Jump to content



Photo

DriveClub running at 30fps @ 1080p

no time of release yet.

  • Please log in to reply
82 replies to this topic

#46 HawkMan

HawkMan

    Neowinian Senior

  • Tech Issues Solved: 4
  • Joined: 31-August 04
  • Location: Norway
  • Phone: Noka Lumia 1020

Posted 29 October 2013 - 16:49

Consoles will never match the graphics power of the PC and that is ok because we have PC's for that. Consoles are for casual gamers

 

You could build a computer that does 1080p 60fps for around 800 and that greatly depends on the game and how well it is optimized for the graphics card you chose. Still a lot more than these consoles cost.

 

Why are console players casual players? because they don't buy super expensive gaming rigs with double dual gpu graphics cards and 1600W power supplies, multiple SSD's and the latest i7(despite the fact no games for the foreseeable future would be able to max out a i5 anyway).

 

playing on a console isn't a measure on whether someone is a casual gamer or not. 




#47 +Lingwo

Lingwo

    Neowinian Senior

  • Tech Issues Solved: 1
  • Joined: 22-April 03
  • Location: UK

Posted 29 October 2013 - 16:55

The game will be good though and the gameplay will be fun?

That's all that matters though, right?



#48 Lord Method Man

Lord Method Man

    Banned

  • Tech Issues Solved: 1
  • Joined: 18-September 12

Posted 29 October 2013 - 16:57

The game will be good though and the gameplay will be fun?

That's all that matters though, right?

 

Yes, which is why the SNES still has more entertainment value than any console released this century.



#49 firey

firey

    F͎̗͉͎͈͑͡ȉ͎̣̐́ṙ͖̺͕͙̓̌è̤̞͉̟̲͇̍̍̾̓ͥͅy͓̍̎̌̏̒

  • Tech Issues Solved: 8
  • Joined: 30-October 05
  • Location: Alberta, Canada
  • OS: Windows 7
  • Phone: Android (4.4.2)

Posted 29 October 2013 - 17:19

Yes, which is why the SNES still has more entertainment value than any console released this century.

I dunno man.   Yea the SNES had some fun games.. but I'd rather play MGS on PS1 than on SNES.. yea "retro" is fun.. but I would much rather play Drive Club than Nascar '94.



#50 firey

firey

    F͎̗͉͎͈͑͡ȉ͎̣̐́ṙ͖̺͕͙̓̌è̤̞͉̟̲͇̍̍̾̓ͥͅy͓̍̎̌̏̒

  • Tech Issues Solved: 8
  • Joined: 30-October 05
  • Location: Alberta, Canada
  • OS: Windows 7
  • Phone: Android (4.4.2)

Posted 29 October 2013 - 17:20

Why are console players casual players? because they don't buy super expensive gaming rigs with double dual gpu graphics cards and 1600W power supplies, multiple SSD's and the latest i7(despite the fact no games for the foreseeable future would be able to max out a i5 anyway).

 

playing on a console isn't a measure on whether someone is a casual gamer or not. 

I don't always agree with you.. but on this post I have to. 

Infact I see "Console Gamers" more hardcore than those that stick with PC.  Because I can guarantee that most console gamers ALSO play PC games.    Which means they are embracing gaming overall.



#51 JonnyLH

JonnyLH

    I say things.

  • Joined: 15-February 13
  • Location: UK
  • OS: W8, W7, WP8, iOS, Ubuntu
  • Phone: Nokia Lumia 920

Posted 29 October 2013 - 17:21

Because in this day and age it shouldve been a no brainer. There's nothing "high" about expecting 1080p60.

I think people's expectations are high because it is new hardware that should be able to do 1080p at 60fps really easily.  My (almost) 5-year old graphics card can do that.

With the graphics fideltiy of games like DC, Ryse and KZ? Come back to me with how munch you spend on a PC which can replicate that.

 

Don't focus on the numbers.

 

Look at CoD2 on the 360 and then picture games from the end of this generation (GTA 5, Batman AC).

http://s.thewiiu.com...-1-original.jpg

 

When you're coding to the metal on an unfamiliar platforms there's just so much more time and effort into getting things working smoothly. With us on the verge of seeing constant 1080p 60fps titles with the exception of the rushed to platform multi-plats, I really feel like there's nothing for us to worry about.



#52 xplatinum

xplatinum

    Neowinian Senior

  • Joined: 17-July 02

Posted 03 November 2013 - 15:21

I am a PC gamer and i pick reduced gfx quality over reduced resolution any day. And that's what all PC gamers i know do. They reduce the gfx quality a bit (usually shadows and such) and keep the higher res.

Well yeah, if we go into finer details such as shadow quality. I will definately lower minor details that vastly improve performance before touching 1080p.



#53 Secular Humanist

Secular Humanist

    Neowinian Senior

  • Joined: 17-June 09

Posted 03 November 2013 - 15:38

do you think you can really tell much of a difference between 720 and 1080... if someone booted up a game, and you were asked "is this 720 or 1080?" i bet almost 100% of people wouldn't know. programming and coding matter too.



#54 LaP

LaP

    Forget about it

  • Tech Issues Solved: 4
  • Joined: 10-July 06
  • Location: Quebec City, Canada
  • OS: Windows 8.1 Pro Update 1

Posted 03 November 2013 - 15:44

do you think you can really tell much of a difference between 720 and 1080... if someone booted up a game, and you were asked "is this 720 or 1080?" i bet almost 100% of people wouldn't know. programming and coding matter too.


You can yes if the display is native 1080p. I'm speechless that some people question that.

Of course 720p will look perfectly fine on a 32" native 720p TV. It will look pretty much as good as 1080p on a 50"+ native 1080p TV. But people who think that you wont see any difference between 720p and 1080p on a 50"+ native 1080p TV don't know what they are talking about.

Of course if they have to reduce the gfx too much to attain 1080p then it will look bad. But that's beside the point. If current gen can't do 1080p with a good gfx quality it will be extremely disappointing to people having a big 1080p screen.

#55 Roger H.

Roger H.

    Neowinian Senior

  • Tech Issues Solved: 22
  • Joined: 18-August 01
  • Location: Germany
  • OS: Windows 8.1
  • Phone: Nexus 5

Posted 03 November 2013 - 15:55

You can yes if the display is native 1080p. I'm speechless that some people question that.

Of course 720p will look perfectly fine on a 32" native 720p TV. It will look as good as 1080p on a 50"+ native 1080p TV. But people who think that you wont see any difference between 720p and 1080p on a 50"+ native 1080p TV don't know what they are talking about.

Of course if they have to reduce the gfx too much to attain 1080p then it will look bad. But that's beside the point. If current gen can't do 1080p with a good gfx quality it will be extremely disappointing to people having a big 1080p screen.


You are thinking of a monitor's resolution, not scaled resolution which is different. The output will still be in 1080p to match the monitors native resolution. What he was trying to say is if you rendered the game in 720 vs 1080 and then upscaled it to 1080p, 90% of people would never know the difference. You are talking about a monitor at non-native resolution because it's being fed to the monitor that way.

Watching 720p on a 1080P TV doesn't make much of a difference either as the TV will upscale it to match it's native resolution either way. I hook up my MicroServer to my TV via VGA and even at 1024 x 768 everything looks crisp just the same. Changing it to 1366 x 768 looks just as crisp.

Yuu are comparing non-native display resolution vs content resolution which are 2 different things. 720p content on a 1080p monitor upscaled to 1080p wont look any better or worse than if that monitor was also in 720p mode and being displayed natively.

#56 LaP

LaP

    Forget about it

  • Tech Issues Solved: 4
  • Joined: 10-July 06
  • Location: Quebec City, Canada
  • OS: Windows 8.1 Pro Update 1

Posted 03 November 2013 - 16:05

You are thinking of a monitor's resolution, not scaled resolution which is different. The output will still be in 1080p to match the monitors native resolution. What he was trying to say is if you rendered the game in 720 vs 1080 and then upscaled it to 1080p, 90% of people would never know the difference. You are talking about a monitor at non-native resolution because it's being fed to the monitor that way.


I'm still speechless that you guys think the upscaler can make the gfx looks as good as if it were real 1080p.

Joe Blow might not see the difference but it doesn't mean there wont be any difference. The gfx will be blurrier. Not as much as the 360 games running at 540p like GoW but it will still have that kind of blurry look to it when you'll compare it to PC games running at true 1080p. I play some of my PC games on my TV at 1080p using a 360 controller and i can tell you it's day and night when it comes to the clarity of the image.

#57 Enron

Enron

    Windows for Workgroups

  • Tech Issues Solved: 1
  • Joined: 30-May 11
  • OS: Windows 8.1 U1
  • Phone: Nokia Lumia 900

Posted 03 November 2013 - 16:15

This thread reminds me of the huge Internet debates back when the Super Nintendo came out and only did 240p.



#58 Secular Humanist

Secular Humanist

    Neowinian Senior

  • Joined: 17-June 09

Posted 03 November 2013 - 16:24

I'm still speechless that you guys think the upscaler can make the gfx looks as good as if it were real 1080p.

Joe Blow might not see the difference but it doesn't mean there wont be any difference. The gfx will be blurrier. Not as much as the 360 games running at 540p like GoW but it will still have that kind of blurry look to it when you'll compare it to PC games running at true 1080p. I play some of my PC games on my TV at 1080p using a 360 controller and i can tell you it's day and night when it comes to the clarity of the image.

if i lived close you, I would set up a test for you to see what we mean... i would bet money that you couldn't tell which was which. You are also adding confusion to the logic based on going from a PC to TV. If it was apples to apples you just likely could not know one from the other as with most people.



#59 LaP

LaP

    Forget about it

  • Tech Issues Solved: 4
  • Joined: 10-July 06
  • Location: Quebec City, Canada
  • OS: Windows 8.1 Pro Update 1

Posted 03 November 2013 - 16:31

if i lived close you, I would set up a test for you to see what we mean... i would bet money that you couldn't tell which was which. You are also adding confusion to the logic based on going from a PC to TV. If it was apples to apples you just likely could not know one from the other as with most people.


So are you saying that all PC gamers are wrong to spend money on GPUs. They should just buy a cheap gpu and run their games at low res and upscale them.

You just saved millions of people hundred of $ congrats.

Anyway i'm done with this. It's a waste of words. Enjoy your 720p while i'll continue to play PC games and probably not even care about next gen if they can't do 1080p properly. My 500$ will be better spent on a new gpu next year.

#60 Secular Humanist

Secular Humanist

    Neowinian Senior

  • Joined: 17-June 09

Posted 03 November 2013 - 16:36

So are you saying that all PC gamers are wrong to spend money on GPUs. They should just buy a cheap gpu and run their games at low res and upscale them.

You just saved millions of people hundred of $ congrats.

really? I bet you also think becasue a camera says 14 megapixels its better then an 12 meagpixel one.... or how about my P4 3.6 GHz is faster then your i3 2.4ghz... MORE COREZ!!! MOREZ GIGAPIXELS!!! 

 

if you really assumed that what you said to be accurate, there is no further reason for me to try to explain.