Microsoft Drops 360's HD Requirements?

The fanfare surrounding the HD era has been dampened down by suggestions that Microsoft is no longer demanding an HD resolution of at least 1280x720 for games released on the Xbox 360.

In the latest issue of Develop, Black Rock Studio's David Jefferies provides an insight into the balancing act required for resolution and quality, claiming that although both HD consoles support 4X Multiscreen Anti-Aliasing, it's impossible to support such techniques at 1280x720 because the overhead is too much.

As a result, most developers have to drop down to 2xMSAA at the very best due to Microsoft's conditions, "providing you weren't one of the lucky ones like Halo," as Jefferies notes. Bungie memorably reduced the resolution of Halo 3 to 1152x640, with the offset being improved HDR lighting as a result of the game employing two frame buffers.

However, Jefferies later claims in the article that Microsoft has dropped the 1280x720 stipulation, allowing developers working on non-Halo titles to make the choice between resolution and quality as they so choose.

Link

I think it's good that developers no longer have to sacrifice visual fidelity and performance just to have a better resolution.

lul but wii hav no hd graphik hd way of futr der mst b mes up.

Well, in all seriousness, I hope this brings some better games over to the 360 by devs that can't pay for HD.. Who knows, it might just increase shovelware, I can't tell the future.

good to hear, I all ways said that HD came too soon weither it be the fact most consumers today still don't own an HDTV, to the fact that upping the resolution forces developers to cut other things out.

And to remind any cows that come in, look at your own list of gimped resolution titles because of the problems of trying to make a graphically advanced game yet keep it at a high resolution.

lul but wii hav no hd graphik hd way of futr der mst b mes up.

Well, in all seriousness, I hope this brings some better games over to the 360 by devs that can't pay for HD.. Who knows, it might just increase shovelware, I can't tell the future.

Yandere

ummm how would that increase shovelware? this isnt the wii we are talking about ;). why do sheep think 360 has better graphics only because its HD? :\

COD4 and MW2 have sub HD resolutions and I don't hear anyone complaining about those 2 games so I don't think tis is going to have much of an impact as some may think

good to hear, I all ways said that HD came too soon weither it be the fact most consumers today still don't own an HDTV, to the fact that upping the resolution forces developers to cut other things out.

And to remind any cows that come in, look at your own list of gimped resolution titles because of the problems of trying to make a graphically advanced game yet keep it at a high resolution.

WilliamRLBaker

We get it. Neither HD console is perfect. Way to build a barricade before anyone says anything.

COD4 and MW2 have sub HD resolutions and I don't hear anyone complaining about those 2 games so I don't think tis is going to have much of an impact as some may think

JAXX377

True. Then again, nobody is praising them for their graphics, either.

[QUOTE="Yandere"]

lul but wii hav no hd graphik hd way of futr der mst b mes up.

Well, in all seriousness, I hope this brings some better games over to the 360 by devs that can't pay for HD.. Who knows, it might just increase shovelware, I can't tell the future.

sikanderahmed

ummm how would that increase shovelware? this isnt the wii we are talking about ;). why do sheep think 360 has better graphics only because its HD? :\

The majority of shovelware have a lack of HD, so who knows? They might be ported over, the answer in my crystal ball isn't clear yet.

[QUOTE="sikanderahmed"]

[QUOTE="Yandere"]

lul but wii hav no hd graphik hd way of futr der mst b mes up.

Well, in all seriousness, I hope this brings some better games over to the 360 by devs that can't pay for HD.. Who knows, it might just increase shovelware, I can't tell the future.

Yandere

ummm how would that increase shovelware? this isnt the wii we are talking about ;). why do sheep think 360 has better graphics only because its HD? :\

The majority of shovelware have a lack of HD, so who knows? They might be ported over, the answer in my crystal ball isn't clear yet.

*facepalm* you know those shovelwares could be easily bumped to HD resolutions on 360?

[QUOTE="JAXX377"]

COD4 and MW2 have sub HD resolutions and I don't hear anyone complaining about those 2 games so I don't think tis is going to have much of an impact as some may think

Ryan_Som

True. Then again, nobody is praising them for their graphics, either.

I found it hilarious that both MS and Sony touted there systems as True HD systems with the amount of ram present in each system.

Isn't 640 still an HD resolution? :?

[QUOTE="Ryan_Som"]

[QUOTE="JAXX377"]

COD4 and MW2 have sub HD resolutions and I don't hear anyone complaining about those 2 games so I don't think tis is going to have much of an impact as some may think

Brownesque

True. Then again, nobody is praising them for their graphics, either.

Are you blaming MS for the bolded if so... Don't let me remind you... dual 1080p:lol:, 120fps:lol:, 4D:lol::lol::lol::lol:. If not then oh, sorry..

The fanfare surrounding the HD era has been dampened down by suggestions that Microsoft is no longer demanding an HD resolution of at least 1280x720 for games released on the Xbox 360.

In the latest issue of Develop, Black Rock Studio's David Jefferies provides an insight into the balancing act required for resolution and quality, claiming that although both HD consoles support 4X Multiscreen Anti-Aliasing, it's impossible to support such techniques at 1280x720 because the overhead is too much.

As a result, most developers have to drop down to 2xMSAA at the very best due to Microsoft's conditions, "providing you weren't one of the lucky ones like Halo," as Jefferies notes. Bungie memorably reduced the resolution of Halo 3 to 1152x640, with the offset being improved HDR lighting as a result of the game employing two frame buffers.

However, Jefferies later claims in the article that Microsoft has dropped the 1280x720 stipulation, allowing developers working on non-Halo titles to make the choice between resolution and quality as they so choose.

Link

I think it's good that developers no longer have to sacrifice visual fidelity and performance just to have a better resolution.

Rockman999

I think it's really embarrassing that every single game on 360 that has been released at a sub-720p image does NOT have 4xMSAA. Ninja Gaiden 2 1120x585 (2xAA), MK vs DC = 1024x576 (2xAA), Perfect Dark Zero (demo) = 1152x640 (no AA), Pro Evolution Soccer 6 (demo) = 1024x576 (2xAA), Project Gotham Racing 3 (demo) = 1024x600 (2xAA), Prototype = 1120x640 (2xAA), Fifa 2006 (demo) = 1024x576 (2xAA), Fifa 2007 (demo) = 1200x675 (no AA), Bionic Commando = 1120x640 (no AA), Call of Duty 3 (screenshot) = 1040x624 (2xAA), Call of Duty 4 = 1024x600 (2xAA), Call of Duty: World at War = 1024x600 (2x AA), Conan = 1024x576 (no AA), Far Cry 2 = 1280x696 (2xAA, centered on 720p window), Halo 3 = 1152x640 (no AA)

Note that this list is not even comprehensive. But look at all those titles exhibiting neither 720p nor 4xMSAA.

Myths debunked: 1) third-party 360 games are not allowed to release games at sub-720p resolution. 2) releasing a game at sub-720p resolution allows for 4xMSAA.

Notes: every single 360 game released at a sub-720p resolution has 2xMSAA or lower. There is no exception from what I can see.

I forgot my link: http://forum.beyond3d.com/showthread.php?t=46241

B3D "List of Game Rendering Resolutions" thread.

Isn't 640 still an HD resolution? :?

Gta3-fan334

Pretty sure that's ED. I'll just take a look...

[QUOTE="Brownesque"][QUOTE="Ryan_Som"]

True. Then again, nobody is praising them for their graphics, either.

Threebabycows

Are you blaming MS for the bolded if so... Don't let me remind you... dual 1080p:lol:, 120fps:lol:, 4D:lol::lol::lol::lol:. If not then oh, sorry..

Isn't 640 still an HD resolution? :?

Gta3-fan334

[QUOTE="Threebabycows"]

[QUOTE="Brownesque"] LoL, maybe because CoD4 and MW2 run at 600p with 2xMSAA. Where's the promised 4xMSAA? Okay, nothing? Where's the dual-framebuffer increasing the range of lighting? It's just an ugly butt game. It does have 60 FPS, though.Brownesque

Are you blaming MS for the bolded if so... Don't let me remind you... dual 1080p:lol:, 120fps:lol:, 4D:lol::lol::lol::lol:. If not then oh, sorry..

I wonder tohugh, how come DEVs just don't eat into a little of the Vram for the right res/AA, because they do it to the PS3, because it has no EDram, can they use combination Edram/Vram?

[QUOTE="Gta3-fan334"]

Isn't 640 still an HD resolution? :?

Technoweirdo

Pretty sure that's ED. I'll just take a look...

[QUOTE="Gta3-fan334"]

Isn't 640 still an HD resolution? :?

Cherokee_Jack

[QUOTE="Brownesque"][QUOTE="Threebabycows"]

Are you blaming MS for the bolded if so... Don't let me remind you... dual 1080p:lol:, 120fps:lol:, 4D:lol::lol::lol::lol:. If not then oh, sorry..

Threebabycows

I wonder tohugh, how come DEVs just don't eat into a little of the Vram for the right res/AA, because they do it to the PS3, because it has no EDram, can they use combination Edram/Vram?

[QUOTE="Cherokee_Jack"][QUOTE="Gta3-fan334"]

Isn't 640 still an HD resolution? :?

Brownesque

I don't really care, since 640 is still not HD.

[QUOTE="Cherokee_Jack"][QUOTE="Gta3-fan334"]

Isn't 640 still an HD resolution? :?

Brownesque

Whatever, as long I can't tell it is not in HD, I won't care

720p is minimum to be considered "HD". Everything lower to 480p are considered ED.

[QUOTE="Brownesque"][QUOTE="Cherokee_Jack"] No. 720 is the minimum. Cherokee_Jack

[QUOTE="Ryan_Som"]

[QUOTE="JAXX377"]

COD4 and MW2 have sub HD resolutions and I don't hear anyone complaining about those 2 games so I don't think tis is going to have much of an impact as some may think

Brownesque

True. Then again, nobody is praising them for their graphics, either.

This IS good news. Let devs drop the resolution a bit if they have to to get the game running properly. As has been said here already, mandatory HD this gen is too early for consoles - in a lot of cases, it's actually hurting the end product.Shafftehr

[QUOTE="Brownesque"][QUOTE="Ryan_Som"]

True. Then again, nobody is praising them for their graphics, either.

Next-Gen-Tec

When eurogamer did framerate avgs. The 360 would be in the 30-33 FPS area for the average and the PS3 would be in the 26-28...SO what is wrong with the framerate?

[QUOTE="Next-Gen-Tec"][QUOTE="Brownesque"] LoL, maybe because CoD4 and MW2 run at 600p with 2xMSAA. Where's the promised 4xMSAA? Okay, nothing? Where's the dual-framebuffer increasing the range of lighting? It's just an ugly butt game. It does have 60 FPS, though.Threebabycows

When eurogamer did framerate avgs. The 360 would be in the 30-33 FPS area for the average and the PS3 would be in the 26-28...SO what is wrong with the framerate?

[QUOTE="Threebabycows"]

[QUOTE="Next-Gen-Tec"] It gets away with it because it runs at 60fps. No excuse for Halo because it's quite ugly, but does have good lighting, HDR, physics, and water. GTA IV could have done with a res drop. It was 720p but the framerate could have been acceptable at a slightly lower res like PS3.Brownesque

When eurogamer did framerate avgs. The 360 would be in the 30-33 FPS area for the average and the PS3 would be in the 26-28...SO what is wrong with the framerate?

[QUOTE="Shafftehr"]This IS good news. Let devs drop the resolution a bit if they have to to get the game running properly. As has been said here already, mandatory HD this gen is too early for consoles - in a lot of cases, it's actually hurting the end product.Brownesque

I that the X360 is stronger than the cards stated, it is just that RAM is the problem, which I think bottlenecks both consoles. Also, are you saying CGI 480P movies look worse than the games on current consoles?

[QUOTE="Brownesque"][QUOTE="Threebabycows"]

When eurogamer did framerate avgs. The 360 would be in the 30-33 FPS area for the average and the PS3 would be in the 26-28...SO what is wrong with the framerate?

Next-Gen-Tec

[QUOTE="Brownesque"][QUOTE="Threebabycows"]

When eurogamer did framerate avgs. The 360 would be in the 30-33 FPS area for the average and the PS3 would be in the 26-28...SO what is wrong with the framerate?

Next-Gen-Tec

[QUOTE="Next-Gen-Tec"]

[QUOTE="Brownesque"] Nothing. The 360 version has a higher resolution, more anti-aliasing, and a higher framerate, as I recall. 360 runs at 720p with 2xAA, whereas PS3 runs at 1152x640 (no AA).BoloTheGreat

[QUOTE="Brownesque"][QUOTE="Threebabycows"]

When eurogamer did framerate avgs. The 360 would be in the 30-33 FPS area for the average and the PS3 would be in the 26-28...SO what is wrong with the framerate?

Next-Gen-Tec

A lot of PS3 games employ needless blur filters, sometimes in addition to Quincunx which already blurs the image and textures. Add that to sub-720p resolution and you have one blurry game. I wish developers would just get with the program and start cutting HDR if they have to to maintain image quality.

Both consoles have different advantages and capacity, we get it, so stop trying to maintain feature parity (Oh, the PS3 version has HDR and a blur filter, too!) and play to each console's strengths. Why is it I can go to town on PC games and get exactly what I want in terms of optimal performance, but these guys can't seem to understand how to make a console game run properly? Sub-720p looks like butt, blur filters are stupid, HDR is unnecessary at best, and Quincunx can go to hell.

[QUOTE="BoloTheGreat"][QUOTE="Next-Gen-Tec"] Yes, but the slight blurriness due to low res was called better AA from sites like... dun dun dun: IGN. Anyway, I thought the GTA IV framerate was fine at times, but too unstable.

mitu123

[QUOTE="mitu123"][QUOTE="BoloTheGreat"] Dosen't lower Def actually make AA apear more pronouced? :? Isure does on my computer, i guess i could up my AA on crysis by reducing the resolution to 800X600 acoring to IGN. Are IGN Blind??Brownesque

[QUOTE="Next-Gen-Tec"][QUOTE="Brownesque"] Yes, but the slight blurriness due to low res was called better AA from sites like... dun dun dun: IGN. Anyway, I thought the GTA IV framerate was fine at times, but too unstable. Nothing. The 360 version has a higher resolution, more anti-aliasing, and a higher framerate, as I recall. 360 runs at 720p with 2xAA, whereas PS3 runs at 1152x640 (no AA).Brownesque

A lot of PS3 games employ needless blur filters, sometimes in addition to Quincunx which already blurs the image and textures. Add that to sub-720p resolution and you have one blurry game. I wish developers would just get with the program and start cutting HDR if they have to to maintain image quality.

Both consoles have different advantages and capacity, we get it, so stop trying to maintain feature parity (Oh, the PS3 version has HDR and a blur filter, too!) and play to each console's strengths. Why is it I can go to town on PC games and get exactly what I want in terms of optimal performance, but these guys can't seem to understand how to make a console game run properly? Sub-720p looks like butt, blur filters are stupid, HDR is unnecessary at best, and Quincunx can go to hell.

TBH, I haven't seen the PS3 really have an advantage over the 360.. Like A.I, physics, etc. Red faction, it runs the same on both platforms(Framerate), but the textures/AA/framebuffer(explosions) are better on 360, they even said they cut optimizations on one platform if it didn't help the other, and I think they cut it from the 360, because why would they not add the optimizations if the PS3 version is already behind?

[QUOTE="Brownesque"]

[QUOTE="mitu123"] They're blind and bias towards Sony.mitu123

yup thats why they overrate ps3 exclusives

[QUOTE="Brownesque"][QUOTE="Shafftehr"]This IS good news. Let devs drop the resolution a bit if they have to to get the game running properly. As has been said here already, mandatory HD this gen is too early for consoles - in a lot of cases, it's actually hurting the end product.Threebabycows

I that the X360 is stronger than the cards stated, it is just that RAM is the problem, which I think bottlenecks both consoles. Also, are you saying CGI 480P movies look worse than the games on current consoles?

See what portion of your screen that takes up? Now save it to your desktop, open up the screenshot in Microsoft photo viewer, and increase the size it takes up on your screen and see how ugly it looks after you reach a certain scale. That's basically what developers are doing when they release games at lower resolutions and scale them up to the size of your TV.

[QUOTE="mitu123"][QUOTE="Brownesque"] No, they just have no idea what they're talking about.

sikanderahmed

yup thats why they overrate ps3 exclusives

Huh? Halo3 hasn't been the only game with sub 720p resolution. Am I understanding this article correclty?