other human being without some sort of a device, is to be able to tell that there's something different about the resolution. that it's not 1080p or 720p if it's far enough as you are suggesting. i would be able to tell the difference betwen 1200 x 1080, it would likely seem more like 900p to me as it's between 720p to 900p if you count the pixels. of course i would be able to tell the difference betewen 1080p and something less than 900p. are you kidding me?

    resolution is nothing new, we've had this on PCs for a long time. just as we can tell the difference between a locked 30fps or unlocked...just like i can tell that BF4 is not locked at 60fps but can probably go down to 50 or even lower in some cases.

    you want me to give you an exact number? no one can tell you that buddy but that's not the right question...the question is if you can tell if something is 1080p or 720p. that i can do. if it's a slight different where it's 700p instead of 720p, or 1000p instead of 1080p, i probably would not be able to tell but you're talking about about a drastic scenario of upscaling.

    there, does that answer your invalid question?
    so there, you cannot tell the resolution, you can only assume that it's lower because the resolution appears 'different' to you lol . you would have to hunt the internetz to know the precise figures, much like the killzone crowd.

    and it isn't an invalid question. i asked this very thing on a tech forum and got a way better response than you were able to come up with.

    nvm. cya around bro. god bless you.

    oh and as a last comment, for the love of resolution, ditch that 46" tv and get a projector with at least a 90" screen or more. True IQ lovers never game/watch on something that size.

    /
    Last edited by rene2kx; 03-11-2014 at 23:48.

  7. #32
    Supreme Veteran
    keefy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    The Sock Gap
    Posts
    18,199
    Rep Power
    129
    Points
    66,528 (0 Banked)
    Items Gran Turismo 5Michelle MarshDoomid SoftwareCommodore 64Metal Gear Solid
    Achievements IT'S OVER 9000!
    My living room isn't big enough for a 90inch screen

  8. #33
    Forum Overseer

    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Addison, TX.
    Age
    32
    Posts
    32,762
    Rep Power
    198
    Points
    137,639 (0 Banked)
    Achievements IT'S OVER 9000!
    Quote Originally Posted by rene2kx View Post
    so there, you cannot tell the resolution, you can only assume that it's lower because the resolution appears 'different' to you lol . you would have to hunt the internetz to know the precise figures, much like the killzone crowd.
    are you serious? no one can tell what the resolution is as far as the number of lines go horizontal and vertical. it doesn't matter what sort of comparison you want done.

    what kind of an expectation is that? are you somehow justifying this as a means to say that resolution doesn't matter? i hope not.

    just because i can't tell how much of the resolution is missing or being upscaled, doesn't mean that i can't tell that it's missing or that it doesn't matter. like i have been saying for the past 10 posts. all you're doing is making circles and you keep coming back to the same spot.

    another thing i mentioned, if you were paying attention, is that once people catch on and realize what 1080p looks like, they will notice it more. you will too in time, i promise you. just like we could tell that COD was not 720p and BF3 was.

    and it isn't an invalid question. i asked this very thing on a tech forum and got a way better response than you were able to come up with.
    i'd love to see the answer they gave you.

    nvm. cya around bro. god bless you.

    oh and as a last comment, for the love of resolution, ditch that 46" tv and get a projector with at least a 90" screen or more. True IQ lovers never game/watch on something that size.

    /
    no that's not true. you don't know anything about this thing. if you sit 3-4 feet away, you are fine for the most part, I'm sure 90" would be a grand experience but i'm not missing any details. 1080p looks OK on my screen. 900p is blurry...720p is unacceptably blurry.

    like i said, we will benefit from 4K moving forward, those (including you) that can't tell, will at least be able to tell 4x of 1080p. give it time.

  9. #34
    Dedicated Member
    Sajuuk Khar's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Age
    26
    Posts
    1,464
    Rep Power
    74
    Points
    9,896 (0 Banked)
    Quote Originally Posted by rene2kx View Post
    oh and as a last comment, for the love of resolution, ditch that 46" tv and get a projector with at least a 90" screen or more. True IQ lovers never game/watch on something that size.

    /
    This kinda makes your point of view of the entire thread null and void with out going into some more needed details here.


    But I think a lot of how the "internet" is reacting to the resolution differences is that MS was going incredibly gun hoe with saying that there was going to be no real difference in power between the X1 and PS4. That the PS4 was unbalanced and wouldn't be able to use all of its resources. The X1 had the power of the cloud to boost performance, that MS wasn't going to give up the 30% difference in hardware spec and be just as good as the PS4 for games. The reason why people could be putting multiplatform titles under such scrutiy because
    A) It would have happened anyway and seems to always have with multiplatform titles. The internet just allows the information to circulate incredibly fast and for people to discuss it.
    B) The potential PR back lash against MS for they way they handled the DRM issues and then trying to downplay clear hardware performance issues. There is a substantial difference in peak GPU performance. Developers were leaking that there were going to be variances in output res. That it also costs more but has lower performance.


    You are probably right in saying that people wouldn't know the precise resolution by just looking at a image on a a screen. But some see the differences and then investigate what the actual numbers are. It could be perceived as a value for money aspect. People that have both consoles, are they going to buy a game that costs the same, but has less visual fidelity either perceivable or even just symbolically when there is the option to pay the same amount of money for a game with a higher visual quality. Yes there are other sides to deciding which to go for, but this is a thread about resolution so we'll keep it there.


    These 960x1080 and 1440x1080 resolutions you keep mentioning, are these specific to any one game?

    I take it from the rest of the thread and bring up shadow fall multiplayer that the 960x1080 is in reference to that. I'm really not sure if its worth going into more detail about it if your not going to read it, but others might so it could clear things up with them.

    ....

    Ok, :P

    A full 1920x1080 image is being sent off to the tv, its the order and the amount of pixels being being rendered which makes it more complicated than pure scaling. A 960x1080 is not being stretched out to 1920x1080.

    What is happening is that every even and odd column of pixels are being rendered on alternating frames, with the current and previous frames pixels being melded together. There is some artifacting because there is some guess work as to where the older pixels have moved to based on movement data.

    If that doesn't make sense I'll do a little diagram with numbers:P

    Ok so, on frame 1 the odd number columns are rendered...

    1 3 5 7 9......

    Then on frame 2 the even numbers are rendered...

    2 4 6 8 10......

    But what is also happening is columns from frame 1 are used in frame 2 to fill the gaps and with calculations made to where they would actually be using motion data from previous frames.

    12345678910......

    To show what the artifacts look like, if I knew how I would just push some of the numbers up or down so they weren't aligned. What is essentially happening is a full 1920x1080 progressive image is being rendered out at 30FPS, but with this technique of alternating pixel rendering and the even distribution of pixels across the whole image, they are able to have the responsiveness of a 60FPS multiplayer experience while almost having a Full HD image. This method of rendering was used possibly because they weren't able to get 60FPS on multiplayer in a stable way for launch.

    Now this is very different to scaling the image up from say 1280x720 or any other combination of non native res, as you are going from this

    12345678910

    to something like this

    1-2-3-4-5-6-7-8-9-10-

    With the - being the result of the scaler estimating what and where the pixel should be. Again different to the shadow fall technique as all pixels are being rendered by the GPU and look how they should, with their position being calculated after if needed.


    To your original question, you can only tell the difference in resolution if there is something else of higher or lower res to compare with. If the 2 consoles were operating in a vacuum apart from each other where nothing was ever compared or seen next to each other, then it could be harder to see differences. But that isn't how it works. They are in direct competition to each other and are going to be compared with what the other can do that the other can't.

  10. Likes on the rocks likes this post
  11. #35
    Forum Overseer

    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Addison, TX.
    Age
    32
    Posts
    32,762
    Rep Power
    198
    Points
    137,639 (0 Banked)
    Achievements IT'S OVER 9000!
    Sajuuk, if we never knew about X1's lower res games, people would still eventually pick it up because once they play enough 1080p games, they will start to see little differences. but again, those that can't tell the difference between 480p and 720p won't see one between 720p and 1080p or 900p.

    but i bet you most should now be able to tell the difference between 720p and 480p because they likely have the proper TV sizes and have been playing in these resolutions for a long while now.

    soon 480p will become the new perceived 720p...and people will see the differences without actually knowing the resolutions. just like most could tell that COD was blurry (or that it was sub 720p).

    i'd say give it time, it will happen. i wouldn't be surprised if the majority of gamers have a TV size of 32-40" and they probably sit far away from the screen.

    if more people move on to 1080p sets and they either get a bigger TV or sit closer, they will see the differences. for those that still can't...will sadly have to wait for 4K...

  12. #36
    Dedicated Member
    Sajuuk Khar's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Age
    26
    Posts
    1,464
    Rep Power
    74
    Points
    9,896 (0 Banked)
    Quote Originally Posted by Sufi View Post
    Sajuuk, if we never knew about X1's lower res games, people would still eventually pick it up because once they play enough 1080p games, they will start to see little differences. but again, those that can't tell the difference between 480p and 720p won't see one between 720p and 1080p or 900p.

    but i bet you most should now be able to tell the difference between 720p and 480p because they likely have the proper TV sizes and have been playing in these resolutions for a long while now.

    soon 480p will become the new perceived 720p...and people will see the differences without actually knowing the resolutions. just like most could tell that COD was blurry (or that it was sub 720p).

    i'd say give it time, it will happen. i wouldn't be surprised if the majority of gamers have a TV size of 32-40" and they probably sit far away from the screen.

    if more people move on to 1080p sets and they either get a bigger TV or sit closer, they will see the differences. for those that still can't...will sadly have to wait for 4K...
    Hehe yeah I know you would still be able to see differences eventually, I was talking more philosophically. If all game resolutions was going to be 720p for ever and always had been, you wouldn't be aware of the possibility of the improvement to 1080p or the downgrade to 480p. But the world we live in we have the steady increase in resolutions so we do see the difference.

    And yeah totally agree with looking back at older games and seeing how blurry and jaggied they are and always were for that matter.

    I actually game on a 40" 1080p TV. Had it since around MGS4 was released and actually getting a 2nd wind of sorts with all games now more or less being 1080p. They look better because they actually match the pixel count.

  13. #37
    Forum Overseer

    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Addison, TX.
    Age
    32
    Posts
    32,762
    Rep Power
    198
    Points
    137,639 (0 Banked)
    Achievements IT'S OVER 9000!
    Quote Originally Posted by Sajuuk Khar View Post
    Hehe yeah I know you would still be able to see differences eventually, I was talking more philosophically. If all game resolutions was going to be 720p for ever and always had been, you wouldn't be aware of the possibility of the improvement to 1080p or the downgrade to 480p. But the world we live in we have the steady increase in resolutions so we do see the difference.

    And yeah totally agree with looking back at older games and seeing how blurry and jaggied they are and always were for that matter.

    I actually game on a 40" 1080p TV. Had it since around MGS4 was released and actually getting a 2nd wind of sorts with all games now more or less being 1080p. They look better because they actually match the pixel count.
    i understand. what i find funny is that people argue how 1080p doesn't matter and here i am not giving a $#@! about 1080p already. i want 4K because it's already out there. PC gamers don't even benefit from it as much as we would! why is life so screwed up!

  14. #38
    Forum Guru
    jlippone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Age
    37
    Posts
    3,826
    Rep Power
    87
    Points
    10,484 (0 Banked)
    Quote Originally Posted by Sufi View Post
    are you saying that it's possible to have a different resolution for things that are closer (not blurred out due to DOF)? generally what i've seen is that DOF isn't always there...it may be in some situations but it's not constantly there. so i presume it's not a total loss to increase the resolution.
    There are ways to do that, yes.

    Although In most cases it seems that it's easier to have constant resolution in image and shade in different rates. (ofcourse having transparent surfaces and such in different resolution is easy and common, but different resolutions within same surfaces is harder.)

    Decouplling shading from resolution is easier and there are some titles coming which will use this method. (IE. Ones using Oxide engine.)
    With such methods you can specify how many samples you shade per frame and where you use them.
    Also if one allows shaded points to become larger than pixel and/or use shaded point more than one frame the big frame buffers become a lot cheaper to render.
    -------
    Couple of nice blog posts about OpenGL.
    The Truth on OpenGL Driver Quality
    Things that drive me nuts about OpenGL

  15. #39
    Superior Member

    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    967
    Rep Power
    11
    Points
    14,222 (0 Banked)
    Quote Originally Posted by rene2kx View Post
    So it means that you cannot tell and you have to know the exact rendered resolution from the internet. And still people are fighting the resolution wars and trying to one up the 'other side' for a few natively rendered horizontal or vertical scan lines. Not a single person here that played killzone sf multiplayer knew that it wasn't rendered in 1920 x 1080 frame by frame, they thought it was, until the news broke out few days back. The consoles will output a 1080p signal irrespective if it's a 960 x 1080 or 1440 x 1080 render and your tv/projector is going to say 1080p. A tv or video projector cannot natively display odd resolutions like this because such resolutions are not standard in the video realm.


    Yes, you can tell. Above AC4 900P vs 1080P

  16. #40
    Elite Sage
    Sub-stance1's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    10,343
    Rep Power
    80
    Points
    65,541 (0 Banked)
    Items BarcelonaPS3 Slim360 Slim
    Achievements IT'S OVER 9000!
    Quote Originally Posted by keefy View Post
    My living room isn't big enough for a 90inch screen
    lol...and one that size isn't even necessary.

  17. #41
    Forum Guru
    jlippone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Age
    37
    Posts
    3,826
    Rep Power
    87
    Points
    10,484 (0 Banked)
    Quote Originally Posted by Sub-stance1 View Post
    lol...and one that size isn't even necessary.
    True, only important metric is angular size and resolution.
    -------
    Couple of nice blog posts about OpenGL.
    The Truth on OpenGL Driver Quality
    Things that drive me nuts about OpenGL

  18. #42
    Superior Member

    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    967
    Rep Power
    11
    Points
    14,222 (0 Banked)
    Quote Originally Posted by rene2kx View Post
    I'm not going down to 720p, scaled 720p can present some artefacts when compared to native 1080p side by side. But people are going crazy for sub 1080p renders that are only a little lower and they won't even be comparing the versions side by side when they play. Mostly from reading the plethora of comments, it has become more of a bragging rights competition and even some of those who don't have an understanding how res. works are actively involved. As to the question regarding framerate, the argument given in favor of it is that it leads to smoother motion. But i really don't think open world type games need it, because many of them that are 60fps don't present a locked framerate which varies between 30-60 and if the variation is a lot, it can lead to screen tear on some tv's (as the tv is refreshing at 60 or some multiple of 60). Besides it's a hog on the system resources. You could obviously do bigger maps, more stuff on screen at once if you are sticking to 30. A locked 1080p30 on open world games is better than a stuttering 60 fps framerate. Only racing games and sports games i feel need 1080p60, they don't have to render a lot.
    Dude. You just admitted to noticing and following the difference between PS3 and Xbox 360 version which had multiplats better on X360 version.

    What you see on PS4 and Xbox One is far larger gap. Not noticing 900P vs 1080P is biggest non sense.

    Go on your computer change your resolution of PC and tell me how it feels. It is freaking blurry? aint it? you are prob not even used to how blurry it is and takes some time to get used to.

    From technical stand point, gap is far larger.

  19. #43
    Forum Elder
    Yungstar 2006's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    tyneside
    Posts
    2,971
    Rep Power
    61
    Points
    28,649 (0 Banked)
    Quote Originally Posted by Fijiandoce View Post
    One argument i really don't get is the FPS thing. 30fps is perfectly fine. 1080p30 is a sufficient standard for this generation of consoles. why 1080p60 is being screamed from the rooftop is beyond me.
    Doesn't it help with reducing input lag from the joypad?

  20. #44
    Forum Elder
    Yungstar 2006's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    tyneside
    Posts
    2,971
    Rep Power
    61
    Points
    28,649 (0 Banked)
    Quote Originally Posted by AttackTitan View Post


    Yes, you can tell. Above AC4 900P vs 1080P
    I'm sure someone said that pic was Xbox, before and after one of it's updates

  21. #45
    Forum Sage
    Itachi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Winterfell
    PSN ID
    iwinulose042
    Age
    21
    Posts
    8,347
    Rep Power
    85
    Points
    31,925 (151,503 Banked)
    Items Final Fantasy XIII-2Final Fantasy XIIIFull Metal AlchemistDragon Ball ZNarutoDeath NoteNaughty DogLightningNoctisAssassins Creed EzioPS3 Slim
    Quote Originally Posted by Yungstar 2006 View Post
    I'm sure someone said that pic was Xbox, before and after one of it's updates
    no its before and after the ps4 patch. 900p vs 1080p

  22. #46
    Superior Member

    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    967
    Rep Power
    11
    Points
    14,222 (0 Banked)
    Quote Originally Posted by Yungstar 2006 View Post
    I'm sure someone said that pic was Xbox, before and after one of it's updates
    Yup. And that post was from 3 weeks ago before I realized.


    However, I found something thats confirmed for PS4 vx X1



  23. #47
    Elite Sage
    Sub-stance1's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    10,343
    Rep Power
    80
    Points
    65,541 (0 Banked)
    Items BarcelonaPS3 Slim360 Slim
    Achievements IT'S OVER 9000!
    Quote Originally Posted by AttackTitan View Post
    Yup. And that post was from 3 weeks ago before I realized.


    However, I found something thats confirmed for PS4 vx X1


    Falling for the okie-doke again...lol

  24. #48
    Superior Member

    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    967
    Rep Power
    11
    Points
    14,222 (0 Banked)
    Quote Originally Posted by Sub-stance1 View Post
    Falling for the okie-doke again...lol
    You mean you? Comes from IGN and marked PS4 and X1 so no confusion. lol

  25. #49
    Elite Sage
    Sub-stance1's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    10,343
    Rep Power
    80
    Points
    65,541 (0 Banked)
    Items BarcelonaPS3 Slim360 Slim
    Achievements IT'S OVER 9000!
    Quote Originally Posted by AttackTitan View Post
    You mean you? Comes from IGN and marked PS4 and X1 so no confusion. lol
    That's a gif, dude. How many times you gonna fall for that? Why would you use that when you could just watch video comparisons? Anyone can see that is bullocks.

  26. #50
    Superior Member

    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    967
    Rep Power
    11
    Points
    14,222 (0 Banked)
    Quote Originally Posted by Sub-stance1 View Post
    That's a gif, dude. How many times you gonna fall for that? Why would you use that when you could just watch video comparisons? Anyone can see that is bullocks.
    LOL. Do you honestly think that compressed video comparison is accurate? Are you kidding? Thats like saying youtube 1080P is same as bluray 1080P.

    You fell for your own okie-doke.

    The gif is accurate. Far more accurate than compressed youtube video. In this case, it literally is just two screenshots switching back and forth.

    You have a habit of convincing yourself with things you want to believe. Not what is true.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
vBCredits II Deluxe v2.1.0 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2010-2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.