1080p @ 30 fps Or 720p @ 60 fps ?

Question obviously for the techies only; which would you rather have game developers target when developing their games?

1- Higher smoother framerates + better graphics fidelity (post processing effects, poly count, lightening effects, etc..) but with lower resolution.

2- Higher super crisp resolution but with lower graphics fidelity and framerate

i.e. which one you think is more important to focus on; graphics fidelity or resolution.

I've read that Lair is running at 30fps, and was wondering what would its graphics fidelity be like if they kept the same framerate but reduced the resolution to 720p.

I.e. how many effects they could've added by reducing its resolution, and whether or not you guys think it's a good idea to increase graphics fidelity on the account of resolution.

Also, is Lair running at native 1080p or its 720p scaled to 1080p?

i would take 720p @ 60 fps anyday

Depends on the game !

A fast racer at 30 fps will suffer in smoothness but an adventure in 60 fps is a waste of resources !

60fps is better than 1080p imo.

Its a shame we haven't got the 120fps that a certain individual promised us...

ummm DMC4, NGS and Heavenly Sword are all 60 FPS and 1080p. best of both :D go PS3 !

720p @ 60fps. Most people don't even have 720p capable displays yet, much less 1080p. Its nice to move technology forward but lets just take it one step at a time. Heck, I'd even take 480p @ 60fps with more detail and better AA than HD res if need be...Corvin

at 480p 30fps, the fidelity would probably reach the quality of final fantacy :shock:

I really wish to see a title that targets 480p at 30fps with loads of post processing effects, just to show people that higher resolution doesn't necessarily translate to better graphics fidelity.

ummm DMC4, NGS and Heavenly Sword are all 60 FPS and 1080p. best of both :D go PS3 !

AB_Uppercut

if they reduced the framerate to 30fps, the resolution to 720p, and added loads of effects (lightening, motion blur, post processing, etc...), those games might probably reach the graphics fidelity of Gears of War :shock:

720p @ 60 fps easily.

Hardly anyone has a TV that takes advantage of 1080p anyway! Not to mention the games can be up-converted to 1080p which, although not exactly the same, is as good as you need. 

[QUOTE="AB_Uppercut"]

ummm DMC4, NGS and Heavenly Sword are all 60 FPS and 1080p. best of both :D go PS3 !

Mystery_Writer

if they reduced the framerate to 30fps, the resolution to 720p, and added loads of effects (lightening, motion blur, post processing, etc...), those games might probably reach the graphics fidelity of Gears of War :shock:

And we'd want to have the graphics of greas of war exactly....for what?  A less impressive looking game at a slower framerate?  NO thanks.  One of the basc principals of PS3 was to have games be able to proform just as good as they look.  It's understandable that xbox360 fans have already settled for less but that's the diffrence between between the two systems. 

PS fans have higher standards than xbox fans so while your concern is noted, setteling for less is why you've decided to support 360.  If you really wanted the best gaming could offer you'd support the PS3 because it simply has the ablity to do more and it's already showing it. 

[QUOTE="Mystery_Writer"][QUOTE="AB_Uppercut"]

ummm DMC4, NGS and Heavenly Sword are all 60 FPS and 1080p. best of both :D go PS3 !

Microned

if they reduced the framerate to 30fps, the resolution to 720p, and added loads of effects (lightening, motion blur, post processing, etc...), those games might probably reach the graphics fidelity of Gears of War :shock:

And we'd want to have the graphics of greas of war exactly....for what? A less impressive looking game at a slower framerate? NO thanks. One of the basc principals of PS3 was to have games be able to proform just as good as they look. It's understandable that xbox360 fans have already settled for less but that's the diffrence between between the two systems.

PS fans have higher standards than xbox fans so while your concern is noted, setteling for less is why you've decided to support 360. If you really wanted the best gaming could offer you'd support the PS3 because it simply has the ablity to do more and it's already showing it.

So that's why you PS fans settled with the PS2 last gen... Although what looks good and what doesn't is a matter of taste, Gears of War technically looks better than any PS3 game right now. That doesn't mean it isn't able to do better, but if you want the best right now, you own a 360.

 And to claim that PS fans have higher standards sounds like implying you are in some way better than xbox fans, which is total and utter nonsense.

720p @ 60 FPS and better looking graphics... Please!

Anybody who is used to seeing 60fps(pc gamers with good pc's) most of the time are going to notice the drop to 30fps,I do.When we see a console game running at 60fps with good levels aa and af (unlike cod 2)we will know then that the devs have finally gotten to grips with the hardware.I adore both the ps3 and xbox 360 but until I see a game like gears running at 60fps,I wont call them great machines.

Resistance was running at 60fps until they lowered it to be rock steady 30fps,so it should be very soon that we will have that on our consoles.

I would rather have 720p at 60fps than 1080p at 30fps anyday!

[QUOTE="Microned"][QUOTE="Mystery_Writer"][QUOTE="AB_Uppercut"]

ummm DMC4, NGS and Heavenly Sword are all 60 FPS and 1080p. best of both :D go PS3 !

inoperativeRS

if they reduced the framerate to 30fps, the resolution to 720p, and added loads of effects (lightening, motion blur, post processing, etc...), those games might probably reach the graphics fidelity of Gears of War :shock:

And we'd want to have the graphics of greas of war exactly....for what? A less impressive looking game at a slower framerate? NO thanks. One of the basc principals of PS3 was to have games be able to proform just as good as they look. It's understandable that xbox360 fans have already settled for less but that's the diffrence between between the two systems.

PS fans have higher standards than xbox fans so while your concern is noted, setteling for less is why you've decided to support 360. If you really wanted the best gaming could offer you'd support the PS3 because it simply has the ablity to do more and it's already showing it.

So that's why you PS fans settled with the PS2 last gen... Although what looks good and what doesn't is a matter of taste, Gears of War technically looks better than any PS3 game right now. That doesn't mean it isn't able to do better, but if you want the best right now, you own a 360.

 And to claim that PS fans have higher standards sounds like implying you are in some way better than xbox fans, which is total and utter nonsense.

The only nonsence I see is lemmings thinking that xbox360 is in any way shape or form a better system than PS3.  That goes for you too.  The 360 has been out for over a year now.  What you are seeing in developemt for all games comming out this year (forza 2, Too Human, Mass Effect etc...) are all full fledged 2nd gen games.  Ninja gainden is 2nd quarter  first generation game and it's Team Ninja's first project on PS3...

so tell me...why is it that NGS is running a resolution of 1080p @ 60fps while maintianing graphics of this level (at a minimum on par with the best upcomming graphics of games comming out for 360 that are all 2nd gen) yet NONE of those upcomming 360 games can boast a resolution and framerate on par with this 2nd quarter 1st generation game on PS3--which is team ninjas first attempt at making a game on the system?

Anybody who is used to seeing 60fps(pc gamers with good pc's) most of the time are going to notice the drop to 30fps,I do.When we see a console game running at 60fps with good levels aa and af (unlike cod 2)we will know then that the devs have finally gotten to grips with the hardware.I adore both the ps3 and xbox 360 but until I see a game like gears running at 60fps,I wont call them great machines.

Resistance was running at 60fps until they lowered it to be rock steady 30fps,so it should be very soon that we will have that on our consoles.

I would rather have 720p at 60fps than 1080p at 30fps anyday!

davaniius

click on the link

http://media.ps3.ign.com/media/856/856529/vid_1952539.html

I agree with some of your points.Second gen xbox 360 games should have been running at 60fps considering that they didn't really go for 1080p resolution but again it's still pretty early.If we don't see this increase in framerate towards the end of the year,then I would start to doubt its potential.If ps3 games start running 60fps on it's early second gen games then I think the jig would be up.Ps3 would get my vote for a better future potential but this isn't about ps3 vs xbox 360.This is about resolutions and frame rates.

[QUOTE="inoperativeRS"][QUOTE="Microned"][QUOTE="Mystery_Writer"][QUOTE="AB_Uppercut"]

ummm DMC4, NGS and Heavenly Sword are all 60 FPS and 1080p. best of both :D go PS3 !

Microned

if they reduced the framerate to 30fps, the resolution to 720p, and added loads of effects (lightening, motion blur, post processing, etc...), those games might probably reach the graphics fidelity of Gears of War :shock:

And we'd want to have the graphics of greas of war exactly....for what? A less impressive looking game at a slower framerate? NO thanks. One of the basc principals of PS3 was to have games be able to proform just as good as they look. It's understandable that xbox360 fans have already settled for less but that's the diffrence between between the two systems.

PS fans have higher standards than xbox fans so while your concern is noted, setteling for less is why you've decided to support 360. If you really wanted the best gaming could offer you'd support the PS3 because it simply has the ablity to do more and it's already showing it.

So that's why you PS fans settled with the PS2 last gen... Although what looks good and what doesn't is a matter of taste, Gears of War technically looks better than any PS3 game right now. That doesn't mean it isn't able to do better, but if you want the best right now, you own a 360.

 And to claim that PS fans have higher standards sounds like implying you are in some way better than xbox fans, which is total and utter nonsense.

The only nonsence I see is lemmings thinking that xbox360 is in any way shape or form a better system than PS3.  That goes for you too.  The 360 has been out for over a year now.  What you are seeing in developemt for all games comming out this year (forza 2, Too Human, Mass Effect etc...) are all full fledged 2nd gen games.  Ninja gainden is 2nd quarter  first generation game and it's Team Ninja's first project on PS3...

so tell me...why is it that NGS is running a resolution of 1080p @ 60fps while maintianing graphics of this level (at a minimum on par with the best upcomming graphics of games comming out for 360 that are all 2nd gen) yet NONE of those upcomming 360 games can boast a resolution and framerate on par with this 2nd quarter 1st generation game on PS3--which is team ninjas first attempt at making a game on the system?

[QUOTE="davaniius"]

Anybody who is used to seeing 60fps(pc gamers with good pc's) most of the time are going to notice the drop to 30fps,I do.When we see a console game running at 60fps with good levels aa and af (unlike cod 2)we will know then that the devs have finally gotten to grips with the hardware.I adore both the ps3 and xbox 360 but until I see a game like gears running at 60fps,I wont call them great machines.

Resistance was running at 60fps until they lowered it to be rock steady 30fps,so it should be very soon that we will have that on our consoles.

I would rather have 720p at 60fps than 1080p at 30fps anyday!

Microned

click on the link

http://media.ps3.ign.com/media/856/856529/vid_1952539.html

[QUOTE="inoperativeRS"][QUOTE="Microned"][QUOTE="Mystery_Writer"][QUOTE="AB_Uppercut"]

ummm DMC4, NGS and Heavenly Sword are all 60 FPS and 1080p. best of both :D go PS3 !

Microned

if they reduced the framerate to 30fps, the resolution to 720p, and added loads of effects (lightening, motion blur, post processing, etc...), those games might probably reach the graphics fidelity of Gears of War :shock:

And we'd want to have the graphics of greas of war exactly....for what? A less impressive looking game at a slower framerate? NO thanks. One of the basc principals of PS3 was to have games be able to proform just as good as they look. It's understandable that xbox360 fans have already settled for less but that's the diffrence between between the two systems.

PS fans have higher standards than xbox fans so while your concern is noted, setteling for less is why you've decided to support 360. If you really wanted the best gaming could offer you'd support the PS3 because it simply has the ablity to do more and it's already showing it.

So that's why you PS fans settled with the PS2 last gen... Although what looks good and what doesn't is a matter of taste, Gears of War technically looks better than any PS3 game right now. That doesn't mean it isn't able to do better, but if you want the best right now, you own a 360.

And to claim that PS fans have higher standards sounds like implying you are in some way better than xbox fans, which is total and utter nonsense.

The only nonsence I see is lemmings thinking that xbox360 is in any way shape or form a better system than PS3. That goes for you too. The 360 has been out for over a year now. What you are seeing in developemt for all games comming out this year (forza 2, Too Human, Mass Effect etc...) are all full fledged 2nd gen games. Ninja gainden is 2nd quarter first generation game and it's Team Ninja's first project on PS3...

so tell me...why is it that NGS is running a resolution of 1080p @ 60fps while maintianing graphics of this level (at a minimum on par with the best upcomming graphics of games comming out for 360 that are all 2nd gen) yet NONE of those upcomming 360 games can boast a resolution and framerate on par with this 2nd quarter 1st generation game on PS3--which is team ninjas first attempt at making a game on the system?

Please, I don't think the 360 is "better" than the ps3. I just stated a fact, that the 360 has the best looking game right now, and therefor your claim that PS fans own a PS3 cause that's the only way to get the best is stupid. I never argued this will always be the case.

 

i would take 720p @ 60 fps anyday

Kakarot00769

Hell yeah! Do people even realize the difference between 30fps and 60fps? 

[QUOTE="Microned"][QUOTE="inoperativeRS"][QUOTE="Microned"][QUOTE="Mystery_Writer"][QUOTE="AB_Uppercut"]

ummm DMC4, NGS and Heavenly Sword are all 60 FPS and 1080p. best of both :D go PS3 !

inoperativeRS

if they reduced the framerate to 30fps, the resolution to 720p, and added loads of effects (lightening, motion blur, post processing, etc...), those games might probably reach the graphics fidelity of Gears of War :shock:

And we'd want to have the graphics of greas of war exactly....for what? A less impressive looking game at a slower framerate? NO thanks. One of the basc principals of PS3 was to have games be able to proform just as good as they look. It's understandable that xbox360 fans have already settled for less but that's the diffrence between between the two systems.

PS fans have higher standards than xbox fans so while your concern is noted, setteling for less is why you've decided to support 360. If you really wanted the best gaming could offer you'd support the PS3 because it simply has the ablity to do more and it's already showing it.

So that's why you PS fans settled with the PS2 last gen... Although what looks good and what doesn't is a matter of taste, Gears of War technically looks better than any PS3 game right now. That doesn't mean it isn't able to do better, but if you want the best right now, you own a 360.

And to claim that PS fans have higher standards sounds like implying you are in some way better than xbox fans, which is total and utter nonsense.

The only nonsence I see is lemmings thinking that xbox360 is in any way shape or form a better system than PS3. That goes for you too. The 360 has been out for over a year now. What you are seeing in developemt for all games comming out this year (forza 2, Too Human, Mass Effect etc...) are all full fledged 2nd gen games. Ninja gainden is 2nd quarter first generation game and it's Team Ninja's first project on PS3...

so tell me...why is it that NGS is running a resolution of 1080p @ 60fps while maintianing graphics of this level (at a minimum on par with the best upcomming graphics of games comming out for 360 that are all 2nd gen) yet NONE of those upcomming 360 games can boast a resolution and framerate on par with this 2nd quarter 1st generation game on PS3--which is team ninjas first attempt at making a game on the system?

Please, I don't think the 360 is "better" than the ps3. I just stated a fact, that the 360 has the best looking game right now, and therefor your claim that PS fans own a PS3 cause that's the only way to get the best is stupid. I never argued this will always be the case.

PS3 fans knew the PS3 was better hardware the moment the specs were announced.  It's only despeate xbox fans who try to argue the point with xbox360's eaiser to develop for games gonig into it's second generation and multiplat ports vs PS3 1st qt, 1st generation games. 

Before we even go in to what's going to come out for PS3's second gen titels, looks at PS3's 3rd qt 1st gen games.  Heavenly Sword, Lair, little Big Planet, Drakes Adventure, Ratchet and Clank.  These games look amazing in my opinion, and I haven't been impressed by anything that has come out for this generation so far (gears included).

To be prefectly fank, if you had paid any attention at all to all the hype and promotioin that sony did for the PS3, it all boils down to three things.  resolution, framerate and content (i.e what goes on in a game and how intensive/much).  And all that can pretty much be credited to the Cell.  The fact that 360 doesn't have one pretty much gaurentees that 360 won't be able to do many of the things PS3 will be doing in the future.  the other factor is Blu-ray, and that just allows more intergraded content.

[QUOTE="Kakarot00769"]

 

i would take 720p @ 60 fps anyday

wapahala

Hell yeah! Do people even realize the difference between 30fps and 60fps?

[QUOTE="inoperativeRS"][QUOTE="Microned"][QUOTE="inoperativeRS"][QUOTE="Microned"][QUOTE="Mystery_Writer"][QUOTE="AB_Uppercut"]

 

Microned

[QUOTE="Mystery_Writer"][QUOTE="AB_Uppercut"]

ummm DMC4, NGS and Heavenly Sword are all 60 FPS and 1080p. best of both :D go PS3 !

Microned

if they reduced the framerate to 30fps, the resolution to 720p, and added loads of effects (lightening, motion blur, post processing, etc...), those games might probably reach the graphics fidelity of Gears of War :shock:

PS fans have higher standards than xbox fans so while your concern is noted, setteling for less is why you've decided to support 360.  If you really wanted the best gaming could offer you'd support the PS3 because it simply has the ablity to do more and it's already showing it. 

both systems will have great games. The difference is the 360 already has them. Who cares what generation they are in. To imply even in the slightest that PS fans have better taste than people who own 360's is completely silly. Especially since I personally know people outside of system wars AND members of this forum who are Sony fans that have decided to buy 360s and are enjoying the hell out of it.

Is the PS3 better hardware, YES. Absolutely. But you can have the best hardware in the world and it will just be a doorstop if there isn't a decent library to back it up. Now you can drone on and on about what's coming, but that doesn't change the fact that RIGHT NOW, the 360 is the better console. To make matters worse for someone with such superior taste, see this thread for what the software outlook for your "superior hardware" is going to be over the next few months.

Read it and weep.

Microned

though I agree it's impressive, but I have to admit, X360 fans are somewhat right about it's not as impressive as Gears / Mass Effect.

I don't think the PS3 can produce the above graphics. It's already choking in Splinter Cell: Double Agent (a much less demanding game)

Question obviously for the techies only; which would you rather have game developers target when developing their games?

1- Higher smoother framerates + better graphics fidelity (post processing effects, poly count, lightening effects, etc..) but with lower resolution.

2- Higher super crisp resolution but with lower graphics fidelity and framerate

i.e. which one you think is more important to focus on; graphics fidelity or resolution.

 

I've read that Lair is running at 30fps, and was wondering what would its graphics fidelity be like if they kept the same framerate but reduced the resolution to 720p.

I.e. how many effects they could've added by reducing its resolution, and whether or not you guys think it's a good idea to increase graphics fidelity on the account of resolution.

Also, is Lair running at native 1080p or its 720p scaled to 1080p?

Mystery_Writer

I'd take 720p at 60fps.

It is still very sharp and clear and yet also smooth. 1080 doesn't add as much as a really smooth framerate.

[QUOTE="Microned"]

Mystery_Writer

though I agree it's impressive, but I have to admit, X360 fans are somewhat right about it's not as impressive as Gears / Mass Effect.

I don't think the PS3 can produce the above graphics. It's already choking in Splinter Cell: Double Agent (a much less demanding game)

I disagree. I think that most developers have not figured out how to make the PS3 do it's best stuff yet.

And to me that's it's biggest problem. The longer it takes developers to figure out the hardware, the longer the wait between really impressive titles. I don't want to pay top dollar for a console and the have to wait a year before the game library is up to speed. It's better to wait until the library suits you and then make your purchase.

Unfortunately for Sony, people like me are choosing to do exactly that.

so tell me...why is it that NGS is running a resolution of 1080p @ 60fps while maintianing graphics of this level (at a minimum on par with the best upcomming graphics of games comming out for 360 that are all 2nd gen) yet NONE of those upcomming 360 games can boast a resolution and framerate on par with this 2nd quarter 1st generation game on PS3--which is team ninjas first attempt at making a game on the system?

 

Microned

Well that's easy ,

NGS is a Xbox 1 last gen port and as you could have seen in the comparison video its 100 %  the Xbox version hence the graphics update , a.i. and everything remains last gen , i bet they can hit 1080P 60 fps on just the Cell core and RSX with just a graphics update .

NG was native 720P on the Xbox 1 hardware .

You took a very bad example that proves nothing ;)

[QUOTE="Mystery_Writer"]

though I agree it's impressive, but I have to admit, X360 fans are somewhat right about it's not as impressive as Gears / Mass Effect.

I don't think the PS3 can produce the above graphics. It's already choking in Splinter Cell: Double Agent (a much less demanding game)

heretrix

I disagree. I think that most developers have not figured out how to make the PS3 do it's best stuff yet.

And to me that's it's biggest problem. The longer it takes developers to figure out the hardware, the longer the wait between really impressive titles. I don't want to pay top dollar for a console and the have to wait a year before the game library is up to speed. It's better to wait until the library suits you and then make your purchase.

Unfortunately for Sony, people like me are choosing to do exactly that.

The good thing is I have all 3 current gen systems. So I can afford to wait for the PS3.

However if it's true that developers still didn't learn the PS3, and say by 2009/10 they'll manage to tap its theoretical power, then I'm afraid by that time we won't be as impressive by current gen graphics and we'll be anticipating the next XBox that will perhaps debut in 2010.

[QUOTE="heretrix"]

[QUOTE="Mystery_Writer"]

though I agree it's impressive, but I have to admit, X360 fans are somewhat right about it's not as impressive as Gears / Mass Effect.

I don't think the PS3 can produce the above graphics. It's already choking in Splinter Cell: Double Agent (a much less demanding game)

Mystery_Writer

I disagree. I think that most developers have not figured out how to make the PS3 do it's best stuff yet.

And to me that's it's biggest problem. The longer it takes developers to figure out the hardware, the longer the wait between really impressive titles. I don't want to pay top dollar for a console and the have to wait a year before the game library is up to speed. It's better to wait until the library suits you and then make your purchase.

Unfortunately for Sony, people like me are choosing to do exactly that.

The good thing is I have all 3 current gen systems. So I can afford to wait for the PS3.

However if it's true that developers still didn't learn the PS3, and say by 2009/10 they'll manage to tap its theoretical power, then I'm afraid by that time we won't be as impressive by current gen graphics and we'll be anticipating the next XBox that will perhaps debut in 2010.