Xbox One exclusive Ryse runs at 900p


Recommended Posts

 

Microsoft has revealed that Xbox One launch title Ryse is not running at native 1080p.

 

Aaron Greenberg, chief of staff for the Devices and Studios Group, tweeted that the game will actually be running at "900p". Greenberg confirmed 1080p rendering for showpiece title Forza Motorsport 5, but it's already known that Killer Instinct - somewhat surprisingly - has targeted an internal 720p rendering resolution.

 

Source: http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-ryse-runs-at-900p

 

Sub-1080p AND most likely 30fps. My my, I wonder where all that magical hidden power the xbone is supposed to have went.

Source: http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-ryse-runs-at-900p

 

Sub-1080p AND most likely 30fps. My my, I wonder where all that magical hidden power the xbone is supposed to have went.

I think you'll find it's more a question of optimisation..

 

I'd love to see how the PS4 is doing in these things too.

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".

Source: http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-ryse-runs-at-900p

 

Sub-1080p AND most likely 30fps. My my, I wonder where all that magical hidden power the xbone is supposed to have went.

 

 

Would anyone really notice sub 1080p without looking for it, or being told???

 

Nobody knew Killzone was under 1080p (at one point in development) until we were told by GG...

 

And anyone playing on a screen under 40" probably won't be to tell either way...

I wonder where all that magical hidden power the xbone is supposed to have went.

 

We'll we'll another 'classic' and 'comical' call of Xbox one to Xbone and bringing up the power and comparisons on un-released consoles. We don't have enough of these threads..

I like how you nitpick things and also jump to conclusions.  The reason you drop the res is to keep the framerate from dipping,  smooth gameplay is the end goal here and I bet the target is 60fps.    They also say that development time is on the short side so hitting the 1080p@60fps target that forza managed to do will take more time for some.

Would anyone really notice sub 1080p without looking for it, or being told???

 

Nobody knew Killzone was under 1080p (at one point in development) until we were told by GG...

 

And anyone playing on a screen under 40" probably won't be to tell either way...

 

Upscaling comes at a cost to image quality. Depending on how far below 1080p a game is on a 1080p display, yes, you can easily notice it being sub-1080p without being told.

  • Like 2

Upscaling comes at a cost to image quality. Depending on how far below 1080p a game is on a 1080p display, yes, you can easily notice it being sub-1080p without being told.

Exactly. Just set your resolution on your PC bellow the native one of your monitor and see how ###### everything suddenly looks.
  • Like 3

Would anyone really notice sub 1080p without looking for it, or being told???

 

Nobody knew Killzone was under 1080p (at one point in development) until we were told by GG...

 

And anyone playing on a screen under 40" probably won't be to tell either way...

 

Blurring.

Exactly. Just set your resolution on your PC bellow the native one of your monitor and see how ****ty everything suddenly looks.

Except that that changes the output, not the generated frames. It makes it look much worse..

 

With certain mathematical techniques you can upscale from 900 and have it indistinguishable from 1080 in real time.

 

720 to 1080 is noticeable, anything above that is less so.

I like how you nitpick things and also jump to conclusions.  The reason you drop the res is to keep the framerate from dipping,  smooth gameplay is the end goal here and I bet the target is 60fps.    They also say that development time is on the short side so hitting the 1080p@60fps target that forza managed to do will take more time for some.

Not to mention the budget between a F2P and AAA title is probably very different.

Not to mention the budget between a F2P and AAA title is probably very different.

And Forza is being made by an MS studio.. Might have a bit of optimisation help there ;)

 

Kinda pointless this thread is, but 7/10 troll bait. Would crash again.

I like how you nitpick things and also jump to conclusions.  The reason you drop the res is to keep the framerate from dipping,  smooth gameplay is the end goal here and I bet the target is 60fps.    They also say that development time is on the short side so hitting the 1080p@60fps target that forza managed to do will take more time for some.

 

Have they actually mentioned if they're targeting 60fps? I think it would be better to assume 30fps unless otherwise stated.

Ryse has always looked good in the videos in my opinion. I was always more worried about the gameplay. (or lack there of)

 

I personally don't know what 900p looks like in person, so maybe it's a good comprise if it means a smooth 60fps. Though, it's troubling that the studio officially stated what the resolution was but not the frame rate.

Troubling is finding blood in your stool.

 

Not releasing frame rate info is a curiosity at best..

It's troubling because this was an official statement that quoted only half of the important performance stats. if the game was running smoothly at 60fps or even 30fps, don't you think they would have included that in this statement? I'm not saying the game isn't running at those rates, but it just seems like a silly thing to NOT say if it were.

And Forza is being made by an MS studio.. Might have a bit of optimisation help there ;)

 

Kinda pointless this thread is, but 7/10 troll bait. Would crash again.

I can understand why some people would want to know this sort of thing. For me I've never paid attention to the "this game runs at XYZ" on the back of boxes, I don't need text to tell me if a game looks good or not, I use my eyes for that.

 

I would have had a lot more respect if it wasn't for the obvious bait, the amount of "debates" that go on in here put me off coming into the gaming section which is a shame because it was the main reason I would come to Neowin at first. I force myself not to get involved in threads because it just isn't worth it.

I don't remember launch titles for the X360 or PS3 having to drop their resolution to get acceptable framerates. It was only later that games like GTAIV, COD:MW and Halo 3 had to drop the resolution to maintain performance. If Valve pushes ahead with the Steam Box we may see PC-based gaming systems significantly outperforming "next generation" consoles within a few years. This might be the last generation of closed-platform consoles.

I don't remember launch titles for the X360 or PS3 having to drop their resolution to get acceptable framerates. It was only later that games like GTAIV, COD:MW and Halo 3 had to drop the resolution to maintain performance. If Valve pushes ahead with the Steam Box we may see PC-based gaming systems significantly outperforming "next generation" consoles within a few years. This might be the last generation of closed-platform consoles.

PCs already significantly outperform these consoles..

 

Admittedly they cost more, but they kick the pants off of the coming gen.

I don't remember launch titles for the X360 or PS3 having to drop their resolution to get acceptable framerates. It was only later that games like GTAIV, COD:MW and Halo 3 had to drop the resolution to maintain performance. If Valve pushes ahead with the Steam Box we may see PC-based gaming systems significantly outperforming "next generation" consoles within a few years. This might be the last generation of closed-platform consoles.

 

The launch titles, a few that the OP article linked to names released under the 720p system requirement.  I mean, it's early days with new systems and the hardware wasn't locked down or drivers till late into it.   The article also compared 900p to 1080p and the difference is minor, maybe if it was 720p it'd be more of an issue.   And why 900?  less scaling needed that way?

At the moment 720P is fine for games unless your using a 22" screen or above. I play on a 19" 1366x768 screen, it is only a pixel destiny of 82 and as far as I'm concerned a pixel density of 72 is fine for images, above that only visibly improves text.

 

I hope the new consoles display 720P well, not sure what effect down scaling will have.

The launch titles, a few that the OP article linked to names released under the 720p system requirement.  I mean, it's early days with new systems and the hardware wasn't locked down or drivers till late into it.   The article also compared 900p to 1080p and the difference is minor, maybe if it was 720p it'd be more of an issue.

Well, Battlefield 4 will only run at 720p so that's a pretty major resolution drop. We're not seeing the same consistency as the current generation. Gamers simply won't know what resolution or framerate a game will run at without doing research beforehand.

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

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Valve finally confirms Steam Machine prices, starts at $1049 for 512GB option by Pulasthi Ariyasinghe The $1,428 option The Steam Hardware lineup that Valve announced last year is slowly starting to roll out. Following the recent Steam Controller launch, Valve has now confirmed the price of the Steam Machine, its all-in-one console-like solution for PC gaming in the living room. There are currently four variants being presented, with only the storage and the included controller being the biggest differences. All of the Steam Machines have the same internals consisting of a semi-custom AMD Zen 4 CPU with six cores and 12 threads, an RDNA 3 28CU GPU, 16GB of DDR5 memory, and 8GB of GDDR6 VRAM, all inside the familiar box Valve has been showing off for months now. The Steam Machine base model starts at $1,049. This has a 512GB NVMe SSD but does not come with a Steam Controller. Keep in mind that storage can be expanded with the microSD card slot too. Next, the $1,128 model has the exact same storage as the previous one but it does come with the new Steam Controller. If you need the Steam Machine to have more storage for games and apps than that, then the 2TB tiers are also available. The $1,349 Steam Machine has no controller once again, but it does ship with two extra faceplates (red fabric and solid walnut) to replace the standard black one. The final option costs $1,428, and it adds the controller back into the bundle. The Steam Machine ships with the Linux-based SteamOS. The box has a 1 Gigabit Ethernet port, DisplayPort 1.4, and HDMI 2.0, as well as one USB-C and four USB-A ports. Keep in mind that when purchasing standalone, the Steam Controller has a $100 price tag. With the above bundles, that drops to $80. It's a rather expensive machine for the internals it is touting, though the design and small form factor do help it somewhat. However, at the same time, the lack of upgradability hurts it. Valve says the ongoing parts shortages and massive price hikes for memory were the leading causes for this price. "The overall effect is that our original goal for the price of Steam Machine is no longer viable," added the company. "So the prices we're sharing today reflect the state of the world for manufacturing; or, more accurately, it reflects the price of the components as we've secured them over the past 6 months." Valve wants interested gamers to reserve it now to get the chance to pre-order a Steam Machine starting June 25, with shipping starting on June 29. Head here to sign up. The invites to buy it will be sent in a randomized order.
    • What the press release doesn’t mention, however, is how much water the natural gas plant itself will consume, Natural gas plants use about 2,803 gallons of water per megawatt-hour produced, which is significantly less than coal-fired plants that use around 19,185 gallons per megawatt-hour. Overall, natural gas plants are more water-efficient, using 584% less water than traditional power plants on average. AI generated
  • Recent Achievements

    • Dedicated
      tuben earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • Week One Done
      mnsgroup earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Conversation Starter
      sumytbe earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • One Year In
      B4dM1k3 earned a badge
      One Year In
    • One Year In
      DarkWun earned a badge
      One Year In
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      513
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      203
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      97
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      82
    5. 5
      neufuse
      67
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!