First party ftw

Yuuichi

Miqo'te Bard
Oct 25, 2009
8,118
73
0
#1
If this 900p/30 fps crap keeps happening it is going to make first party give these "level the field" third party devs the finger because first ac, now dragonage. Don't get me wrong I realize not every game can be 60fps but we know for a fact the ps4 is capable of beautiful games at 1080p 60 fps but devs choosing not to. Yes order 1886 is 30 fps, but it'll be 1080p.
 

YoungMullah88

PSU Live Streamer
Sep 15, 2006
15,249
65
0
Charlotte
www.playfire.com
#2
Yup I've said it from the beginning of this gen, 85% of my purchase will be first party titles. The only ones I don't have are knack, killzone and MLB. The rest I've bought and I'll keep. This is music to my ears.


All Sony first party games have been 1080p killzone used some trickery but it achieved it
 

BBK..

Master Sage
Oct 19, 2008
12,515
122
0
30
In the 36 Chambers
#3
Leave it to the first party to eek out every bit of performance. It's always been the way. When PD, GG, SMS and ND release their gameso you'll then see the PS4 stretch it's legs.

Though if I'm being pedantic, the order isn't proper 1080 is it.
 

YoungMullah88

PSU Live Streamer
Sep 15, 2006
15,249
65
0
Charlotte
www.playfire.com
#4
[QUOTE="BBK.., post: 6387907]Leave it to the first party to eek out every bit of performance. It's always been the way. When PD, GG, SMS and ND release their gameso you'll then see the PS4 stretch it's legs.

Though if I'm being pedantic, the order isn't proper 1080 is it.[/QUOTE]
Ready at dawn went for the "filmic" Cinematic look lol, its still 1080p...Can't wait for ubi to go down to 24fps
 

Duffman

Selected Members Council
Staff member
Oct 14, 2013
14,672
37
48
Chillin by the poo!!
#6
Gotta love first party exclusives, none of this parity shit!!

Should be up to the third party developers to make their games run and good as the console would allow and not worry about upsetting everyone else just because it looks better or runs faster! Why should the PS4 suffer just because the Xbox One is harder to run 1080p games with, if the fan boys don't like it buy the better console!
 

MjW

Forum Sage
Oct 30, 2006
7,873
64
48
#7
[QUOTE="BBK.., post: 6387935]1920x800 isn't 1080p. It'll have correct pixel mapping though so that's good enough.[/QUOTE]
It is considered 1080p even though technically it isn't. Same as all BluRay movies, they are considered 1080p while technically they aren't.

I get movies having black bars since they are made for the cinema and then ported to BluRay for our not-so-wide HDTVs.

But a game made originally for common HDTVs, having black bars? I don't know. I haven't played the game yet but to me it just looks like someone at Ready at Dawn had a ingenious idea on how to save on pixels and call it art.

I'm still getting the game though. But I'm not getting a Phillips Ultra Wide HDTV to skip the black bars. :p
 
Aug 26, 2014
32
3
8
#8
I will be very selective on 3rd party titles if this becomes the norm. I think the best way for consumers to vote is with their wallets. If developers want to go the parity route, then they should be satisfied with the XB1 installed base to support them.
I just want Sony to get project morpheus out.
 

BBK..

Master Sage
Oct 19, 2008
12,515
122
0
30
In the 36 Chambers
#9
[QUOTE="MjW, post: 6387948]It is considered 1080p even though technically it isn't. Same as all BluRay movies, they are considered 1080p while technically they aren't.

I get movies having black bars since they are made for the cinema and then ported to BluRay for our not-so-wide HDTVs.

But a game made originally for common HDTVs, having black bars? I don't know. I haven't played the game yet but to me it just looks like someone at Ready at Dawn had a ingenious idea on how to save on pixels and call it art.

I'm still getting the game though. But I'm not getting a Phillips Ultra Wide HDTV to skip the black bars. :p[/QUOTE]

Just seems a bit of a cop out missing 320 of each side especially seeing as it isn't actually rendering 1080 pixels. Still a very intriguing game though
 

Omar

Forum Overseer
May 29, 2005
34,262
181
0
37
Addison, TX.
#12
order is not 1080p. i'm not sure what mjw is speaking of. and maybe it's true for movies but i'm saying, if a game isn't 1920x1080, it's not 1080p.

and we should not expect 60fps from first party. they are likely going to stay with 30fps.
 

Christopher

Community and Technical Manager
Staff member
Jun 1, 2007
11,955
107
63
49
Newnan, GA
#14
[QUOTE="Omar, post: 6387978]order is not 1080p. i'm not sure what mjw is speaking of. and maybe it's true for movies but i'm saying, if a game isn't 1920x1080, it's not 1080p.

and we should not expect 60fps from first party. they are likely going to stay with 30fps.[/QUOTE]

1080p is just marketing as far as I know. It confused me when I first starting seeing 720p and 1080p years back cuz resolution is a grid, not a line.
 

Omar

Forum Overseer
May 29, 2005
34,262
181
0
37
Addison, TX.
#15
[QUOTE="YoungMullah88, post: 6387980]You love to go opposite of everything don't you? His explanation is spot on, the game renders the images in 1920x1080 they just elected to add the bars to give the game a cinematic look. You can try to argue this all you want but it will not be with me

http://tay.kotaku.com/why-the-order-1886-is-1080p-and-not-800p-1518902908[/QUOTE]
that's because you don't know that it's just an 1080p aspect ratio, it's not actually delivering 1080p pixels. BF3 did the same thing, they removed a few lines from the game's resolution in order to secure some resources. but it was still seen as 720p...we didn't notice the bars on that one.

to make it simpler, they are saving resources by not showing the extra pixels, it's not as if those pixels are "hidden" but still being processed...they're actually not there.
[QUOTE="Christopher, post: 6387985]1080p is just marketing as far as I know. It confused me when I first starting seeing 720p and 1080p years back cuz resolution is a grid, not a line.[/QUOTE]

i'm not understanding you.
 
Last edited:

Christopher

Community and Technical Manager
Staff member
Jun 1, 2007
11,955
107
63
49
Newnan, GA
#16
[QUOTE="Omar, post: 6387987]that's because you don't know that it's just an 1080p aspect ration, it's not actually delivering 1080p pixels. BF3 did the same thing, they removed a few lines from the game's resolution in order to secure some resources. but it was still seen as 720p...we didn't notice the bars on that one.

to make it simpler, they are saving resources by not showing the extra pixels, it's not as if those pixels are "hidden" but still being processed...they're actually not there.


i'm not understanding you.[/QUOTE]

1920x1080 is the full grid of 1080p at 16:9 aspect ratio. The term 1080p always seemed odd to be since it leaves off the vertical lines. Finally just decided it must be a marketing strategy to simplify the resolution of a TV. Otherwise, the aspect ratio is just assumed to be 16:9, but technically any resolution of XXXX-1080 progressive could be called 1080p, correct?
 

Omar

Forum Overseer
May 29, 2005
34,262
181
0
37
Addison, TX.
#17
[QUOTE="Christopher, post: 6387989]1920x1080 is the full grid of 1080p at 16:9 aspect ratio. The term 1080p always seemed odd to be since it leaves off the vertical lines. Finally just decided it must be a marketing strategy to simplify the resolution of a TV. Otherwise, the aspect ratio is just assumed to be 16:9, but technically any resolution of XXXX-1080 progressive could be called 1080p, correct?[/QUOTE]yeah, mynd brought this up a while back and it’s true that 16:9 is not even the aspect ratio of a TV. So unless you change your image to be stretched, you’re not seeing the entire details. I always knew about the stretch feature so I just used it anyway, what I didn’t know is that this was the only way to get proper 1080p resolution.
And you’re likely correct about the marketing part and I don’t get myself how they decide these resolutions to be the next ones. The last part...i believe you’re right, when it’s the other way around where e.g. 800p doesn’t describe the whole scenario, developers will be vocal about it. because they don’t want us to think that 800p is less than 900p because it’s not. Though you have someone like GG who lied about 1080p in multiplayer and called it 1080p even though it was actually 960 x 1080p.
 

Bitbydeath

Power Member
Sep 10, 2005
15,185
114
0
37
#18
[QUOTE="Omar, post: 6387978]order is not 1080p. i'm not sure what mjw is speaking of. and maybe it's true for movies but i'm saying, if a game isn't 1920x1080, it's not 1080p.

and we should not expect 60fps from first party. they are likely going to stay with 30fps.[/QUOTE]

While it is not exactly 1080p the pixel density will be the same as 1080p. So it will look 1080p just with black bars. The problem with 900p and 720p etc is larger pixels so the overall image isn't as clean/detailed, you won't have that problem with the Order.
 

daLa

Veteran
May 22, 2006
4,779
21
0
www.myspace.com
#19
I understand if they can't make 60fps but not been able to achieve 1080p on res, it's unbelievable. At this rate it'll take at least 3 more console generations in order for them to make 4k games.
 

mynd

Ultimate Veteran
May 3, 2006
20,865
182
63
47
Down Under
#20
[QUOTE="Yuuichi, post: 6387974]DaI has been debunked[/QUOTE]

So should your statement about 60fps.
There isn't even a 1st party game running at 60 fps.

[QUOTE="Omar, post: 6387978]
and we should not expect 60fps from first party. they are likely going to stay with 30fps.[/QUOTE]

Yup.
 

Omar

Forum Overseer
May 29, 2005
34,262
181
0
37
Addison, TX.
#21
[QUOTE="Bitbydeath, post: 6387996]While it is not exactly 1080p the pixel density will be the same as 1080p. So it will look 1080p just with black bars. The problem with 900p and 720p etc is larger pixels so the overall image isn't as clean/detailed, you won't have that problem with the Order.[/QUOTE]

yeah, like they're not scaling the image so it's in its purest form. but it's still not 1080p because for that, you'd have to have the amount of pixels that are = 1920 x 1080.

so if you want to call it 1080p (even though it's not), you'd have to specify that it's not 1080p but a 1080p 1:1 aspect ratio w/1920x800 pixels.
 

YoungMullah88

PSU Live Streamer
Sep 15, 2006
15,249
65
0
Charlotte
www.playfire.com
#22
[QUOTE="mynd, post: 6388000]So should your statement about 60fps.
There isn't even a 1st party game running at 60 fps.



Yup.[/QUOTE]
MLB runs at 60...why does everybody forget baseball? Infamous runs at 60 (Yes it deeps, but it's 60), the last of us? You guessed it, 60
 

mynd

Ultimate Veteran
May 3, 2006
20,865
182
63
47
Down Under
#23
[QUOTE="YoungMullah88, post: 6388013]MLB runs at 60...why does everybody forget baseball? Infamous runs at 60 (Yes it deeps, but it's 60), the last of us? You guessed it, 60[/QUOTE]

Your right, I'll rephrase that NO PS4 exclusives run at 60fps. Fuck cross-gen, plenty of cross gen runs at 60fps.
And you're wrong about infamous BTW it averages 35fps.
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2014-vs-infamous-second-son
 

BBK..

Master Sage
Oct 19, 2008
12,515
122
0
30
In the 36 Chambers
#24
[QUOTE="Omar, post: 6388003]yeah, like they're not scaling the image so it's in its purest form. but it's still not 1080p because for that, you'd have to have the amount of pixels that are = 1920 x 1080.

so if you want to call it 1080p (even though it's not), you'd have to specify that it's not 1080p but a 1080p 1:1 aspect ratio w/1920x800 pixels.[/QUOTE]

Bingo.
 

Bitbydeath

Power Member
Sep 10, 2005
15,185
114
0
37
#28
[QUOTE="Omar, post: 6388003]yeah, like they're not scaling the image so it's in its purest form. but it's still not 1080p because for that, you'd have to have the amount of pixels that are = 1920 x 1080.

so if you want to call it 1080p (even though it's not), you'd have to specify that it's not 1080p but a 1080p 1:1 aspect ratio w/1920x800 pixels.[/QUOTE]
And then it just gets complicated. Given the density of pixels makes it more 1080p than anything else or we make up a new term like blu-ray quality.
 

mynd

Ultimate Veteran
May 3, 2006
20,865
182
63
47
Down Under
#29
It will display on a 1080p TV in native 1080p format.
The image just isn't rendering 1080p.

In that sense you can say its displaying a native 1080p output, regardless of what the image is being rendered.
So native 1080p is correct.
 

Sajuuk Khar

Dedicated Member
May 26, 2005
1,375
4
0
31
#30
[QUOTE="Bitbydeath, post: 6388588]And then it just gets complicated. Given the density of pixels makes it more 1080p than anything else or we make up a new term like blu-ray quality.[/QUOTE]

Exactly, Blu-rays are considered 1080p even though the ratios can vary from show to show. If there is enough of a performance gain I'd prefer games to go 1920x800 before 1600x900 and then be scaled to fit the monitor. Having that 1:1 pixel match provides a much clearer picture.