E3 2014: Diablo 3 Runs In 900p on Xbox One, 1080p on PS4

@Blazen702 Beta is usually lower quality than the full game to decrease download size. Notice Digital Foundry assumed nothing from their analysis. You shouldn't either. Besides, Sony never said the game would be 1080p. The developer did. Stop it with the FUD. Thanks.

<< LINK REMOVED >> from what I read in this article the xbox one version strikes me the same as in watch dogs case. It will probably be 7xxp res max. Which accounts to, in MY opinion, that this whole "next gen" talk is a lie since the consoles can't run launch games at 1080p smooth enough. However, only time will tell how much longer this is going to last

@bkamagnum Sure, now you just need to pay the $1,000+ for a TV that can only refresh 30 times per second. Nice. 4K isn't really a great option for gaming unless you have the money to buy a 60 Hz 4K TV/Monitor. It's really not worth it at this point. Despite what everyone likes to pretend, very few people actually play anything at 4K.

<< LINK REMOVED >> no one cares diablo is garbage.

<< LINK REMOVED >><< LINK REMOVED >> Poor people*

<< LINK REMOVED >> cause that's all xbox does is lie to their fans right to their faces but they stick with crap so they know what they are getting.

<< LINK REMOVED >> running at 1080 is a developer decision not an MS decision. Games can run at 1080 on xboxone there are a number of them that do right now like forza 5.

The thing is the difference between 900 and 1080 isnt that much and also its actually better if it runs at 900 but has a better framerate than 1080 and shuttering.

<< LINK REMOVED >> the funny thing is most of the 'master race' nerds who are always talking smack about how superior PCs are dont even have top of the line rigs and cant run anything on ultra anyway.

@Flyin3lvl The game looks better: more particle effects, better meshes, better textures, and more room for things like depth of field and ambient occlusion. This also means developers can do more things with the game like adding in more enemies, more visually unique abilities, and grander landscapes.

It's pretty childish yourself, ironically, to assume just because people enjoy a platform that runs games very well that their "mummy and daddy' bought it for them.

I'm a medically retired veteran with two young kids. I don't ever recall my parents paying any amount of my PC or laptop purchased within the last year; and both of them have 2-3x the computing power of the consoles.

<< LINK REMOVED >> You're confusing native resolution to upscaled resolution. There's a huge difference. Besides, the PS3 upscaled to 1080p as well. I should know. I have a PS3 and a 1080p TV. Many multiplatform games did look slightly better on the Xbox 360 at launch, and they DID make a big deal about it. Most Xbox 360 games were native 720p though. Besides, if you have a 1080p TV then all games are automatically upscaled to 1080p by your TV even if your console doesn't upscale them. Displays can only display at one resolution. They simply upscale and downscale as needed. 720p won't display on a 1080p TV. It's always upscaled. Anyway, I'm done with the tech lesson.

<< LINK REMOVED >>

Ideally, this is where good development tools will come in. As things like the Unreal Engine mature, it will do more of the heavy lifting and have advanced ways of handling different architecture. Hopefully this is the case.

And ignore Blazen, all of his posts on this article are pretty bad. I love my X1 and hate Sony, but I'm not going to go around claiming that graphical abilities of the X1 surpass the PS4's.

Another statement by someone who has no idea what they are talking about. The Xbox is called so because it is relying on directx hence the name directx box. X1 is using directx11 which is years old. With directx12 the X1 will be almost twice as powerful as it is now. And that's fact not opinion. AMD and Nvidia know more then you clueless kids