how to fix the order 1886

  • 104 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for WitIsWisdom
WitIsWisdom

10448

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 11

User Lists: 0

#52 WitIsWisdom
Member since 2007 • 10448 Posts

How to fix the order? Give an option to use classic third person instead of crappy OTS. Fixed.

Avatar image for ConanTheStoner
ConanTheStoner

23838

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#53  Edited By ConanTheStoner  Online
Member since 2011 • 23838 Posts

@CrownKingArthur said:
@ConanTheStoner said:

So a joke topic actually goes on to expose a number of "slow" users.

Was this your intention CKA?

yip

Well played sir, well played indeed.

Avatar image for TheFadeForever
TheFadeForever

2655

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#54  Edited By TheFadeForever
Member since 2013 • 2655 Posts

TC got you good cows

"bu but tc owned himself ah what not"

Avatar image for treedoor
treedoor

7648

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#55  Edited By treedoor
Member since 2004 • 7648 Posts

That's actually how I do it on my PC.

I've modified my PC monitor to have a very thick black border around it. Makes me feel like I'm playing games at a resolution higher than 1080p.

Avatar image for Mr-Kutaragi
Mr-Kutaragi

2466

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#56  Edited By Mr-Kutaragi
Member since 2013 • 2466 Posts

@PinkieWinkie said:

I guess RE4 needed to be fixed too then. Wait, no it didn't.

TLHBO.

This happen when xbox brand have no AAA average exclusive for 3 year, bro getting bored and make poor attempt to be "clever." DC for 720p and poor performance this gen by comparing to design decision of other dev.

Avatar image for EducatingU_PCMR
EducatingU_PCMR

1581

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

#57  Edited By EducatingU_PCMR
Member since 2013 • 1581 Posts
@locopatho said:

@CrownKingArthur said:
@locopatho said:

@CrownKingArthur said:
@Shielder7 said:

@I_can_haz said:

It's full HD already, it doesn't need fixing. The black bars don't take away anything from the resolution.

He's trying to be clever but is coming off as a moron as usual.

The Order 1886 is not full HD.

Full HD is 1920x1080. The Order 1886's render is 1920x800 which is too low to be Full HD.

Drawing black bars along the top and bottom doesn't reduce the resolution of the remaining screen, which is the same res as a 1920 * 1080 game would be. It's full HD at a different aspect ratio. There is no rule that says full HD must be a 16:9 ratio.

so, what's happening in the third picture in my opening post?

using identical logic, the ps4 now renders the order 1886 in 2560x1080, is that correct?

the truth is a 1920x800 scene was rendered in all three instances. an interesting fact about this resolution - it is below full hd.

I'm using the definition of 1080P

i never talked about reduction. the simple facts:

1. the scene render is done at 1920x800

2. this is vertically centered on a 1920x1080 display

3. the rest is populated by what i'll crudely describe as 'free black'.

i'm sorry. but full hd is 2 073 000 pixels. the order 1886's 1 536 000 pixels does not achieve this technical definition of 1080P. Earlier today you earned a victory, even if I wanted to - I cannot grant this one.

A wikipedia link? Seriously? Lawl.

It's a full hd game. Blocking off the top and bottom with black bars doesn't change the quality of the rest of the screen.

It's not a Full HD game.

"Full HD" is a commercial term meaning 1920 lines vertical, and 1080 lines horizontal. So "Full HD" is indeed related to the 16:9 aspect ratio.

The order is 1920x800, it is not Full HD.

Don't you have any movies in 1920x800? If you open them you'll see the player adds two horizontal lines in the top and bottom, this is done because the screen needs to be filled with something, because 280 horizontal lines are missing.

The other way is to force another aspect ratio, 16:9, if you force it the image will look stretched because the only way to fill the screen is to stretch the pixels up and down.

TL:DR The Order is not Full HD.

Avatar image for lglz1337
lglz1337

4959

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#58  Edited By lglz1337
Member since 2013 • 4959 Posts

@PinkieWinkie: so good ! TC debunked

Avatar image for ronvalencia
ronvalencia

29612

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#59  Edited By ronvalencia
Member since 2008 • 29612 Posts

@locopatho:

@happyduds77 said:

@CrownKingArthur said:
@locopatho said:

A wikipedia link? Seriously? Lawl.

It's a full hd game. Blocking off the top and bottom with black bars doesn't change the quality of the rest of the screen.

yes that's correct. a wikipedia link. 'Lawl' does not refute my argument.

with my argument unrefuted, i further strengthen my position with more evidence. heard of the bbc? here is a technical document.

section 7.3 http://www.bbc.co.uk/guidelines/dq/pdf/tv/TechnicalDeliveryStandardsFileBBCv2.pdf

they clearly talk about 1080P and the resolution for 1080P is defined as 1920x1080.

you still claim it is full hd. why do you do this? how is it a full hd game if only (1920x800) 1 536 000 pixels were rendered?

full hd is 2 076 000 pixels. no free black allowed.

yes that's right the 1920 width of the scene allows this scene to slot into a full hd display pixel for pixel. oh and the unrendered areas top and bottom are then populated by 'free black'.

So image quality is the same, but ratio is different. Is that what you're saying?

In terms of pixel count, it not "Full HD" i.e. 1920 x 1080 pixels.

The devs has stated 1920x800 was due to MSAA 4X bandwidth consumption i.e. 32 ROPS's MSAA processors wasn't able to operating at full speed due to memory bandwidth limits.

PS4's 32 ROPS is just a paper tiger when compare to the real 32 ROPS with higher memory bandwidth from 7950 Boost Edition.

The top 32 ROPS equipped Radeon HD is the R9-280X a.k.a. 7970 GE a.k.a. 8970.

Avatar image for zeeshanhaider
zeeshanhaider

5524

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#60 zeeshanhaider
Member since 2004 • 5524 Posts

So cows are now defining their own terminology for Full HD. Never saw that coming. I guess when you can't have games at 1080p on 900pStation the desperation force you to do just that.

Avatar image for Warlord_Irochi
Warlord_Irochi

4291

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 12

User Lists: 7

#62 Warlord_Irochi
Member since 2009 • 4291 Posts

Man, it is so easy to fire up fanboys... almost as easy as pointing a bored graphic-obessed PC user.

Avatar image for hippiesanta
hippiesanta

10301

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#63 hippiesanta
Member since 2005 • 10301 Posts

people with big TV at home won't complaint the black bars

Avatar image for jake44
jake44

2085

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#64 jake44
Member since 2003 • 2085 Posts

@Wasdie said:

Nothing is broken. They wanted to go with an unusual aspect ratio for games. That's not broken, that's their decision.

As usual, Wasdie is right.

Avatar image for Snugenz
Snugenz

13388

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#65 Snugenz
Member since 2006 • 13388 Posts

I love this thread, i hope it never dies.

Avatar image for ShoTTyMcNaDeS
ShoTTyMcNaDeS

2784

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#66 ShoTTyMcNaDeS
Member since 2011 • 2784 Posts

How about we just play games and not worry about aspect ratios, rendering and graphical resolutions! Man you guys all need to get laid. You sound like a bunch of 300 lb. nerds that sit at a desk chair shoving Cheetos and Mountain Dew in your face!

Avatar image for FoxbatAlpha
FoxbatAlpha

10669

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#67 FoxbatAlpha
Member since 2009 • 10669 Posts

Lol at Gears of Order: 1886 and the "cinematic" experience.

Avatar image for jake44
jake44

2085

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#68  Edited By jake44
Member since 2003 • 2085 Posts

@seanmcloughlin said:

Needing to be fixed would mean something's broken or doesn't work. Which isn't the case

Avatar image for R4gn4r0k
R4gn4r0k

49076

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#69 R4gn4r0k
Member since 2004 • 49076 Posts

@locopatho said:

@CrownKingArthur said:
@Shielder7 said:

@I_can_haz said:

It's full HD already, it doesn't need fixing. The black bars don't take away anything from the resolution.

He's trying to be clever but is coming off as a moron as usual.

The Order 1886 is not full HD.

Full HD is 1920x1080. The Order 1886's render is 1920x800 which is too low to be Full HD.

Drawing black bars along the top and bottom doesn't reduce the resolution of the remaining screen, which is the same res as a 1920 * 1080 game would be. It's full HD at a different aspect ratio. There is no rule that says full HD must be a 16:9 ratio.

Whaaaaaaaaa ?

Full HD is 1920x1080... so yeah the RULE is that it needs to be 1920x1080 and that is a 16:9 aspect ratio :/

Avatar image for R4gn4r0k
R4gn4r0k

49076

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#70 R4gn4r0k
Member since 2004 • 49076 Posts

@Gaming-Planet said:

I'm planning on getting a 21:9 monitor(2560x1080p) anyway. It looks amazing for PC games. Someone should make a bendable 21:9 monitor.

I have a 21:9 monitor from LG and I can tell you it's great.

+Higher aspect ratio allows you to see more than 16:9 monitors

+You don't need multiple monitors for the wider view, meaning no bezels, which is great

+The increase from 1920x1080 to 2560x1080 doesn't take a huge hit on performance

-Not all games support it. Most games can be fixed to support it (check WSGF) but in like 0.01% of the cases there is no fix

Anyway, in the case of The Order: making a 21:9 game on a system which everyon has hooked up to a 16:9 TV is pretty dumb.

Avatar image for tymeservesfate
tymeservesfate

2230

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#71  Edited By tymeservesfate
Member since 2003 • 2230 Posts

@Vecna said:

stealing this pic XD

but yea, awesome thread LOL...and...yes, yes, i agree TC. very well put.

Avatar image for deactivated-5cd08b1605da1
deactivated-5cd08b1605da1

9317

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 27

User Lists: 0

#72 deactivated-5cd08b1605da1
Member since 2012 • 9317 Posts

@FoxbatAlpha said:

Lol at Gears of Order: 1886 and the "cinematic" experience.

And yet, watch lems hyping the next Gears

Avatar image for Joedgabe
Joedgabe

5134

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 7

User Lists: 0

#73 Joedgabe
Member since 2006 • 5134 Posts

the bars are for the cinematic experience i believe. Not really anything to do with the 1080p i think.

Avatar image for IamAdorable
IamAdorable

407

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#74 IamAdorable
Member since 2013 • 407 Posts

Last picture made me chuckle :p
The only way to play it!

Avatar image for tlgersuperman
Tlgersuperman

88

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#75 Tlgersuperman
Member since 2014 • 88 Posts

But if you use 256 colors....

Avatar image for locopatho
locopatho

24300

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#76 locopatho
Member since 2003 • 24300 Posts

@R4gn4r0k said:

@locopatho said:

@CrownKingArthur said:
@Shielder7 said:

@I_can_haz said:

It's full HD already, it doesn't need fixing. The black bars don't take away anything from the resolution.

He's trying to be clever but is coming off as a moron as usual.

The Order 1886 is not full HD.

Full HD is 1920x1080. The Order 1886's render is 1920x800 which is too low to be Full HD.

Drawing black bars along the top and bottom doesn't reduce the resolution of the remaining screen, which is the same res as a 1920 * 1080 game would be. It's full HD at a different aspect ratio. There is no rule that says full HD must be a 16:9 ratio.

Full HD is 1920x1080

Says who?

Avatar image for zeeshanhaider
zeeshanhaider

5524

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#77  Edited By zeeshanhaider
Member since 2004 • 5524 Posts

@locopatho said:

@R4gn4r0k said:

@locopatho said:

@CrownKingArthur said:
@Shielder7 said:

@I_can_haz said:

It's full HD already, it doesn't need fixing. The black bars don't take away anything from the resolution.

He's trying to be clever but is coming off as a moron as usual.

The Order 1886 is not full HD.

Full HD is 1920x1080. The Order 1886's render is 1920x800 which is too low to be Full HD.

Drawing black bars along the top and bottom doesn't reduce the resolution of the remaining screen, which is the same res as a 1920 * 1080 game would be. It's full HD at a different aspect ratio. There is no rule that says full HD must be a 16:9 ratio.

Full HD is 1920x1080

Says who?

Prove that any thing below 1920x1080 is FullHD.

Avatar image for R4gn4r0k
R4gn4r0k

49076

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#78  Edited By R4gn4r0k
Member since 2004 • 49076 Posts

@locopatho said:

@R4gn4r0k said:

@locopatho said:

@CrownKingArthur said:
@Shielder7 said:

@I_can_haz said:

It's full HD already, it doesn't need fixing. The black bars don't take away anything from the resolution.

He's trying to be clever but is coming off as a moron as usual.

The Order 1886 is not full HD.

Full HD is 1920x1080. The Order 1886's render is 1920x800 which is too low to be Full HD.

Drawing black bars along the top and bottom doesn't reduce the resolution of the remaining screen, which is the same res as a 1920 * 1080 game would be. It's full HD at a different aspect ratio. There is no rule that says full HD must be a 16:9 ratio.

Full HD is 1920x1080

Says who?

The people that coined up the "Full HD" term

What are you trying to say here: that Full HD is not 1920x1080?

Because let me tell you: Full HD is 1080p is 1920x1080 or in other words it's a 16:9 aspect ratio.

From Wikipedia:

High-definition television (HDTV) provides a resolution that is substantially higher than that of standard-definition television.

HDTV may be transmitted in various formats:

  • 1080p - 1920×1080p: 2,073,600 pixels (~2.1 megapixels [Mpx]) per frame
  • 1080i - typically either:
    • 1920×1080i: 1,036,800 pixels (~1 Mpx) per field or 2,073,600 pixels (~2.1 Mpx) per frame
    • 1440×1080i: 777,600 pixels (~0.8 Mpx) per field or 1,555,200 pixels (~1.6 Mpx) per frame
  • 720p - 1280×720p: 921,600 pixels (~0.9 Mpx) per frame

The letter "p" here stands for progressive scan while "i" indicates interlaced.

1080p (aka Full HD/ FHD and BT.709) is a set of HDTVhigh-definition video modes characterized by 1080 horizontal lines of vertical resolution[1] and progressive scan, as opposed to interlaced, as is the case with the 1080i display standard. The term usually assumes a widescreenaspect ratio of 16:9, implying a resolution of 1920x1080 (2.1 megapixel) often marketed as Full HD.

Avatar image for deactivated-5d6bb9cb2ee20
deactivated-5d6bb9cb2ee20

82724

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 56

User Lists: 0

#79 deactivated-5d6bb9cb2ee20
Member since 2006 • 82724 Posts

It seems so many people missed the point...

Avatar image for always_explicit
always_explicit

3379

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#80 always_explicit
Member since 2007 • 3379 Posts

@I_can_haz said:

OP, when you make a "joke" thread and you're the only one laughing at your joke it's probably time to hang the towel.

I laughed at his thread. My favourite bit was when you commented and got schooled by TC.

Avatar image for handssss
handssss

1907

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#81 handssss
Member since 2013 • 1907 Posts

@R4gn4r0k said:

@locopatho said:

@R4gn4r0k said:

@locopatho said:

@CrownKingArthur said:
@Shielder7 said:

@I_can_haz said:

It's full HD already, it doesn't need fixing. The black bars don't take away anything from the resolution.

He's trying to be clever but is coming off as a moron as usual.

The Order 1886 is not full HD.

Full HD is 1920x1080. The Order 1886's render is 1920x800 which is too low to be Full HD.

Drawing black bars along the top and bottom doesn't reduce the resolution of the remaining screen, which is the same res as a 1920 * 1080 game would be. It's full HD at a different aspect ratio. There is no rule that says full HD must be a 16:9 ratio.

Full HD is 1920x1080

Says who?

The people that coined up the "Full HD" term

What are you trying to say here: that Full HD is not 1920x1080?

Because let me tell you: Full HD is 1080p is 1920x1080 or in other words it's a 16:9 aspect ratio.

From Wikipedia:

High-definition television (HDTV) provides a resolution that is substantially higher than that of standard-definition television.

HDTV may be transmitted in various formats:

  • 1080p - 1920×1080p: 2,073,600 pixels (~2.1 megapixels [Mpx]) per frame
  • 1080i - typically either:
    • 1920×1080i: 1,036,800 pixels (~1 Mpx) per field or 2,073,600 pixels (~2.1 Mpx) per frame
    • 1440×1080i: 777,600 pixels (~0.8 Mpx) per field or 1,555,200 pixels (~1.6 Mpx) per frame
  • 720p - 1280×720p: 921,600 pixels (~0.9 Mpx) per frame

The letter "p" here stands for progressive scan while "i" indicates interlaced.

1080p (aka Full HD/ FHD and BT.709) is a set of HDTVhigh-definition video modes characterized by 1080 horizontal lines of vertical resolution[1] and progressive scan, as opposed to interlaced, as is the case with the 1080i display standard. The term usually assumes a widescreenaspect ratio of 16:9, implying a resolution of 1920x1080 (2.1 megapixel) often marketed as Full HD.

so then why are blu-ray movies all considered full 1080p when most of them use the same aspect ratio as the order?

Avatar image for FoxbatAlpha
FoxbatAlpha

10669

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#82  Edited By FoxbatAlpha
Member since 2009 • 10669 Posts

@Vatusus said:

@FoxbatAlpha said:

Lol at Gears of Order: 1886 and the "cinematic" experience.

And yet, watch lems hyping the next Gears

That's because Gears is Gears. The original. Not some League of Extraordinary Gentlemen crap.

Avatar image for R4gn4r0k
R4gn4r0k

49076

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#83 R4gn4r0k
Member since 2004 • 49076 Posts

@handssss said:

so then why are blu-ray movies all considered full 1080p when most of them use the same aspect ratio as the order?

That is a very good question. But the term Full HD means 1080p or 1920x1080

Seeing as how the Blu-ray video fills all horizontal pixels (1920 horizontally) but not all vertical pixels, as it's in a 21:9 aspect ratio I would say they are not Full HD, they are in fact 1920x800.

Avatar image for PurpleMan5000
PurpleMan5000

10531

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#84 PurpleMan5000
Member since 2011 • 10531 Posts

@treedoor said:

That's actually how I do it on my PC.

I've modified my PC monitor to have a very thick black border around it. Makes me feel like I'm playing games at a resolution higher than 1080p.

I usually just upgrade my PC when I want to game at a higher resolution/settings, but this black border concept has me intrigued.

Avatar image for CrownKingArthur
CrownKingArthur

5262

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#85  Edited By CrownKingArthur
Member since 2013 • 5262 Posts
@R4gn4r0k said:

@handssss said:

so then why are blu-ray movies all considered full 1080p when most of them use the same aspect ratio as the order?

That is a very good question. But the term Full HD means 1080p or 1920x1080

Seeing as how the Blu-ray video fills all horizontal pixels (1920 horizontally) but not all vertical pixels, as it's in a 21:9 aspect ratio I would say they are not Full HD, they are in fact 1920x800.

correct.

in common parlance i don't talk about 'full hd' movies anyway, i talk about 'blu ray quality' - when i'm talking about the top tier quality films. this is reflected in the marketing materials of major retailers, such as amazon.

also, i wouldn't make the comparison from movies to games. there are already so many full hd games, i'd suggest its more appropriate to compare those to the order - and in the order's case there difference is a loss of pixel data from the top and bottom replaced with black bars. furthermore games are a dynamic content whereas movies are static. just a few reasons why the movies to games comparison is flawed.

there are tv shows which are filmed and broadcast in 16:9 full hd 1920x1080. that's full hd. a blu ray film in 1920x800 is not full hd, but it's blu ray quality.

Avatar image for shawn30
shawn30

4409

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#86 shawn30
Member since 2006 • 4409 Posts

I like the borders, myself. Adds a bit of style to their game display. I just hope the game is good as this could get me to buy a PS4. I have hi hopes for this one.

Avatar image for Mozelleple112
Mozelleple112

11293

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

#87  Edited By Mozelleple112
Member since 2011 • 11293 Posts

@CrownKingArthur said:
@Shielder7 said:

@I_can_haz said:

It's full HD already, it doesn't need fixing. The black bars don't take away anything from the resolution.

He's trying to be clever but is coming off as a moron as usual.

The Order 1886 is not full HD.

Full HD is 1920x1080. The Order 1886's render is 1920x800 which is too low to be Full HD.

This is correct, but people who say "its 800p" are clearly stupid and don't know a thing or two about resolution.

1920x800p will look every bit as sharp as high-res as 1920x1080p with the exception of 280 vertical pixels per horizontal line, however this will just appear as two black bars on the top and bottom of the picture, without ruining the smoothness or sharpness of regular 1920x1080p resolution. They could have gone for 2560x1080p which would give us the sharpness of 2560x1600p, but with black bars, but so few TVs support that resolution and it would require significantly more graphical power from the PS4, it isn't worth it.

Would go perfect with Philips' 21:9 cine screens, those are 2560x1080p and already 21:9 aspect ratio, so you would be able to play without any black bars.

Avatar image for misterpmedia
misterpmedia

6209

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#88 misterpmedia
Member since 2013 • 6209 Posts

@seanmcloughlin said:

Needing to be fixed would mean something's broken or doesn't work. Which isn't the case

Also worked well for Resident Evil 4. A very highly praised game, and one of my favourites. To be honest I didn't even notice them until the comparisons with The Order were made.

Avatar image for R4gn4r0k
R4gn4r0k

49076

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#89 R4gn4r0k
Member since 2004 • 49076 Posts

@CrownKingArthur said:
@R4gn4r0k said:

@handssss said:

so then why are blu-ray movies all considered full 1080p when most of them use the same aspect ratio as the order?

That is a very good question. But the term Full HD means 1080p or 1920x1080

Seeing as how the Blu-ray video fills all horizontal pixels (1920 horizontally) but not all vertical pixels, as it's in a 21:9 aspect ratio I would say they are not Full HD, they are in fact 1920x800.

correct.

in common parlance i don't talk about 'full hd' movies anyway, i talk about 'blu ray quality' - when i'm talking about the top tier quality films. this is reflected in the marketing materials of major retailers, such as amazon.

also, i wouldn't make the comparison from movies to games. there are already so many full hd games, i'd suggest its more appropriate to compare those to the order - and in the order's case there difference is a loss of pixel data from the top and bottom replaced with black bars. furthermore games are a dynamic content whereas movies are static. just a few reasons why the movies to games comparison is flawed.

there are tv shows which are filmed and broadcast in 16:9 full hd 1920x1080. that's full hd. a blu ray film in 1920x800 is not full hd, but it's blu ray quality.

There is a lot of misconception it seems. A lot of people say a blu-ray movie is full HD, hell, I think I have called it that too. But thinking about it, and what full HD implies, it can't be. It can be the best possible resolution, but it can't be full HD in its aspect ratio.

Totally, Movies and games should be totally necessary. Movies are in 21:9 because that is the aspect ratio of a Cinema screen and projector. The order is in 21:9 because they want this game to be more cinematic. BS, they know everyone will play it on a 16:9 screen and they are cutting off what people see for a bullshit reason.

Avatar image for locopatho
locopatho

24300

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#90  Edited By locopatho
Member since 2003 • 24300 Posts

@R4gn4r0k said:

@handssss said:

so then why are blu-ray movies all considered full 1080p when most of them use the same aspect ratio as the order?

That is a very good question. But the term Full HD means 1080p or 1920x1080

Seeing as how the Blu-ray video fills all horizontal pixels (1920 horizontally) but not all vertical pixels, as it's in a 21:9 aspect ratio I would say they are not Full HD, they are in fact 1920x800.

See, this is why I'm arguing the point. It's utterly ridiculous to me that we are now saying Blu Ray movies aren't Full HD. The quality of their picture is exactly the same as a 1920*1080 image. Just at a different aspect ratio. Saying "They aren't Full HD" is at best overly pedantic, at worst trying to mislead people. The image quality IS Full HD. Just with black bars.

Hell, if we are being THIS technical and pedantic about it, couldn't we say that the black bars need to be drawn in as black pixels and thus they are rendering 1080 vertical pixels?

Btw, is there a source besides WIkipedia that says what exactly "FULL HD" means?

Avatar image for R4gn4r0k
R4gn4r0k

49076

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#91 R4gn4r0k
Member since 2004 • 49076 Posts

@locopatho said:

@R4gn4r0k said:

@handssss said:

so then why are blu-ray movies all considered full 1080p when most of them use the same aspect ratio as the order?

That is a very good question. But the term Full HD means 1080p or 1920x1080

Seeing as how the Blu-ray video fills all horizontal pixels (1920 horizontally) but not all vertical pixels, as it's in a 21:9 aspect ratio I would say they are not Full HD, they are in fact 1920x800.

See, this is why I'm arguing the point. It's utterly ridiculous to me that we are now saying Blu Ray movies aren't Full HD. The quality of their picture is exactly the same as a 1920*1080 image. Just at a different aspect ratio. Saying "They aren't Full HD" is at best overly pedantic, at worst trying to mislead people. The image quality IS Full HD. Just with black bars.

Hell, if we are being THIS technical and pedantic about it, couldn't we say that the black bars need to be drawn in as black pixels and thus they are rendering 1080 vertical pixels?

Btw, is there a source besides WIkipedia that says what exactly "FULL HD" means?

Go look it up yourself. I've provided enough evidence as to what Full HD exactly means. Google "What is Full HD", it's not hard to look it up yourself.

If you want to go ahead and believe that 1920x800 is Full HD or that 1920x800 with black bars is Full HD or that a 21:9 aspect ratio can be Full HD than please do so.

There are many people on this site that make up their own reality and I don't want to spend any of my time further into convincing you, because I seem to be getting nowhere.

Avatar image for locopatho
locopatho

24300

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#92  Edited By locopatho
Member since 2003 • 24300 Posts

@R4gn4r0k said:

@locopatho said:

@R4gn4r0k said:

@handssss said:

so then why are blu-ray movies all considered full 1080p when most of them use the same aspect ratio as the order?

That is a very good question. But the term Full HD means 1080p or 1920x1080

Seeing as how the Blu-ray video fills all horizontal pixels (1920 horizontally) but not all vertical pixels, as it's in a 21:9 aspect ratio I would say they are not Full HD, they are in fact 1920x800.

See, this is why I'm arguing the point. It's utterly ridiculous to me that we are now saying Blu Ray movies aren't Full HD. The quality of their picture is exactly the same as a 1920*1080 image. Just at a different aspect ratio. Saying "They aren't Full HD" is at best overly pedantic, at worst trying to mislead people. The image quality IS Full HD. Just with black bars.

Hell, if we are being THIS technical and pedantic about it, couldn't we say that the black bars need to be drawn in as black pixels and thus they are rendering 1080 vertical pixels?

Btw, is there a source besides WIkipedia that says what exactly "FULL HD" means?

Go look it up yourself. I've provided enough evidence as to what Full HD exactly means. Google "What is Full HD", it's not hard to look it up yourself.

If you want to go ahead and believe that 1920x800 is Full HD or that 1920x800 with black bars is Full HD or that a 21:9 aspect ratio can be Full HD than please do so.

There are many people on this site that make up their own reality and I don't want to spend any of my time further into convincing you, because I seem to be getting nowhere.

No, you provided Wikipedia. That isn't evidence.

I think I'll live in the reality where Blu Ray movies are Full HD and people don't argue that covering one portion of the screen damages the rest of the screens quality.

No need to get nasty about it, it's not my fault you guys refuse to provide evidence. I'm just using the evidence of my eyes: regardless of the aspect ratio, The Order and Blu Ray movies have identical image quality to TV and other video games. What is so crazy about that?

Avatar image for R4gn4r0k
R4gn4r0k

49076

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#93  Edited By R4gn4r0k
Member since 2004 • 49076 Posts

@locopatho said:

No, you provided Wikipedia. That isn't evidence.

I think I'll live in the reality where Blu Ray movies are Full HD and people don't argue that covering one portion of the screen damages the rest of the screens quality.

No need to get nasty about it, it's not my fault you guys refuse to provide evidence.

I'm just using the evidence of my eyes: regardless of the aspect ratio, The Order and Blu Ray movies have identical image quality to TV and other video games. What is so crazy about that?

What is so hard about googling "What is full HD" ?

edit: also, you do know that Wikipedia has sources do you ? Again, something you couldn't be bothered to look up yourself.

Avatar image for I_can_haz
I_can_haz

6511

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#94 I_can_haz
Member since 2013 • 6511 Posts

@always_explicit said:

@I_can_haz said:

OP, when you make a "joke" thread and you're the only one laughing at your joke it's probably time to hang the towel.

I laughed at his thread. My favourite bit was when you commented and got schooled by TC.

You laughing at his thread is about as valuable is like a guaranteed epic fail seal of approval. OP should be on suicide watch knowing that you found his thread funny.

Avatar image for CrownKingArthur
CrownKingArthur

5262

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#95 CrownKingArthur
Member since 2013 • 5262 Posts

@locopatho said:

@R4gn4r0k said:

.

it's not my fault you guys refuse to provide evidence

actually that's you who's failed to provide any evidence.

here is my fourth piece of evidence.

http://www.blu-ray.com/faq/

section 2.4, notice how it says MAXIMUM? the maximum resolution for a blu ray film is 1920x1080. which you accept is 1080P.

a fifth piece of evidence

sony wouldn't want to be guilty of false advertising, now would they? here we see all their 1080P tv's are marketed as full hd. meaning full hd and 1080p are interchangeable terms.

http://www.sony.co.uk/electronics/tv/t/televisions

i hope that this finally resolves this issue for you.

Avatar image for cainetao11
cainetao11

38076

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 77

User Lists: 1

#96 cainetao11
Member since 2006 • 38076 Posts

I can see what I need to just fine, even in the first pic. No fix needed

Avatar image for Heil68
Heil68

60833

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#97 Heil68
Member since 2004 • 60833 Posts

@xboxdone74 said:

I imagine the best way to fix The Order jelly, is to get a ps4.

Avatar image for deactivated-5cd08b1605da1
deactivated-5cd08b1605da1

9317

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 27

User Lists: 0

#98  Edited By deactivated-5cd08b1605da1
Member since 2012 • 9317 Posts

@FoxbatAlpha said:

@Vatusus said:

@FoxbatAlpha said:

Lol at Gears of Order: 1886 and the "cinematic" experience.

And yet, watch lems hyping the next Gears

That's because Gears is Gears. The original. Not some League of Extraordinary Gentlemen crap.

Original? Gears? Lol

Hint: Killswitch meets RE4

Gears wasnt original for shit. It just popularized TPS cover shooter mechanics, it didnt invented it

Avatar image for edwardecl
edwardecl

2240

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#99 edwardecl
Member since 2005 • 2240 Posts

Full HD is a bit of a grey area... I mean plenty of Bluray films are 1920 x 800 because of the aspect ratio, are they not full HD?

But anyway the reason given is that they wanted 4x MSAA... agree with it or not that's where it's at. It's a valid reason respect it. They could have done 1080p (1920 x 1080) without 4x MSAA with another technique but they didn't. My bigger concern is the frame rate to be honest.

Avatar image for CrownKingArthur
CrownKingArthur

5262

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#100  Edited By CrownKingArthur
Member since 2013 • 5262 Posts
@edwardecl said:

Full HD is a bit of a grey area... I mean plenty of Bluray films are 1920 x 800 because of the aspect ratio, are they not full HD?

But anyway the reason given is that they wanted 4x MSAA... agree with it or not that's where it's at. It's a valid reason respect it. They could have done 1080p (1920 x 1080) without 4x MSAA with another technique but they didn't. My bigger concern is the frame rate to be honest.

that's correct a blu ray quality film may not achieve 1080P (1080P is the technical term, essentially synonymous with the marketing term 'full HD', proven already in this thread). If you are looking for 'Full HD' content, then you'd be looking for something filmed in 16:9, like some modern TV shows. post 89 I talk about this with Ragnarok.

Respect the devs decision? Is that a command or something? If yes, what authority do you have over me? none. Instead I suggest to you to consider the following alternative angle in terms of "respect".

Here's what I respect: the already decided unchanging technical definitions of 1080P, and unfortunately The Order 1886 fails to meet the specifications. Therefore I simply call it as I see it - The Order 1886 is not Full HD. I can't see why this would be a problem for anyone unless they were a member of the Congregation of the Church of Sony Playstation.

Another way I pay respect to the dev's is to represent their product accurately. It renders at 1920x800 (fact) which is not full hd (fact). The denialists of this pay massive disrespect to every 1080P video game which came before the order 1886 which had to a 35% larger scene to render!