Athernar Posted September 20, 2013 Share Posted September 20, 2013 Actually there where other third party games who also increased their resolution and/or FPS this gen on subsequent releases. You need to stop thinking in absolutes all the time, I'm sure there are a few cases of the opposite where the nature of the game benefits from one of the two - or maybe the devs could get away with a cheapo rerelease, maybe making significant progress in terms of features was ruled out by a harder limit like RAM. But ultimately, the majority of console titles put perf budgets towards features ahead of FPS/Resolution. It's a clear trend and it makes sense, native resolution isn't a big deal when you're rolling "TV+Couch", and 60fps isn't as rewarding due to the limitations of interfacing with a controller instead of a keyboard and mouse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trooper11 Posted September 20, 2013 Share Posted September 20, 2013 MS and Sony don't pay retail price for the hardware so I think it's feasible to stick something with a retail value of 800-1000$ inside a, let's say 600$ console. What I would have gone for is this. Keep the same basic hardware, but beef up the CPU part of the APU to desktop class and add another dedicated GPU (200-250$ retail value) for crossfire in games that need it. Maybe the tech is a year away (desktop class steamroller APU), the box will be bigger and it would need more cooling, but I say it would have been worth it. I will grant you that you could make an argument that a $600 console with those specs might be worth it, but does that mean it would sell well in the market today? Sony was unable to convince many people to buy a ps3 @ $600. The X1 is pushing it with $500 but at least they are trying to counter that with a pitch about the value of Kinect. I'm just not sure if a $600 console has much of a chance beyond niche status. This discussion reminds me of a couple consoles that came out during the snes/genesis era and then the sega saturn/ps1 days that demanded high prices but did in fact offer a higher end performance. That would be the Neo Geo and 3DO. Both consoles were clearly superior, offering games that could match arcade level quality, but they commanded a price that simply kept them out of the mass market. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonnyLH Posted September 20, 2013 Share Posted September 20, 2013 The probable reason it will of been dropped to 900p is simply business requirements towards frame-rate with tightened budget while a lot of the team members may be moved onto different projects internally. We most definitely will see resolution gains based on the public acceptance of these resolution changes online. It's just annoying, but I'm guessing the Combat Vidoc trailer which was in 1080p was actually rendered in 900p and that looks sublime to be honest. Also Athernar, Halo is the best example of a game which goes from Sub-HD to native 720p this generation. Anyone who bad mouths Forza needs to do more reading up on it considering every Forza game since Forza 3 has had a physics engine which runs at 360FPS. Including Forza 5. For them to push visuals at a locked 60fps also is a big feat. Considering the jump between graphics between Forza 2 and 3, I wouldn't be suprised if we saw something similar in next-gen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kaotic Posted September 29, 2013 Share Posted September 29, 2013 Looks like Ryse is back up to 1080p. Javascript is not enabled or refresh the page to view. Click here to view the Tweet Javascript is not enabled or refresh the page to view. Click here to view the Tweet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackhearted Posted September 29, 2013 Author Share Posted September 29, 2013 The horribly broken english of those tweets doesn't push me to believe in them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrp04 Posted September 29, 2013 Share Posted September 29, 2013 Looks like Ryse is back up to 1080p. Javascript is not enabled or refresh the page to view. Click here to view the Tweet Javascript is not enabled or refresh the page to view. Click here to view the Tweet Good. None of these games should use sub-1080p graphics. It's just pathetic that these new consoles can't guarantee 1080p60. I thought it was a sure thing a year or two ago considering how cheap it is to do on PC. But instead Microsoft makes a $350 console and forces you to buy a $150 camera and Sony releases a $400 console that can STILL not guarantee 1080p60 but is much more likely to do it than XB1. Come on! Lord Method Man 1 Share Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kaotic Posted September 29, 2013 Share Posted September 29, 2013 The horribly broken english of those tweets doesn't push me to believe in them. He's the game director though. I think I'll believe him over anyone else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spaceelf Posted September 29, 2013 Share Posted September 29, 2013 nm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pupik Posted September 29, 2013 Share Posted September 29, 2013 Wonder what happened since earlier he said there were downgrades: http://gearnuke.com/ryse-downgrade-officially-confirmed-crytek-ceo/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vcfan Posted September 29, 2013 Share Posted September 29, 2013 Wonder what happened since earlier he said there were downgrades: http://gearnuke.com/ryse-downgrade-officially-confirmed-crytek-ceo/ i sure love downgrades (the bluriness from the 2nd pic is because it was captured from a streamed video, 1st one is a direct screen shot). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vcfan Posted September 29, 2013 Share Posted September 29, 2013 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dead.cell Posted September 29, 2013 Share Posted September 29, 2013 Who cares how the game actually plays? So long as we can have more triangles!! :woot: Osiris 1 Share Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LaP Posted September 29, 2013 Share Posted September 29, 2013 wtf is the big deal with resolution. I mean wtf happened to gameplay??? Are you living under a rock ? Gfx quality has always been a big deal. This date back to 8bits era. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McKay Posted September 29, 2013 Share Posted September 29, 2013 Phew thank goodness. I can rest in peace at night now knowing that the textures vertical height has increased by 180 pixels. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George P Global Moderator Posted September 29, 2013 Global Moderator Share Posted September 29, 2013 Just one less thing for people to moan about in the end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blerk Posted September 29, 2013 Share Posted September 29, 2013 Well going by dualshocker's two comparison articles, I'm liking the new version over the older ones. The reduced jaggies looks better and I'm a lot keener on the appearance of the metal armor now - looks less like the chrome plastic that Samsung uses on their phones :P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George P Global Moderator Posted September 29, 2013 Global Moderator Share Posted September 29, 2013 Well going by dualshocker's two comparison articles, I'm liking the new version over the older ones. The reduced jaggies looks better and I'm a lot keener on the appearance of the metal armor now - looks less like the chrome plastic that Samsung uses on their phones :p The skin and armor both look more real, how some people can say the old version looks better than the new is laughable to me. People seem to think the higher polygons in a character model the better when that's not how it works in the end, just shows that most gamers have no idea about game development. You can have a lower poly count but make it looks better with better textures and shaders/lighting and so on. kaotic 1 Share Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonnyLH Posted September 29, 2013 Share Posted September 29, 2013 HNNGGGGG. Kudos to Crytek, dropping the polys and upping the shaders was definitely the best artistic decision. Looks stunning. The full HD tweet is vague, but hopefully it is 1080p! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonnyLH Posted September 29, 2013 Share Posted September 29, 2013 The horribly broken english of those tweets doesn't push me to believe in them. Well it is the CEO of Crytek and they're a German company. He has stated "no downgrades" since E3. 1080p confirmed at E3, would mean still 1080p now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spaceelf Posted September 29, 2013 Share Posted September 29, 2013 Well it is the CEO of Crytek and they're a German company. He has stated "no downgrades" since E3. 1080p confirmed at E3, would mean still 1080p now. They are? I thought they were Czech. Huh! Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blerk Posted September 29, 2013 Share Posted September 29, 2013 Nice to see that the next-gen consoles all have a focus on nice teeth. From Riley (Call of Duty Dog) to Ryse, XB1 looks to have some of the nicest teeth of any next-gen console :D :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spenser.d Posted September 29, 2013 Share Posted September 29, 2013 Solid news for those who were concerned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DirtyLarry Veteran Posted September 29, 2013 Veteran Share Posted September 29, 2013 I think it is 900p native. Javascript is not enabled or refresh the page to view. Click here to view the Tweet They apply their upscaler for AA, framebuffer, and native 1080p, which is a very confusing way to put things, as that means it uses an upscaler to achieve native 1080p, which is not native right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonnyLH Posted September 29, 2013 Share Posted September 29, 2013 I think it is 900p native. Javascript is not enabled or refresh the page to view. Click here to view the Tweet They apply their upscaler for AA, framebuffer, and native 1080p, which is a very confusing way to put things, as that means it uses an upscaler to achieve native 1080p, which is not native right? The interesting thing is, is that its been 900p this whole time. No-one has noticed including journalists, media and everyone who's played it. With the framebuffer comment, post-processing effects may be applied after its upscaled which may create a weird hybrid which causes the 1080p look so to speak. Since its been like this since day 1 and the E3 demo was 900p, not bothered, looks intense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M_Lyons10 Posted September 29, 2013 Share Posted September 29, 2013 I would be amazed if many of the launch titles on both XB1 or PS4 run at 60fps/1080. Launch titles are NEVER going to use the full potential of consoles so I don't see this as any surprise. Also, is there any need for the "magical hidden power" part, all you're asking for is yet ANOTHER thread that this forum could do without over who has the biggest e-p***s because they chose the "right console". Agreed. These discussions would be much better if they were a bit less juvenile (And posters in general thought through their posts a little before posting... It's common sense that launch titles aren't optimized to take full advantage of ANY console's feature set or hardware... This has been the case since the beginning of time. LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts