It's the GAMES that matter!! Not whether graphics are 720p (upscaled to 1080p), 900p (upscaled to 1080p), or native 1080p. That makes no difference whatsoever in the enjoyment of playing a game. These resolution differences are totally irrelevant, especially since they are all high definition anyways.
What matters is: Does the console have games you want to play?
System Wars is no longer about games, it has become a hardware and technical specs debate forum. People on System Wars have forgotten what really matters: THE GAMES!!!!
uuummmm no, sorry, i want a visually good looking game to go along with the enjoyment of playing a game..i blame PC gaming: 1080p res made me a graphics whore. now i barf at the sight of a console game (although i still do play them for the exclusives)
@Wasdie: Sorry but its not as cut and dry as just displaying two pictures to make a comparision up close on a PC screen or mobile device. And further more, you are not truely viewing seperate resolutions since you are viewing them on your exact same screen. How am I seeing 1080p on either when I'm viewing up close from a 1136-by-640 mobile phone?
There is a lot more to an image than resolution. The difference will be less if you have two sets that are more equal in there specifications with the main difference being the resolution. And even on the same set. A lot of scalers suck ass and is the only reason you might need 1080p over 720p. That blur might also be a split-second frame difference.
Its going to get even worse if 4k ever hits the market as mainstream. While you shouldn't need 4k for a crystal clear picture, you are going to have one and as a result will need 4k source material for the picture to look good. However side by side against native 1080p and 720p with native source material, you are going to feel ripped off at normal living room viewing distances.
If you want to hear something really interesting, A shoot-out was organized a long while back in Athens by the Greek www.avclub.gr, where 35 of its members were invited to comment on the differences between the 720 and 1080 DLP panels when fed by HD and SD material. The results were really eye-opening: The majority of the people present felt that from a distance of 4 meters and beyond from the 130' screen, the resolution difference between the two projectors was from minimal to insignificant! They even had 3-4 people who in fact thought that the 720 projector was the 1080 one!
Now back to gaming, A lot of elements contribute to the visual fidelity and to the spectacle offered by a game, and they aren’t as easily represented by raw numbers. As a matter of fact, many of them influence the final beauty of a title more than resolution.
Lighting, for instance, is probably the single most important element in determining the final quality of a game’s visuals. A game could be rendered in 4K resolution, have millions of polygons and run locked at 120 FPS, but a sub-par lighting engine would make it look like absolute crap, with models on screen that would seem flat and artificial in front of your eyes.
On the other hand, a developer that sacrifices a few thousands pixels to implement a more powerful and spectacular lighting engine will most probably produce a game that ultimately looks a lot better. Sadly though, all you guys know is Resolution.
While I know we see some things differently, this is a great example of a well thought out, rational post and thank you for even writing it in a thread like this that's so dim witted its barely believable. Its a common sense thing. Screen resolution will be a talking point, but widely insignificant to if the game is actually any damn good or not. And while some Cows seem more obsessed with regaining lost bragging rights from last gen then discussing any merits of the game itself, ultimately I wish more dialogue like yours continues on this forum no matter if we agree or disagree.
I haven't seen any lemmings disagree anymore that the PS4 is more graphically powerful than the Xbox One, or that will change going forward even as both systems improve optimization, or that the gaming sites who are producing side by side HD footage of the games in question are wrong when they are reporting the PS4 version looks better. The debate is by how much, and that doesn't include if the game is better on the PS4. For me the difference in the resolution won't mean a damn thing if the gameplay, story, multiplayer, and framerate are all very good. I showed a couple of those side by side comparison vids to six of my pals. Only 2 saw a difference they noticed, but none wanted a PS4 because of it. They wanted to know if the game was good or not and what other games were coming. When I showed them some of the gigantic threads going on fighting about this they were shocked and laughed that this was a big deal at all. 2 are getting both systems, all are getting Xbox One, and the rest of us all said maybe later down the line we'll get a PS4. No one thought either was a bad system, lol. It you aren't a gaming forum poster on a daily basis so much of this BS will fly over peoples heads. It will all come down to the system with the games you want to-play and do you feel the Xbox One features and exclusives justify the extra $100 over the extra power and exclusives of the PS4. All the rest is BS
I remember lemmings laughing at cows last gen when a game had a blurry spot on a texture like in Devil May Cry 4, or when they got a game in lower res, now that the tables are turned they act like they don't care anymore. It's pathetic you they have to justify their purchase of the inferior console this gen. It's 2013, 1080P should've been the standard last gen, so for 720P to be considered okay this gen is just people being blind fanboys. People shouldn't just accept it and swallow it. Voice your opinion and let them know that it is unacceptable. We shouldn't promote this behavior.
If the PS4 version was 720p while the One versions were 900P-1080P, Lemmings would be all over them with this.
It's the GAMES that matter!! Not whether graphics are 720p (upscaled to 1080p), 900p (upscaled to 1080p), or native 1080p. That makes no difference whatsoever in the enjoyment of playing a game. These resolution differences are totally irrelevant, especially since they are all high definition anyways.
Oh wow, so you are saying there is no difference between 720p, 1080p and Ultra High Definition because they are all called high definition... Oh wow.
Also Xbox 720 barely has any games that interest me. It's going to be the same old Halo, Forza and Fable throughout the gen. Owning a 360 showed me how little MS cares about exclusives besides those.
Just because I think a lot of people here don't fully understand. When render the same camera position in a 3D environment with the same field of view at a higher resolution, more details get rendered. More pixels = more details. It's not just about the size of the screen or how sharp it is, but it's also going to have a major effect on how all of the various rendering effects look.
It doesn't matter if you're farther away or closer either, the higher resolution you render the better the picture is going to look, even if you downsample when you finally display. There is a lot more to an image than resolution, but the resolution is the final factor in how much detail you're going to see so it's damn important that you do it well.
New effects, new lighting, new post, and new particle effects are all increasing in detail in a very subtle way that you won't see unless you've got enough pixels in your render. The resolution of the shadows, the individual lights on the environments, small reflections in reflective materials, the tone of texture and material on an object, all of that kind of stuff is greatly affected if you drop the resolution down quite a bit. If you take a native 1080p shot of any game and then take a 2k shot downsampled to 1080p, you'll see a boost in overall image quality. All effects rendered will have a more profound impact on the final picture.
If your resolution isn't high enough there is no point in rendering a lot of techniques if the detail is just not going to come out in the final picture.
Just because I think a lot of people here don't fully understand. When render the same camera position in a 3D environment with the same field of view at a higher resolution, more details get rendered. More pixels = more details. It's not just about the size of the screen or how sharp it is, but it's also going to have a major effect on how all of the various rendering effects look.
It doesn't matter if you're farther away or closer either, the higher resolution you render the better the picture is going to look, even if you downsample when you finally display. There is a lot more to an image than resolution, but the resolution is the final factor in how much detail you're going to see so it's damn important that you do it well.
New effects, new lighting, new post, and new particle effects are all increasing in detail in a very subtle way that you won't see unless you've got enough pixels in your render. The resolution of the shadows, the individual lights on the environments, small reflections in reflective materials, the tone of texture and material on an object, all of that kind of stuff is greatly affected if you drop the resolution down quite a bit. If you take a native 1080p shot of any game and then take a 2k shot downsampled to 1080p, you'll see a boost in overall image quality. All effects rendered will have a more profound impact on the final picture.
If your resolution isn't high enough there is no point in rendering a lot of techniques if the detail is just not going to come out in the final picture.
finally someone who understands and why i was calling bs on the 720p vs 1080p graph applied to gaming, the view distance is not the only thing important to the resolution, but the fact that they are different images to begin with, the chart lems are using as an excuse only applies to same images, just different viewing distance.
Let the eyes be the judge. Assuming the same detail levels with only the res being different: One is 1080p. The other is 720p upscaled. The reason why the differences were more noticeable with the earlier console versions because the detail levels were also compromised.
also i dont really trust image comparisons since most sites compress the quality of the images if they arent compressed already when the screenshot was taken like fraps do.
also i dont really trust image comparisons since most sites compress the quality of the images if they arent compressed already when the screenshot was taken like fraps do.
If you need absolutely 100% faithful screenshots to notice the differences then the differences aren't really mind-numbing.
also i dont really trust image comparisons since most sites compress the quality of the images if they arent compressed already when the screenshot was taken like fraps do.
If you need absolutely 100% faithful screenshots to notice the differences then the differences aren't really mind-numbing.
just saying details are lost. Played enough ps3 and pc to know the differences
Let the eyes be the judge. Assuming the same detail levels with only the res being different: One is 1080p. The other is 720p upscaled. The reason why the differences were more noticeable with the earlier console versions because the detail levels were also compromised.
Let the eyes be the judge. Assuming the same detail levels with only the res being different: One is 1080p. The other is 720p upscaled. The reason why the differences were more noticeable with the earlier console versions because the detail levels were also compromised.
The second one is the 1080p shot. Next, please.
You can tell a difference studying still shots, but when that is 30/60fps and you are moving the gun around and running, and not looking at it from 1 foot away from a monitor the difference will be unnoticeable/minimal.
A bigger factor will be setting differences if it has no AA, lower quality textures, missing details etc. I think two identical games with the only difference being 720p vs 1080p won't be that noticeable if at all for most people. The quality of TV would be a larger factor, a cheap LCD that is terrible at handling motion, will look awful regardless.
@APiranhaAteMyVaSo let me get this straight: I call bullshit, and the argument changes to, "Well, it would look the same in motion!" No. It doesn't. I updated the GPU in my PC (not at all a high-end gaming machine). Games that would only run before at 720p now run at 1080p. The difference is night and day. Stop trying to find ways to say "There's no difference", when clearly there is.
I do graphic design. The first thing anybody will tell is to NEVER upscale an image, it only loses quality.
@APiranhaAteMyVaSo let me get this straight: I call bullshit, and the argument changes to, "Well, it would look the same in motion!" No. It doesn't. I updated the GPU in my PC (not at all a high-end gaming machine). Games that would only run before at 720p now run at 1080p. The difference is night and day. Stop trying to find ways to say "There's no difference", when clearly there is.
I do graphic design. The first thing anybody will tell is to NEVER upscale an image, it only loses quality.
I never said there is no difference, just that it isn't night and day as you seem to think, especially when you are judging a still shot and disregarding all other factors. You can tell a difference between both them images for sure, but what about on a real home set up playing a game.
It would be a good idea if one of these tech sites set up two identical TVs side by side, calibrate them to be close to identical as they can and then judge both side by side. Sitting the same distance from both, and reporting when/if it becomes noticeable. Tech sites have done this test with HDMi cables, so I see no reason why a site can't do something for a more important factor to buying like resolutions.
I agree with u bro. Sony fans can brag all they want with the 1080p but they dont got the games. They got nothing. Even if they do get games, they dont got the cloud. The number of p wont matter with the cloud. The cloud is what will decide the true power of next gen systems, its why im paying extra. Were lucky theyre only charging $500. The cloud makes it more powerful than even $2000 computers.
Killzone: 1080p has facial animations from the N64 days. Dude looks like he is sneezing while he is speaking.
Ryse: 900p Some of the best facial animations I have ever seen.
Resolution doesn't make shit graphics pretty. Nothing can fix that. Did you ever fire up a game from 2004 on your PC and max it out with a new card from today? It still looks like shit. See my point?
Killzone: 1080p has facial animations from the N64 days. Dude looks like he is sneezing while he is speaking.
Ryse: 900p Some of the best facial animations I have ever seen.
Resolution doesn't make shit graphics pretty. Nothing can fix that. Did you ever fire up a game from 2004 on your PC and max it out with a new card from today? It still looks like shit. See my point?
Killzone: 1080p has facial animations from the N64 days. Dude looks like he is sneezing while he is speaking.
Ryse: 900p Some of the best facial animations I have ever seen.
Resolution doesn't make shit graphics pretty. Nothing can fix that. Did you ever fire up a game from 2004 on your PC and max it out with a new card from today? It still looks like shit. See my point?
2003, still looking pretty in 1080p to me
My point is.................... a shit looking game isn't going to be magically transformed by 1080p. A beautiful game at the core no mater how old is important.
Take all your images and videos put them on 50" screen, sit 10 feet away and honestly say there is a difference that would make you choose a console over another. Even sat 6 feet away the differences wont be enough.
Cost, Games, features, friends and multiplayer will be the deciding factor when the differences are so slim. In fact they will always be the difference, the Wii selling more than the 360/PS3 shows that.
The reason the PS4 will sell better early on is because the price is less and Microsoft haven't shown enough of what the Kinect and OS can do. Once the prices are the same the resolution differences alone wont be enough to remain on top. If they bring out the games they keep promising and not hiding behind indies then they may remain on top. But even then a 60/40 or even 70/30 split still means millions of sold consoles for Xbox One. With the price being more it can only mean less kids on multiplayer games also :)
I can't believe that on a forum about tech (games), people are seriously trying to state that 720p and 1080p are "more or less the same". Only matters in stills? Watch an NFL game on FOX, then watch it on NBC. Night and day difference and that's only 720p vs 1080i. Pop in a Blu-Ray and it's like a screen door was removed from your eyeballs.
It was completely noticeable on the 55in that I used to have, and now my 120" projection screen... don't even get me started. It is HARD to enjoy current graphics levels on my 360 on a TV over 55in, so switching to next generation is supposed to help fix some of that. Don't think that has an impact on gamers? I've never owned any playstation product before it, but I will be purchasing a PS4 partly due to the horrid AA and lower resolution on the XB1. I game on my PC streamed to the projector, and in a new console I want to a closely match that experience as possible.
A small $100 price difference in no way has any impact on my gaming decision, not with the hundreds or possibly thousands more that will be spent over the years on them. The fact is both systems will have a great games, great accessories, and a great network this time. Buy whatever console you want, for whatever reasons you want. Stop with the misinformation though, it really doesn't help.
I can't believe that on a forum about tech (games), people are seriously trying to state that 720p and 1080p are "more or less the same". Only matters in stills? Watch an NFL game on FOX, then watch it on NBC. Night and day difference and that's only 720p vs 1080i. Pop in a Blu-Ray and it's like a screen door was removed from your eyeballs.
It was completely noticeable on the 55in that I used to have, and now my 120" projection screen... don't even get me started. It is HARD to enjoy current graphics levels on my 360 on a TV over 55in, so switching to next generation is supposed to help fix some of that. Don't think that has an impact on gamers? I've never owned any playstation product before it, but I will be purchasing a PS4 partly due to the horrid AA and lower resolution on the XB1. I game on my PC streamed to the projector, and in a new console I want to a closely match that experience as possible.
A small $100 price difference in no way has any impact on my gaming decision, not with the hundreds or possibly thousands more that will be spent over the years on them. The fact is both systems will have a great games, great accessories, and a great network this time. Buy whatever console you want, for whatever reasons you want. Stop with the misinformation though, it really doesn't help.
Lucky you, but your not an example of 90% of consoles buyers out there.
Your talking tosh about 720p to 1080i, 720p is better than 1080i for sports and fast moving movies.
Dimishing returns is factual, not up for debate really.
Obviously more pixels is better, how much better is the question.
If a machine can do 4k resolution, of course I'd rather have that, but am I gonna pay an extra $1000 or $2000 for it? Nope.
If I can get 1080 on the cheap, I'll do that.
If I can get 720 on the cheap, I'll do that.
As long as the devs make the game nice, that's the #1 thing, in fact I would say RAM is much more important than 720 vs 1080, with RAM you can make bigger levels, more complicated everything, better AI, etc etc.
These days I would say 1080 vs 720 upscale is the equivalent of having extra AA or something.
I wasn't allowed my own thread, and the original thread was incoherent, so I'll post this here:
I responded to a post by @PraetorianMan who stated:
"Screw the PS4, pretend it doesn't even exist.
WHY is the Xbox One only pushing 720p on a game that doesn't even look graphically impressive?"
with this article -
Why Microsoft doesn't require Xbox One devs to run games in native 1080p
which uses this article as a source -
Microsoft to unlock more GPU power for Xbox One developers
Here are some cherry picked quotes from both:
"Xbox One reserves 10 per cent of graphics resources for Kinect and apps functionality, Digital Foundry can confirm, with Microsoft planning to open up this additional GPU power for game development in the future. This, and further graphics and performance-based information was revealed during our lengthy discussions with two of the architects behind the Xbox One silicon."
"A lower resolution generally means that there can be more quality per pixel. With a high quality scaler and anti-aliasing and render resolutions such as 720p or '900p', some games look better with more GPU processing going to each pixel than to the number of pixels; others look better at 1080p with less GPU processing per pixel."
_____________
The thing is; the PS4 does exist. It's more powerful, and it's cheaper. And I'm starting to think MS were well aware that their competitor would be out-performing them from launch, and the damage control started over a month ago.
Saying that; many people, including myself, do not see much of a difference between the BF4 comparisons we have, and actually prefer the technically inferior version - this is from video and picture comparisons, and I'm certain side-by-side comparisons will show the clear differences. And the other news we have is that CoD: Ghosts, another high-profile multi-platform title, will be significantly inferior on the more expensive platform.
Should there have been a Technical Certification Requirement mandate that required Xbox One games to run at 1080p native?
Do you think the decision to include Kinect and other functionality will impact the Xbox brand?
Is the Xbox One's, subjectively, superior launch line-up worth the additional cost?
If not, what features/exclusives do you think justify the additional cost?
Disregarding cost/power, should MS ever be forgiven for their attempt at DRM?
At this point, why would you buy inferior hardware at a higher price?
Killzone: 1080p has facial animations from the N64 days. Dude looks like he is sneezing while he is speaking.
Ryse: 900p Some of the best facial animations I have ever seen.
Resolution doesn't make shit graphics pretty. Nothing can fix that. Did you ever fire up a game from 2004 on your PC and max it out with a new card from today? It still looks like shit. See my point?
The best part is how both are completely unplayable,gameplay graphics IN GAME Ryse graphics are nothing like that video,and Killzone does look better while running at higher resolution and higher frames to.
Hell Killzone online look better than Ryse online or offline.
Killzone: 1080p has facial animations from the N64 days. Dude looks like he is sneezing while he is speaking.
Ryse: 900p Some of the best facial animations I have ever seen.
Resolution doesn't make shit graphics pretty. Nothing can fix that. Did you ever fire up a game from 2004 on your PC and max it out with a new card from today? It still looks like shit. See my point?
The best part is how both are completely unplayable,gameplay graphics IN GAME Ryse graphics are nothing like that video,and Killzone does look better while running at higher resolution and higher frames to.
Hell Killzone online look better than Ryse online or offline.
you babble so much I don't even think YOU can understand yourself. Are you talking about cut scenes vs. gameplay. all use the same engine. The KZ engine sucks to high hell.
Killzone massive downgrade incoming in 3.2.1......
you babble so much I don't even think YOU can understand yourself. Are you talking about cut scenes vs. gameplay. all use the same engine. The KZ engine sucks to high hell.
Killzone massive downgrade incoming in 3.2.1......
Cut scenes aren't playable Ryse gameplay is very encloses and far from looking like the cut scenes,gameplay vs gameplay Killzone SF does more at higher resolutions and higher frames with more effects to.
When you try to make a demanding game on xbox one,everything fall apart like BF4 and Ghost already prove,Ryse look nice because is very enclosed and heavily path guided,is like a corridor shooter but without the corridor.
T, nobody is interested in KZ. Yes, pre-orders blah blah blah, because
there are not other games on the thing to pre-order.
Now scroll up and read my post.
Lets see the most pre-order games on xbox one are not Ryse or Forza but COD Ghost and BF4,on PS4 those 2 are also high but Killzone SF is also high,even that other 2 very popular FPS are there to,so what other hack and slash there is on xbox one.? Ryse is basically alone,so is Dead Rising,yet they are below the shooters.
So The xbox one is on the same boat no good games i see since Ryse,Forza,or Dead Rising aren't top sellers..lol
you babble so much I don't even think YOU can understand yourself. Are you talking about cut scenes vs. gameplay. all use the same engine. The KZ engine sucks to high hell.
Killzone massive downgrade incoming in 3.2.1......
Cut scenes aren't playable Ryse gameplay is very encloses and far from looking like the cut scenes,gameplay vs gameplay Killzone SF does more at higher resolutions and higher frames with more effects to.
When you try to make a demanding game on xbox one,everything fall apart like BF4 and Ghost already prove,Ryse look nice because is very enclosed and heavily path guided,is like a corridor shooter but without the corridor.
You love to counter with a lot of bullshit that no one can understand. When you take the background out, the fog, the enclosed spaces etc. and just but the facial animations up head to head. which one looks better to you?
One looks amazing (Ryse) and one looks last gen. (KZ). Fact.
You love to counter with a lot of bullshit that no one can understand. When you take the background out, the fog, the enclosed spaces etc. and just but the facial animations up head to head. which one looks better to you?
One looks amazing (Ryse) and one looks last gen. (KZ). Fact.
No i counter with facts,Fact is Ryse doesn't look like that gameplay wise period,you can post all the bullsh** gif you want that is not gameplay period.
@danabo said:
@tormentos said:
So The xbox one is on the same boat no good games i see since Ryse,Forza,or Dead Rising aren't top sellers..lol
Yes, the best games are always the "top sellers"
Now scroll up and read my post!
Drop the charade dude,if killzone is selling because there is nothing more,when it has BF4 and COD ghost how you explain those also selling on xbox one over xbox one exclusives,you know leaks point at Killzone SF selling better than all xbox one exclusives right.? Even that it has to compete with 2 other popular FPS on day 1,when on xbox one there is no competition for xbox one games on those genres,it makes your arguments all the sadder.
It's cool if that game is running at 1080P though.
But it doesn't matter.
No one can really tell the difference with the naked eye between 720 and 1080. There is small difference when going from say 480 to 1080 that is a little noticeable but there is virtually none between 720 and 1080.
If you can't tell the difference between 720P to 1080P then there is something wrong with your eye. If you are in front of a PC monitor and go turn down the resolution from 1080P to 720P and see how it looks. Or if you have a console like a PS3 like I do, go play on it and then compare the same game on the same TV in FULL HD 1080P. The console version, it's going look blurry and crappy (especially if you have something like 50" or higher HDTV). There is a significant difference.
I just got done playing games in FULL HD 1080P on my Samsung 60" Plasma. Assassins Creed II looks stunning in FULL HD 1080P with 8X AA. The texture has more detail, everything is rajor sharp and crystal clear. In a normal living room, you will see a significant difference from 720P to 1080P. If you take an 720P image and stretch it to fit a 60" screen size obviously that will look significantly less sharp as compared to an image that is native 1080P. I have hooked up gaming PC to my 60" HDTV as well as my PS3 and the difference is significant in gaming. Not to mention that PC's will have better DX 11 effects like tesselation, higher AA, etc. and all the graphical bells and whistles (i.e, TressFX anyone?).
It's cool if that game is running at 1080P though.
But it doesn't matter.
No one can really tell the difference with the naked eye between 720 and 1080. There is small difference when going from say 480 to 1080 that is a little noticeable but there is virtually none between 720 and 1080.
Virtually none? Proves that you haven't gamed in 1080P. How can there be "none" difference at double the resolution. I have seen with my own eyes where the textures are more blurrier and not crystal clear like in 1080P.
If you are having trouble gaming less than 10 feet away from a 55 inch set, you really should have your eye sight checked.
Further more, you are better off paying a licensed professional to fine tune your set than you are just wasting the money on a higher resolution. Its funny to me on how many people dump a grand on a television set only to view with factory settings and all the stupid filters activated.
Shouldnt you have said more than 10 feet away?
You really want to try to put forth the notion that a player sitting closer to the screen doesnt have an advantage in mp or doesnt feel more immersed in the game world?
It's cool if that game is running at 1080P though.
But it doesn't matter.
No one can really tell the difference with the naked eye between 720 and 1080. There is small difference when going from say 480 to 1080 that is a little noticeable but there is virtually none between 720 and 1080.
Unless of course it was the PS4 that was stuck at 720p. Then the Xbots would be all over that shit "PS4 720p lulz!"
its not really about 1080p and 720p with these first few games....the fact is that one system costs $100 less and is more powerful. Down the road that power is going to be big. If you are only getting one console I honestly don't see how anyone could choose xbone over ps4.
PS4 is more powerful and its a fact. If you like the games on xbox one better that that is different but you can't argue the fact that the PS4 is a more powerful system.
And comparing some random screenshot of two different games is pretty dumb. Like comparing a god of war 3 screenshot with a halo 3 screenshot and saying PS3 has twice the graphical power than xbox 360
Log in to comment