Resistance Fall of Man Downgraded to 720p

[CY:G]

?Native 1080p (versus 720p scaled to 1080p) uses much more VRAM than 720p. When we finished up a few of our bigger levels at the very end of the development process we realized that we would have had to steal VRAM from some of our characters and environments to run in native 1080p. Anyway, we felt it was best to stay at 720p and that, at least while 1080p televisions are still relatively scarce, we should focus on implementing 1080p for our future games.? - Ted Price

http://www.gamecaption.com/2006/10/20/resi...man-downgraded/

[Veedems Veteran]

Most people aren't going to notice a difference anyway. I don't see why it's a big deal.

[-Anthony]

A game that was never 1080p.

[Spartan_X]

oooooooook! :rolleyes:

now that this game is supposed to run at 720p insteed of 1080p are they still using the 22gb of the BD and 300mb per level? :rolleyes: :shifty: :whistle:

I want to hear all the new excuses for this... :p

A game that was never 1080p.

http://www.gamepro.com/news.cfm?article_id=80048 :shifty:

[Sheppard]

The Hi Definition era starts when they say it does eh :p

Most people aren't going to notice a difference anyway. I don't see why it's a big deal.

Because Sony was being childish making up names for resolutions (ie "Full HD" which is very misleading as 720p is also FullHD as is 1080i), because they thought the Xbox 360 couldnt do 1080p native, now they have fallen flat on their ass and i, for one, am very happy, they need to be brought down a peg or two.

Edited October 20, 2006 by Sheppard

[Noveed]

lol, what about those TVs a while back with 1080p True HD written on them, im sure one of them was playing RFOM... another overestimation?

[Ironman273]

lol, what about those TVs a while back with 1080p True HD written on them, im sure one of them was playing RFOM... another overestimation?

Just because the TV says 1080p (which it can do) doesn't mean it won't display lesser resolutions. It's very possible it was running at 720p

Most people aren't going to notice a difference anyway. I don't see why it's a big deal.

I agree, but a lot of people said that 1080p was the only way HiDef should be seen because Sony said so... They made a big deal about it before when they thought the 360 wouldn't have it, so it's a big deal now that the truth comes out. The dirty Sony marketing machine... :no:

[AlphaPrime]

Good. I'd rather have it looking this good at 720p, then looking crap at 1080p like Lair. 1080p should only be for arcade/puzzle games.

[magik]

Oh, what's this? The memory bottlenecks plaguing the PS3 that BrandonLive has outlined several times has finally reared it's ugly head?

Shame on Sony for spewing out nonesense 1080p-this and FullHD-that. :no:

[Ambience]

I guess I'm disappointed in Sony if it was originally touted at 1080p. But since I'm not getting it, I don't mind.

[Noveed]

Just because the TV says 1080p (which it can do) doesn't mean it won't display lesser resolutions. It's very possible it was running at 720p

I agree, but a lot of people said that 1080p was the only way HiDef should be seen because Sony said so... They made a big deal about it before when they thought the 360 wouldn't have it, so it's a big deal now that the truth comes out. The dirty Sony marketing machine... :no:

the reason for putting them lables on was to show that the game was running in 1080p, Sony were showcasing thier ps3s at the time and not thier TVs...

[Brandon Live Veteran]

I doubt the 256MB of VRAM was really the limitation they ran into. They're just trying to simplify things since it's a lot more complicated to explain that the PS3 lacks anywhere near enough memory bandwidth to do 1080p in any real-world scenarios. The RSX has the same memory bandwidth as a Geforce 6800 (and not a GT or Ultra). The hardware was simply never designed to be used at the resolution (whereas the 360 with its eDRAM backbuffer and tiling architecture is much more adaptable to such a use).

Edited October 21, 2006 by Brandon Live

[Inplode]

A game that was never 1080p.

everything i read about the game said it was being set up for 1080p but even at 720 you wont see much of a diffrence

[kingroach]

next 64 player multiplayer will be downgraded to 16 player.. When I heard in 1up that Resistance has 1080p with 64 player online, I could smell the bs.

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

If the game still looks and plays like the videos shown you cant take away the fact it will be a stellar game :yes:

However all the 1080p talk is frustrating. We dont want ridge racer to be the ONLY game to be able to run at it. :no: :laugh:

[PL_ Veteran]

next 64 player multiplayer will be downgraded to 16 player.. When I heard in 1up that Resistance has 1080p with 64 player online, I could smell the bs.

Ugh, 1UP are annoying sometimes.

"SDF! Another victory!"

[soniqstylz]

next 64 player multiplayer will be downgraded to 16 player.. When I heard in 1up that Resistance has 1080p with 64 player online, I could smell the bs.

No idea where you got that... the developers have been saying 40 player for months now.

[Septimus]

Hah. Kinda funny.

Maybe Sony should have unified the memory? Oops.

[Brandon Live Veteran]

Hah. Kinda funny.

Maybe Sony should have unified the memory? Oops.

There are two reasons things ended up the way they did:

1) Sony waited til the last minute (in their design process) to decide to even use a GPU, when they realized that Cell wasn't all it was cracked up to be and that their original PS2-style everything-in-software approach didn't work (graphically speaking) against the original Xbox and GameCube and that it was going to get them destroyed when they went up against the simplicity of designing for the 360 and Wii.

-The result of this was a GPU that was bolted onto the architecture (leading to the segregated memory and other goofs) and the use of what is essentially a PC part, not one designed for a console.

2) Sony spent way too much money on everything else to afford a decent GPU and fast memory for it. So they had Nvidia license them a PC part on the cheap. It's basically a customized Geforce 6800 (in the same way that the original Xbox chip was a customized NV20 / Geforce 3).

It has the same memory bandwidth as a plain "vanilla" Geforce 6800. It will largely be bound to the same resolution, FSAA, and HDR capabilities of that card. It certainly has advantages over the 6800 in raw pixel-pushing and shader capabilities. But those aren't going to get you 1080p.

[Danrarbc]

However all the 1080p talk is frustrating. We dont want ridge racer to be the ONLY game to be able to run at it. :no: :laugh:

The way things are going for Sony recently you might not have to worry about that, 1080p could end up pulled from Ridge Racer too :p

[1759]

The way things are going for Sony recently you might not have to worry about that, 1080p could end up pulled from Ridge Racer too :p

:laugh: The PS3: Sony's Vista.

All this development time, and by the time either comes out, people will be like, "That's it?" It's a good thing the PS2 has a strong game library, as I really don't want a x360 or Wii, as none of the games really interest me on those systems, and I still am a bit jaded over the PSP.

[Noveed]

:laugh: The PS3: Sony's Vista.

dno about that, vista seems to be back on track at the moment, RTM is coming very soon :laugh: :p

[iconboy]

There are two reasons things ended up the way they did:

1) Sony waited til the last minute (in their design process) to decide to even use a GPU, when they realized that Cell wasn't all it was cracked up to be and that their original PS2-style everything-in-software approach didn't work (graphically speaking) against the original Xbox and GameCube and that it was going to get them destroyed when they went up against the simplicity of designing for the 360 and Wii.

-The result of this was a GPU that was bolted onto the architecture (leading to the segregated memory and other goofs) and the use of what is essentially a PC part, not one designed for a console.

2) Sony spent way too much money on everything else to afford a decent GPU and fast memory for it. So they had Nvidia license them a PC part on the cheap. It's basically a customized Geforce 6800 (in the same way that the original Xbox chip was a customized NV20 / Geforce 3).

It has the same memory bandwidth as a plain "vanilla" Geforce 6800. It will largely be bound to the same resolution, FSAA, and HDR capabilities of that card. It certainly has advantages over the 6800 in raw pixel-pushing and shader capabilities. But those aren't going to get you 1080p.

blah blah blah, what are u some sort of Micro$oft stooge/goon? ... oh wait a sec... :yes:

[Sheppard]

So what he works for Microsoft, that doesn't make him any less qualified to know what hes talking about or to voice his opinion. Everyone including Sony were making a big hoot about the fact the PS3 will do its "Full HD" named 1080p, now all the games are either being downgraded to 720p and/or downgraded in quality to fit 1080p and now all the Sony fanboys have either gone quiet or saying "oh you wont notice the difference" i think its quite funny, now go back to the Wii forum and wait for your glorified gamecube.

[Heyo]

Oh the irony that the PS3s' biggest shooter is running in 720p where as stuff like Lost Planet and Halo 3 on the 360 is going to offer 1080p.

Can you imagine the wacking Sony is going to get if the 360 ends up getting MORE titles offering 1080p in the next year than the PS3?

It's amost as if MS baited Sony to make a big deal over 1080p and then BAM!

I just wish they would both stick to 720p anyway. MS was right. 720p is the sweet spot for this generation and these types of games would look better in 720p without having to worry about supporting 1080p for the 1% of people who have TVs that support it.