Battlefield 4 to run at 720p and 60fps. Cool wit me


Recommended Posts

It does frustrate me somewhat.

 

The last genetration of "HD consoles" ran most games at 640p and upscaled them to 1080p.

 

This generation will presumably run most at 720p and upscale to 1080p

 

Will it take until the next generation of consoles before the majority of games will run natively at 1080p or higher? This would be a long time after the HD specifications were released, and it just seems cheeky to call consoles from as early as 2005 "HD gaming ready".

  • Like 4

Most high end PCs will run it at 1080p. It's rather sad that "next gen" consoles are barely better than the previous gen

With the rate hardware is advancing you're probably right. To me, it's just nonsensical calling something next gen when it's not much better than current gen

  • Like 1

Most high end PCs will run it at 1080p. It's rather sad that "next gen" consoles are barely better than the previous gen

That's the thing, the hardware is much more powerful yet they've only gone from 640p to 720p.

 

I'm sure the games will look better and run smoother, but I'd rather 1080p @ 60 FPS with slightly less detail than 720p @ 60 FPS at full detail - even though I probably wouldn't tell the difference :D

With the rate hardware is advancing you're probably right. To me, it's just nonsensical calling something next gen when it's not much better than current gen

Which is the reason im not in a hurry to buy a next gen console. 

I've always preferred PCs anyway. I brought all this hardware (except the SSD and Monitor) in 2011 and it still runs 1080p at playable framerates

Your 2011 hardware may not run Battlefield 4 at 720p at 60 FPS, we'll have to see when it's out.

Because, for all too many of us, we have no wish to spend the money upgrading everything?

 

All those games that are going to be on the PS4/XB ONE will (for the most part) also be on the current-generation PS3 and/or XB360 - that means, strictly from the console side of things, two different sets of specs.  The developer will likely target the lower set of specs and rely on up-rezzing to make up the difference (which was the case with PS3/XB360).  A LOT of folks will simply skip the upgrade cycle altogether (cost/price).

 

For the PC side, it's a lot easier, and has been for a while; however, the resistance even there has been greater - or have we forgotten Crysis 3 already?  For all those willing to spend money getting the latest/greatest hardware (whether console OR PC) there are lots of others that refuse to move whatsoever.

 

Finally, it's proving out that you don't need a high-end PC (except when it comes to portables) to run BF4 capably; a quad-core CPU (and almost any of them) along with GTX 660 or better/HD7850 or better will do nicely.

That really really blows.     The article only says Playstation,  if Xbox is the same way. I will completely skip it and get it for PC.   I can play BF 3 on ultra currently.  Maybe i'll get a new card.   I have 1080, I want it to play 1080, not upscaled,  native.   

I'd imagine within a year or so we see more 1080p games @ 60fps, launch titles usually start off with the "growing pains" but I'll wait and see what other developers are able to pull off.

  • Like 3

I just have a sneaking suspicion that Sony and Microsoft were in too huge of rush to get their next-gens released that the overall quality won't be as good as it should have been.  And that also is leading to game developers having a tough time getting the performance they were hoping for.

 

I'm kind of expecting some sort of huge flaw (lagging, freezing, overheating, etc) to show it's face when these are released, and for that reason, I think I'm going to hold off on buying a launch day console.

  • Like 3

May I offer a thought - and feel free to dismiss it if it is nonsense, and I will gladly offer that I know little on this:

 

Is 720p upscaled to 1080p being chosen as a "sweet spot" so that is can be downscaled to SD sizes better than downscaling the gaming, interface & text from a 1080 render would be?

May I offer a thought - and feel free to dismiss it if it is nonsense, and I will gladly offer that I know little on this:

 

Is 720p upscaled to 1080p being chosen as a "sweet spot" so that is can be downscaled to SD sizes better than downscaling the gaming, interface & text from a 1080 render would be?

 

They better not be sacrificing anything in these new consoles in order to work with SD. SD is dead and has been for several years. No way can there be a significant customer base left who are going to buy $400-$500 consoles who are still using a 480i display.

They better not be sacrificing anything in these new consoles in order to work with SD. SD is dead and has been for several years. No way can there be a significant customer base left who are going to buy $400-$500 consoles who are still using a 480i display.

Lol

  • Like 1

May I offer a thought - and feel free to dismiss it if it is nonsense, and I will gladly offer that I know little on this:

 

Is 720p upscaled to 1080p being chosen as a "sweet spot" so that is can be downscaled to SD sizes better than downscaling the gaming, interface & text from a 1080 render would be?

I believe they'd have two UI rendering pipelines, one SD and one HD. UI scaling shouldn't be too difficult of a job.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Ummmm that is what is it supposed to do. Just turn if off in settings if you do not want it analyzing your open tabs. Chrome does the same thing with Gemini. Sarfari will do the samething after Apple's AI and even more so with the release of their 27 versions that is now powered by Googles LLM/ML models. Understanding why it is doing it and how it can help you vs jumping to some conspiracy theroy is a much better approach. As long as it can be turned off, all is good. Yes the default should be off but the a lot of people would never discover these features.
    • Just another reason (aside from many others) not to use Edge. Firefox 153.0b5 DEx64 has a similar feature added recently in prior builds that I will turn off at some point when I get around to it. It's the new "Something looks suspicious" page that pops up here and there. It cleverly hides itself between web pages that I've actually visited; as a result, you know, of selecting a web page and telling the browser where to go. The interesting thing is that it does not produce these warnings from pages that I, as the only intelligent user of the browser in my system, have ever directed the browser to open! What seems to be happening is that the browser looks at all the goofy ad links on a web page I do actually open and selects one that "looks suspicious" and then creates the "something looks suspicious" web page, which is neatly inserted, as mentioned, between web pages my RB ("real brain") has directed the browser to load in a session. The thing is, I usually look at links I am considering to follow before I ask the browser to load them, and in cases I have noticed where the link does indeed look suspicious, most of the time I will choose to not follow the link at all. Doesn't everyone do this or something similar? I am picky about what I voluntarily load... (I don't like links that start off fine, with a site designaiton that seems normal enough but then is followed by indecipherable alphanumeric strings many, many lines long, etc. I tend to reject those because they look suspicious. They may not be, but I don't care... I'll stay with Firefox, of course, if for no other reason than they usually let you turn off the junk you don't like. And because it isn't Edge... But at some point Microsoft will come to realize that putting your bookmarks on the left side is a Good Thing for a lot of people, just as Microsoft discovered when it had the bright idea of nailing the Windows taskbar to the bottom of the screen, when for decades Microsoft browsers had left that placement up to the user. They have finally reversed the obscenity of that decision. Finally.
    • Google was using the old CATPCHAs data to train their LLMs. What is the say they won't use this camera data of users to train their LLM? these companies need some strict regulations!
    • Depends on what you need. Might be a bit clearer on what you plan to do with it. Sort of a waste if you get the newest and greatest, but don't know how to use it.
  • Recent Achievements

    • One Year In
      BA the Curmudgeon earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Conversation Starter
      rosiecharles earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • First Post
      KMilenkoski1202 earned a badge
      First Post
    • First Post
      carols23 earned a badge
      First Post
    • One Month Later
      Tom Willson earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      513
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      258
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      151
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      94
    5. 5
      macoman
      66
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!