Go and play your 1080p Killzone :Shadow flop and Knack. What matters in the end is overall experience not resolution. 1080p and those still failed. LOL, btw if you read my previous post you will see their framerates are crap too and are not what the devs and fanboys said they were supposed to be.
Watch COD:Ghosts comparison videos and you will see that the superior version is on Xbox One because it has better framerate and miniscule difference between 1080p upscaled and native 1080p. http://www.ign.com/videos/2013/11/12/call-of-duty-ghosts-in-1080p-ps4-vs-xbox-one-commentary
They're just jealous. Wii U outputs beautiful visuals (if more because of the artstyle than pure tech, admittedly) and it does so hitting the 1080p/60FPS benchmarks.
See, that's the thing to keep in mind while making that comparison, though. When a game has less graphical tech going on in the first place, higher resolutions and framerates are easier to achieve. The way some people talk, it's like they think that resolution is the only thing that contributes to a game having good graphics. Case and point, my laptop can run Source games at 1080p, and get like 70 fps or more. But with Metro, Crysis, Far Cry 3, or STALKER, I have to turn down to 720p to keep my FPS above 30. And yet, all those games look more impressive at 720p than Half Life 2 and Counterstrike do at 1080p.
So yeah, the Wii U running Mario Kart at 1080p doesn't really mean anything. Because, art-style, subjectivity, and opinions aside, Battlefield 4 looks more impressive at 900p than Mario Kart would at any resolution.
That said, I'm still personally of the opinion that the fact that these consoles can't hit 1080p and 60 fps, even with the more graphically intense games, is proof that they're laughably underpowered. Especially considering how often fanboys and marketing execs try to compare them to "high-end PCs". Because you know what can run Battlefield 4 at even more than 1080p, and at even more than 60 fps? A high-end PC. Which the PS4 and Xbone clearly are not.
They're just jealous. Wii U outputs beautiful visuals (if more because of the artstyle than pure tech, admittedly) and it does so hitting the 1080p/60FPS benchmarks.
No please stop trolling us lol
I am not trolling anybody. Those are all technically proficient gorgeous looking games running at 1080p 60FPS.
Do you own WiiU yourself ?
Not really, and I don't quite see how that is pertinent to the discussion which is after all rooted in pure numbers.
Wait a minute. You hype a system and don´t have balls to stick with it ?
They're just jealous. Wii U outputs beautiful visuals (if more because of the artstyle than pure tech, admittedly) and it does so hitting the 1080p/60FPS benchmarks.
those numbers mean nothing on WiiU where the graphics are clearly not comparable (and you even aknowledge it yourself), and you still keep boasting with them?
my old Pentium IV PC runs Half Life 1 @ 1080p/150fps. did i win now?
Gran Turismo 6 with all that content, weather effects, and day/night cycle, running at 1280x1080p upscaled to 1920x1080p is far more impressive on that old tech, compared to Forza 5 at 1080p native on a next gen console. I gotta agree that resolution isn't everything, but the facts are clear, the PS4 has more power available. If COD had ran at 720p on the PS4 it would easily have been able to run far more graphical tech than X1.
They're just jealous. Wii U outputs beautiful visuals (if more because of the artstyle than pure tech, admittedly) and it does so hitting the 1080p/60FPS benchmarks.
See, that's the thing to keep in mind while making that comparison, though. When a game has less graphical tech going on in the first place, higher resolutions and framerates are easier to achieve. The way some people talk, it's like they think that resolution is the only thing that contributes to a game having good graphics. Case and point, my laptop can run Source games at 1080p, and get like 70 fps or more. But with Metro, Crysis, Far Cry 3, or STALKER, I have to turn down to 720p to keep my FPS above 30. And yet, all those games look more impressive at 720p than Half Life 2 and Counterstrike do at 1080p.
So yeah, the Wii U running Mario Kart at 1080p doesn't really mean anything. Because, art-style, subjectivity, and opinions aside, Battlefield 4 looks more impressive at 900p than Mario Kart would at any resolution.
That said, I'm still personally of the opinion that the fact that these consoles can't hit 1080p and 60 fps, even with the more graphically intense games, is proof that they're laughably underpowered. Especially considering how often fanboys and marketing execs try to compare them to "high-end PCs". Because you know what can run Battlefield 4 at even more than 1080p, and at even more than 60 fps? A high-end PC. Which the PS4 and Xbone clearly are not.
Mmmm. No. Resolution matters. What worth has all those extra details and better texture quality in next gen games if you can´t see them at 720p ? At 720p, you have to sit pretty far from your tv, or game on a smaller screen, and you are just phisically uncapable to see extra details, because they blend in because of a distance or smaller screen. To apreciate all that extra quality you need to play on a big screen and at 1080p. 720p just blurs things away.
Knack framerate: runs at 30-40 fps, even dips to as low as 14 fps even without much stuff in Knack. How is that even possible that the game is having a hard time keeping a stable framerate even though it doesn't have that many objects and action going on?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xN6tbzGALhY
Killzone: Shadowfall framerate: Far from 60 fps, runs at 40-50 fps and even dips to as low as 30 fps. 60 fps my ass.
Idiot, it's 1080p upscaled from 720p on Xbox One. PS4 is native 1080p but has unstable framerate. So both are 1080p nub.
@rogelio22
It's 1080p upscaled from 720p on Xbox One. PS4 is native 1080p but has unstable framerate.
I'd rather have a consistent 60fps framerate than an unstable framerate on PS4. Besides, the difference between upscaled 1080p and native 1080p is so miniscule.
Why are you so angry? And you do your avatars name disserves by bashing the system that it was born on...just saying... calm down
it's 1080p upscaled from 720p on Xbox One. PS4 is native 1080p but has unstable framerate. So both are 1080p nub.
@rogelio22
It's 1080p upscaled from 720p on Xbox One. PS4 is native 1080p but has unstable framerate.
I'd rather have a consistent 60fps framerate than an unstable framerate on PS4. Besides, the difference between upscaled 1080p and native 1080p is so miniscule.
the scaler interpolated those extra pixels man. the xbox one renders the scene at 720p (in this instance), and it's scaler chip upscales the image for a 1080p output.
and this... trying to say the xbone is the same power, because of a scaler chip is downright laughable.
Where are the 2 things we were promised last console gen? At the bottom of a lonely well mewling for help. I'm still stunned........STUNNED......that neither the PS4 or X1 can pull this shit off. I thought to myself last gen really shouldn't have promised that with only a 1/2 gb of RAM, but there was no way that the next gen would not accomplish something that hermits have enjoyed since the mid 2000's.
I was wrong.
I have quasi-faith that the PS4 will hit it's stride 2-3 years into this gen,.
Next gen is here, you just have to look for it in the right places.
BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHA oh boy. Wii U fans still exist? I remember people claiming the Wii U would be so great since Nintendo was back to its hardcore gaming. LOLOLOLOLOL
''Where is the promissed 1080p and 60fps on consoles ?''
Here:
1080p/60fps
Call of Duty: Ghosts(1920x1080 60fps)
DC: Universe Online (1920x1080 60fps)
Deep Down (1920x1080 60fps)
Diablo 3 (1920x1080 60fps)
Fifa 2014 (1920x1080 60fps)
Final Fantasy XIV (1920x1080 60fps)
Flower (1920x1080 60fps)
Forza Motorsport 5(1920x1080 60fps)
Killzone Shadow Fall (1920x1080 30/60fps)
NBA 2K14 (1920x1080 60fps)
Resogun (1920x1080 60fps)
Transistor(1920x1080 60fps)
Trine 2: Complete Story (1920x1080 60fps)
1080p/30fps(?)
Assassin's Creed 4: Black Flag (1920x1080 30fps)
Blacklight: Retribution (1920x1080 ...fps)
Drive Club (1920x1080 ...fps)
Infamous: Second Son (1920x1080 ...fps)
Knack (1920x1080 ...fps)
Skylanders: Swap Force(1920x1080 ...fps)
Thief(1920x1080 30fps)
Warframe (1920x1080 ...fps)
other (900p/30fps/60fps)
Battlefield 4 (1600x900 60fps)
Killer Instinct(1280x720 60fps)
Metal Gear Solid 5: Ground Zeroes (... 60fps)
Ryse: Son of Rome (1600x900 30fps)
The Order 1886 (1920x800 ...fps)
Titanfall(... 60fps)
720p/30fps (last gen standards)
Dead Rising 3 (1280x720 30fps)
Most console games in the last 8 years ran at 720p/30fps, or even sub720p/sub30fps. I see an improvement.
We don't know how consistent those game will run. We know that cod:ghost has frame rate issues and Killzone: Shadow Fall MP averages at 40-50 fps, with dips as low as 36 fps.
I'm not saying 60 fps is an absolute must (but it offers smoother gameplay, especially for shooters) however game developers should stop lying that their games are 60fps if they can't maintain that frame rate all the time or at least almost all the time, with only small dips.
They're just jealous. Wii U outputs beautiful visuals (if more because of the artstyle than pure tech, admittedly) and it does so hitting the 1080p/60FPS benchmarks.
See, that's the thing to keep in mind while making that comparison, though. When a game has less graphical tech going on in the first place, higher resolutions and framerates are easier to achieve. The way some people talk, it's like they think that resolution is the only thing that contributes to a game having good graphics. Case and point, my laptop can run Source games at 1080p, and get like 70 fps or more. But with Metro, Crysis, Far Cry 3, or STALKER, I have to turn down to 720p to keep my FPS above 30. And yet, all those games look more impressive at 720p than Half Life 2 and Counterstrike do at 1080p.
So yeah, the Wii U running Mario Kart at 1080p doesn't really mean anything. Because, art-style, subjectivity, and opinions aside, Battlefield 4 looks more impressive at 900p than Mario Kart would at any resolution.
That said, I'm still personally of the opinion that the fact that these consoles can't hit 1080p and 60 fps, even with the more graphically intense games, is proof that they're laughably underpowered. Especially considering how often fanboys and marketing execs try to compare them to "high-end PCs". Because you know what can run Battlefield 4 at even more than 1080p, and at even more than 60 fps? A high-end PC. Which the PS4 and Xbone clearly are not.
Mmmm. No. Resolution matters. What worth has all those extra details and better texture quality in next gen games if you can´t see them at 720p ? At 720p, you have to sit pretty far from your tv, or game on a smaller screen, and you are just phisically uncapable to see extra details, because they blend in because of a distance or smaller screen. To apreciate all that extra quality you need to play on a big screen and at 1080p. 720p just blurs things away.
xbox360 vs PC
By your logic the most powerful console is Wii U. Nintendo games are pretty easy to run They don't push hardware so things like 60 fps at 1080p are easy. High resolution doesn't always look better versus adding more detail, polygons, animation or whatever the dev is sacrificing. There is a lot more to consider.
Sure, but aren't 720p/30 games inconsistent too? The difference is that a game running at 60fps can go down to 40s and will still be smooth. Games running at 30fps usually go down to 20s, turning them almost unplayable...at least to me. Also, like i said above, most 8th gen games run at 1080p and some at 900p. A good leap considering 720p was last gen consoles higher standards.
Sure, but aren't 720p/30 games inconsistent too? The difference is that a game running at 60fps can go down to 40s and will still be smooth. Games running at 30fps usually go down to 20s, turning them almost unplayable...at least to me. Also, like i said above, most games next gen run at 1080p and some at 900p. A good leap for the 'higher standard' 720p of last gen consoles.
Yup and the games will improve in performance as the generation progresses.
They're just jealous. Wii U outputs beautiful visuals (if more because of the artstyle than pure tech, admittedly) and it does so hitting the 1080p/60FPS benchmarks.
See, that's the thing to keep in mind while making that comparison, though. When a game has less graphical tech going on in the first place, higher resolutions and framerates are easier to achieve. The way some people talk, it's like they think that resolution is the only thing that contributes to a game having good graphics. Case and point, my laptop can run Source games at 1080p, and get like 70 fps or more. But with Metro, Crysis, Far Cry 3, or STALKER, I have to turn down to 720p to keep my FPS above 30. And yet, all those games look more impressive at 720p than Half Life 2 and Counterstrike do at 1080p.
So yeah, the Wii U running Mario Kart at 1080p doesn't really mean anything. Because, art-style, subjectivity, and opinions aside, Battlefield 4 looks more impressive at 900p than Mario Kart would at any resolution.
That said, I'm still personally of the opinion that the fact that these consoles can't hit 1080p and 60 fps, even with the more graphically intense games, is proof that they're laughably underpowered. Especially considering how often fanboys and marketing execs try to compare them to "high-end PCs". Because you know what can run Battlefield 4 at even more than 1080p, and at even more than 60 fps? A high-end PC. Which the PS4 and Xbone clearly are not.
Mmmm. No. Resolution matters. What worth has all those extra details and better texture quality in next gen games if you can´t see them at 720p ? At 720p, you have to sit pretty far from your tv, or game on a smaller screen, and you are just phisically uncapable to see extra details, because they blend in because of a distance or smaller screen. To apreciate all that extra quality you need to play on a big screen and at 1080p. 720p just blurs things away.
xbox360 vs PC
By your logic the most powerful console is Wii U. Nintendo games are pretty easy to run They don't push hardware so things like 60 fps at 1080p are easy. High resolution doesn't always look better versus adding more detail, polygons, animation or whatever the dev is sacrificing. There is a lot more to consider.
No. I haven´t said that. WiiU is peggybacking on a cartoonish art style. Cartoon is cartoon no matter the size of your screen or how far you sit from your tv.
High resolution doesn't always look better versus adding more detail, polygons, animation indead, but there is a point where there is no sense anymore to add more detail, polygons and animation, as the user won´t see them at 720p.
720p blurs away extra details, like in the case of Witcher 2. If you look at the PC screenshot, you can see that the King´s face has a scar, farrows and he´s unshaved. You look at the xbox 360 version, and you can only see a face. And this is just one of the many details 720 gamers miss on.
Sure, but aren't 720p/30 games inconsistent too? The difference is that a game running at 60fps can go down to 40s and will still be smooth. Games running at 30fps usually go down to 20s, turning them almost unplayable...at least to me. Also, like i said above, most games next gen run at 1080p and some at 900p. A good leap for the 'higher standard' 720p of last gen consoles.
Yup and the games will improve in performance as the generation progresses.
Indeed. Games like Perfect Dark Zero and Resistance FoM look and run like a joke compared to the latest 360/PS3 games.
Sure, but aren't 720p/30 games inconsistent too? The difference is that a game running at 60fps can go down to 40s and will still be smooth. Games running at 30fps usually go down to 20s, turning them almost unplayable...at least to me. Also, like i said above, most games next gen run at 1080p and some at 900p. A good leap for the 'higher standard' 720p of last gen consoles.
Yup and the games will improve in performance as the generation progresses.
Indeed. Games like Perfect Dark Zero and Resistance FoM look and run like a joke compared to the latest 360/PS3 games.
Exactly. The best games of this generation haven't even been thought of yet.
It's the 7th gen, the gen after 6th gen. It's a title, "next-gen." It only implies that it will be more advanced, in reality it's the smallest step they could take. PC gamers will probably find the next 7 years of multiplatform titles to be lackluster and graphically no different than games from 2003.
Sure, but aren't 720p/30 games inconsistent too? The difference is that a game running at 60fps can go down to 40s and will still be smooth. Games running at 30fps usually go down to 20s, turning them almost unplayable...at least to me. Also, like i said above, most games next gen run at 1080p and some at 900p. A good leap for the 'higher standard' 720p of last gen consoles.
Yup and the games will improve in performance as the generation progresses.
It´s no longer true. Usually games become more demanding as the generation progresses.
Next gen is here, you just have to look for it in the right places.
Yeah they are 1080p but they also run on old engines and the graphics are simplistic. So technically they run at 1080p but they also are cartoony lacking good physics, graphical detail and so on.
That's like sticking out your chest and saying "my wiiu is so awesome because I can run a 10 year old game on it at FULL RESOLUTION!!!!!!"
Sure, but aren't 720p/30 games inconsistent too? The difference is that a game running at 60fps can go down to 40s and will still be smooth. Games running at 30fps usually go down to 20s, turning them almost unplayable...at least to me. Also, like i said above, most games next gen run at 1080p and some at 900p. A good leap for the 'higher standard' 720p of last gen consoles.
Yup and the games will improve in performance as the generation progresses.
It´s no longer true. Usually games become more demanding as the generation progresses.
Sure, but aren't 720p/30 games inconsistent too? The difference is that a game running at 60fps can go down to 40s and will still be smooth. Games running at 30fps usually go down to 20s, turning them almost unplayable...at least to me. Also, like i said above, most games next gen run at 1080p and some at 900p. A good leap for the 'higher standard' 720p of last gen consoles.
Yup and the games will improve in performance as the generation progresses.
It´s no longer true. Usually games become more demanding as the generation progresses.
And wasn't always like that? Note that last gen 720p was the standard res from 2005 to 2013, despite the fact that games improved graphically.
It's the 7th gen, the gen after 6th gen. It's a title, "next-gen." It only implies that it will be more advanced, in reality it's the smallest step they could take. PC gamers will probably find the next 7 years of multiplatform titles to be lackluster and graphically no different than games from 2003.
Well, there will be certain exceptions like Witcher 3, as CD Project develops on PC as a lead platform and then downscales to consoles.
Killzone: Shadow Fall’s Single Player is at 30fps, 720p at launch, 1080p after a patch.
Knack, 1080p, 30fps LOL. Come one, PS4 can´t run a kiddie game at 60fps !?
Black Flag 720p, 30fps on PS4, 1080p after a patch.
Battlefield, 900p on PS4, 60fps, but no 1080p.
Dead Rising 3, 720p and 30fps LOL
KI, 720p, 60fps LOL
Are you kidding me ? Where is the promissed 1080p and 60fps on consoles ? In Resogun ?
Lol next gen my ass.
Bu bu bu bu just wait and see, optimisaychun and Naughty Dog will bring that to consoles! - What makes you think that? No game has been able to do it yet and these are PS3 and 360 ports for the most part.
Bu bu bu bu 1080p doesn't matter! (unless you are talking about XBone not being able to do it) - The Xbox One can do 1080p, just not every game, similar to the PS4
Bu bu bu bu the human eye cannot see the difference past 30fps! - And I don't really know what to say to this one. Apparently you've never seen a game in 60fps.
I see your sarcasm radar is broken. I was mainly making a joke about the old cow line "Just wait", which was used constantly during the early years of the PS3. Now it's evolved into just wait till Naughty Dog makes a game. Of course the Xbone can do 1080p but it's been one of the biggest cow comments to say it cannot. It's also pointing out a hypocrisy how that on hand they claimed that 1080p didn't matter, but since some Xbone games are not 1080p it's a huge deal. And the last point is a huge downplay by consolites that is of course ridiculous. There is a huge difference between 30fps and 60fps. ;)
They're just jealous. Wii U outputs beautiful visuals (if more because of the artstyle than pure tech, admittedly) and it does so hitting the 1080p/60FPS benchmarks.
See, that's the thing to keep in mind while making that comparison, though. When a game has less graphical tech going on in the first place, higher resolutions and framerates are easier to achieve. The way some people talk, it's like they think that resolution is the only thing that contributes to a game having good graphics. Case and point, my laptop can run Source games at 1080p, and get like 70 fps or more. But with Metro, Crysis, Far Cry 3, or STALKER, I have to turn down to 720p to keep my FPS above 30. And yet, all those games look more impressive at 720p than Half Life 2 and Counterstrike do at 1080p.
So yeah, the Wii U running Mario Kart at 1080p doesn't really mean anything. Because, art-style, subjectivity, and opinions aside, Battlefield 4 looks more impressive at 900p than Mario Kart would at any resolution.
That said, I'm still personally of the opinion that the fact that these consoles can't hit 1080p and 60 fps, even with the more graphically intense games, is proof that they're laughably underpowered. Especially considering how often fanboys and marketing execs try to compare them to "high-end PCs". Because you know what can run Battlefield 4 at even more than 1080p, and at even more than 60 fps? A high-end PC. Which the PS4 and Xbone clearly are not.
Mmmm. No. Resolution matters. What worth has all those extra details and better texture quality in next gen games if you can´t see them at 720p ? At 720p, you have to sit pretty far from your tv, or game on a smaller screen, and you are just phisically uncapable to see extra details, because they blend in because of a distance or smaller screen. To apreciate all that extra quality you need to play on a big screen and at 1080p. 720p just blurs things away.
xbox360 vs PC
By your logic the most powerful console is Wii U. Nintendo games are pretty easy to run They don't push hardware so things like 60 fps at 1080p are easy. High resolution doesn't always look better versus adding more detail, polygons, animation or whatever the dev is sacrificing. There is a lot more to consider.
No. I haven´t said that. WiiU is peggybacking on a cartoonish art style. Cartoon is cartoon no matter the size of your screen or how far you sit from your tv.
High resolution doesn't always look better versus adding more detail, polygons, animation indead, but there is a point where there is no sense anymore to add more detail, polygons and animation, as the user won´t see them at 720p.
720p blurs away extra details, like in the case of Witcher 2. If you look at the PC screenshot, you can see that the King´s face has a scar, farrows and he´s unshaved. You look at the xbox 360 version, and you can only see a face. And this is just one of the many details 720 gamers miss on.
Also remember Dark Souls where certain details could not be seen because the resolution was so low? On the PC all of those details suddenly were apparent? (after it was patched of course)
They're just jealous. Wii U outputs beautiful visuals (if more because of the artstyle than pure tech, admittedly) and it does so hitting the 1080p/60FPS benchmarks.
See, that's the thing to keep in mind while making that comparison, though. When a game has less graphical tech going on in the first place, higher resolutions and framerates are easier to achieve. The way some people talk, it's like they think that resolution is the only thing that contributes to a game having good graphics. Case and point, my laptop can run Source games at 1080p, and get like 70 fps or more. But with Metro, Crysis, Far Cry 3, or STALKER, I have to turn down to 720p to keep my FPS above 30. And yet, all those games look more impressive at 720p than Half Life 2 and Counterstrike do at 1080p.
So yeah, the Wii U running Mario Kart at 1080p doesn't really mean anything. Because, art-style, subjectivity, and opinions aside, Battlefield 4 looks more impressive at 900p than Mario Kart would at any resolution.
That said, I'm still personally of the opinion that the fact that these consoles can't hit 1080p and 60 fps, even with the more graphically intense games, is proof that they're laughably underpowered. Especially considering how often fanboys and marketing execs try to compare them to "high-end PCs". Because you know what can run Battlefield 4 at even more than 1080p, and at even more than 60 fps? A high-end PC. Which the PS4 and Xbone clearly are not.
Mmmm. No. Resolution matters. What worth has all those extra details and better texture quality in next gen games if you can´t see them at 720p ? At 720p, you have to sit pretty far from your tv, or game on a smaller screen, and you are just phisically uncapable to see extra details, because they blend in because of a distance or smaller screen. To apreciate all that extra quality you need to play on a big screen and at 1080p. 720p just blurs things away.
xbox360 vs PC
By your logic the most powerful console is Wii U. Nintendo games are pretty easy to run They don't push hardware so things like 60 fps at 1080p are easy. High resolution doesn't always look better versus adding more detail, polygons, animation or whatever the dev is sacrificing. There is a lot more to consider.
No. I haven´t said that. WiiU is peggybacking on a cartoonish art style. Cartoon is cartoon no matter the size of your screen or how far you sit from your tv.
High resolution doesn't always look better versus adding more detail, polygons, animation indead, but there is a point where there is no sense anymore to add more detail, polygons and animation, as the user won´t see them at 720p.
720p blurs away extra details, like in the case of Witcher 2. If you look at the PC screenshot, you can see that the King´s face has a scar, farrows and he´s unshaved. You look at the xbox 360 version, and you can only see a face. And this is just one of the many details 720 gamers miss on.
Also remember Dark Souls where certain details could not be seen because the resolution was so low? On the PC all of those details suddenly were apparent? (after it was patched of course)
Yep. There is already 4k support. This is how Darks Souls look at 4k resolution. Open the image in a new tab
Sure, but aren't 720p/30 games inconsistent too? The difference is that a game running at 60fps can go down to 40s and will still be smooth. Games running at 30fps usually go down to 20s, turning them almost unplayable...at least to me. Also, like i said above, most 8th gen games run at 1080p and some at 900p. A good leap considering 720p was last gen consoles higher standards.
Yes of course, there is a huge difference in smoothness between a game that varies between 36-60fps, most of the time 40-60fps, to a game that runs at 30fps with dips down to 20fps. But it's still false advertising to claim that it runs at 60fps.
Hopefully it will be better further in to this generation, but to many game developers seems to be willing sacrifice some frame rate so that their games can look as good as possible. There is no reason why pretty much every game (now that devs. are more familiar with the hardware) released the last couple of years to ps3/360, all couldn't run consistently at their respective frame rate if the developers where willing to hold back a little on the visuals.
They're just jealous. Wii U outputs beautiful visuals (if more because of the artstyle than pure tech, admittedly) and it does so hitting the 1080p/60FPS benchmarks.
See, that's the thing to keep in mind while making that comparison, though. When a game has less graphical tech going on in the first place, higher resolutions and framerates are easier to achieve. The way some people talk, it's like they think that resolution is the only thing that contributes to a game having good graphics. Case and point, my laptop can run Source games at 1080p, and get like 70 fps or more. But with Metro, Crysis, Far Cry 3, or STALKER, I have to turn down to 720p to keep my FPS above 30. And yet, all those games look more impressive at 720p than Half Life 2 and Counterstrike do at 1080p.
So yeah, the Wii U running Mario Kart at 1080p doesn't really mean anything. Because, art-style, subjectivity, and opinions aside, Battlefield 4 looks more impressive at 900p than Mario Kart would at any resolution.
That said, I'm still personally of the opinion that the fact that these consoles can't hit 1080p and 60 fps, even with the more graphically intense games, is proof that they're laughably underpowered. Especially considering how often fanboys and marketing execs try to compare them to "high-end PCs". Because you know what can run Battlefield 4 at even more than 1080p, and at even more than 60 fps? A high-end PC. Which the PS4 and Xbone clearly are not.
Mmmm. No. Resolution matters. What worth has all those extra details and better texture quality in next gen games if you can´t see them at 720p ? At 720p, you have to sit pretty far from your tv, or game on a smaller screen, and you are just phisically uncapable to see extra details, because they blend in because of a distance or smaller screen. To apreciate all that extra quality you need to play on a big screen and at 1080p. 720p just blurs things away.
xbox360 vs PC
By your logic the most powerful console is Wii U. Nintendo games are pretty easy to run They don't push hardware so things like 60 fps at 1080p are easy. High resolution doesn't always look better versus adding more detail, polygons, animation or whatever the dev is sacrificing. There is a lot more to consider.
No. I haven´t said that. WiiU is peggybacking on a cartoonish art style. Cartoon is cartoon no matter the size of your screen or how far you sit from your tv.
High resolution doesn't always look better versus adding more detail, polygons, animation indead, but there is a point where there is no sense anymore to add more detail, polygons and animation, as the user won´t see them at 720p.
720p blurs away extra details, like in the case of Witcher 2. If you look at the PC screenshot, you can see that the King´s face has a scar, farrows and he´s unshaved. You look at the xbox 360 version, and you can only see a face. And this is just one of the many details 720 gamers miss on.
Also remember Dark Souls where certain details could not be seen because the resolution was so low? On the PC all of those details suddenly were apparent? (after it was patched of course)
Yep. There is already 4k support. This is how Darks Souls look at 4k resolution. Open the image in a new tab
Playing this myself, a bad port, but a wonderful game, i really like it ;)
They're just jealous. Wii U outputs beautiful visuals (if more because of the artstyle than pure tech, admittedly) and it does so hitting the 1080p/60FPS benchmarks.
See, that's the thing to keep in mind while making that comparison, though. When a game has less graphical tech going on in the first place, higher resolutions and framerates are easier to achieve. The way some people talk, it's like they think that resolution is the only thing that contributes to a game having good graphics. Case and point, my laptop can run Source games at 1080p, and get like 70 fps or more. But with Metro, Crysis, Far Cry 3, or STALKER, I have to turn down to 720p to keep my FPS above 30. And yet, all those games look more impressive at 720p than Half Life 2 and Counterstrike do at 1080p.
So yeah, the Wii U running Mario Kart at 1080p doesn't really mean anything. Because, art-style, subjectivity, and opinions aside, Battlefield 4 looks more impressive at 900p than Mario Kart would at any resolution.
That said, I'm still personally of the opinion that the fact that these consoles can't hit 1080p and 60 fps, even with the more graphically intense games, is proof that they're laughably underpowered. Especially considering how often fanboys and marketing execs try to compare them to "high-end PCs". Because you know what can run Battlefield 4 at even more than 1080p, and at even more than 60 fps? A high-end PC. Which the PS4 and Xbone clearly are not.
Mmmm. No. Resolution matters. What worth has all those extra details and better texture quality in next gen games if you can´t see them at 720p ? At 720p, you have to sit pretty far from your tv, or game on a smaller screen, and you are just phisically uncapable to see extra details, because they blend in because of a distance or smaller screen. To apreciate all that extra quality you need to play on a big screen and at 1080p. 720p just blurs things away.
xbox360 vs PC
By your logic the most powerful console is Wii U. Nintendo games are pretty easy to run They don't push hardware so things like 60 fps at 1080p are easy. High resolution doesn't always look better versus adding more detail, polygons, animation or whatever the dev is sacrificing. There is a lot more to consider.
720p blurs away extra details, like in the case of Witcher 2. If you look at the PC screenshot, you can see that the King´s face has a scar, farrows and he´s unshaved. You look at the xbox 360 version, and you can only see a face. And this is just one of the many details 720 gamers miss on.
LOL. That has nothing to do with the resolution. That was an effort to save textures.
Seriously, the inability to discern the value of textures/polygons from resolution is ridiculous. Toy story (1-3) on DVD (480p) still looks much better than any game on any console or PC. Resolution is not the end all be all that many here make it out to be.
They're just jealous. Wii U outputs beautiful visuals (if more because of the artstyle than pure tech, admittedly) and it does so hitting the 1080p/60FPS benchmarks.
See, that's the thing to keep in mind while making that comparison, though. When a game has less graphical tech going on in the first place, higher resolutions and framerates are easier to achieve. The way some people talk, it's like they think that resolution is the only thing that contributes to a game having good graphics. Case and point, my laptop can run Source games at 1080p, and get like 70 fps or more. But with Metro, Crysis, Far Cry 3, or STALKER, I have to turn down to 720p to keep my FPS above 30. And yet, all those games look more impressive at 720p than Half Life 2 and Counterstrike do at 1080p.
So yeah, the Wii U running Mario Kart at 1080p doesn't really mean anything. Because, art-style, subjectivity, and opinions aside, Battlefield 4 looks more impressive at 900p than Mario Kart would at any resolution.
That said, I'm still personally of the opinion that the fact that these consoles can't hit 1080p and 60 fps, even with the more graphically intense games, is proof that they're laughably underpowered. Especially considering how often fanboys and marketing execs try to compare them to "high-end PCs". Because you know what can run Battlefield 4 at even more than 1080p, and at even more than 60 fps? A high-end PC. Which the PS4 and Xbone clearly are not.
Mmmm. No. Resolution matters. What worth has all those extra details and better texture quality in next gen games if you can´t see them at 720p ? At 720p, you have to sit pretty far from your tv, or game on a smaller screen, and you are just phisically uncapable to see extra details, because they blend in because of a distance or smaller screen. To apreciate all that extra quality you need to play on a big screen and at 1080p. 720p just blurs things away.
xbox360 vs PC
By your logic the most powerful console is Wii U. Nintendo games are pretty easy to run They don't push hardware so things like 60 fps at 1080p are easy. High resolution doesn't always look better versus adding more detail, polygons, animation or whatever the dev is sacrificing. There is a lot more to consider.
720p blurs away extra details, like in the case of Witcher 2. If you look at the PC screenshot, you can see that the King´s face has a scar, farrows and he´s unshaved. You look at the xbox 360 version, and you can only see a face. And this is just one of the many details 720 gamers miss on.
LOL. That has nothing to do with the resolution. That was an effort to save textures.
Seriously, the inability to discern the value of textures/polygons from resolution is ridiculous. Toy story (1-3) on DVD (480p) still looks much better than any game on any console or PC. Resolution is not the end all be all that many here make it out to be.
Not sure if serious.
Resolution is in a direct relation with textures. Resolution determines how many pixels may be displayed on a given screen.
Next gen is here, you just have to look for it in the right places.
BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHA oh boy. Wii U fans still exist? I remember people claiming the Wii U would be so great since Nintendo was back to its hardcore gaming. LOLOLOLOLOL
Ouch! Does it hurt?
Nope. Killzone IS butt. It has always been a bad game since "teh Halo killuh" Killzone 1. I see why you would think I was a PS fanboy because they're NUTS and the loudest. I won't buy a PS4, I bought a PS3 thought it was trash and don't trust Sony to deliver on their product or promises. Can you be a Wii U fanboy? Is that possible? I know children are but seriously, what adults love the Wii U?
They're just jealous. Wii U outputs beautiful visuals (if more because of the artstyle than pure tech, admittedly) and it does so hitting the 1080p/60FPS benchmarks.
See, that's the thing to keep in mind while making that comparison, though. When a game has less graphical tech going on in the first place, higher resolutions and framerates are easier to achieve. The way some people talk, it's like they think that resolution is the only thing that contributes to a game having good graphics. Case and point, my laptop can run Source games at 1080p, and get like 70 fps or more. But with Metro, Crysis, Far Cry 3, or STALKER, I have to turn down to 720p to keep my FPS above 30. And yet, all those games look more impressive at 720p than Half Life 2 and Counterstrike do at 1080p.
So yeah, the Wii U running Mario Kart at 1080p doesn't really mean anything. Because, art-style, subjectivity, and opinions aside, Battlefield 4 looks more impressive at 900p than Mario Kart would at any resolution.
That said, I'm still personally of the opinion that the fact that these consoles can't hit 1080p and 60 fps, even with the more graphically intense games, is proof that they're laughably underpowered. Especially considering how often fanboys and marketing execs try to compare them to "high-end PCs". Because you know what can run Battlefield 4 at even more than 1080p, and at even more than 60 fps? A high-end PC. Which the PS4 and Xbone clearly are not.
Mmmm. No. Resolution matters. What worth has all those extra details and better texture quality in next gen games if you can´t see them at 720p ? At 720p, you have to sit pretty far from your tv, or game on a smaller screen, and you are just phisically uncapable to see extra details, because they blend in because of a distance or smaller screen. To apreciate all that extra quality you need to play on a big screen and at 1080p. 720p just blurs things away.
xbox360 vs PC
By your logic the most powerful console is Wii U. Nintendo games are pretty easy to run They don't push hardware so things like 60 fps at 1080p are easy. High resolution doesn't always look better versus adding more detail, polygons, animation or whatever the dev is sacrificing. There is a lot more to consider.
720p blurs away extra details, like in the case of Witcher 2. If you look at the PC screenshot, you can see that the King´s face has a scar, farrows and he´s unshaved. You look at the xbox 360 version, and you can only see a face. And this is just one of the many details 720 gamers miss on.
LOL. That has nothing to do with the resolution. That was an effort to save textures.
Seriously, the inability to discern the value of textures/polygons from resolution is ridiculous. Toy story (1-3) on DVD (480p) still looks much better than any game on any console or PC. Resolution is not the end all be all that many here make it out to be.
Not sure if serious.
Resolution is in a direct relation with textures. Resolution determines how many pixels may be displayed on a given screen.
It means a screen can display upto 2073600 pixels.
Every texture is displayed in a certain resoltion
1080p textures > 900p textures > 720p textures
Low res textures on 1080p displays look blurry
1080p texttures on 1080p displays look crispy and detailed as hell.
Display resolution can have an in-direct relation with texture resolution.
Metro 2033 Xbox 360 edition's the texture resolution is 1024x1024, while PC version has 2048x2048. Even at 1280x720 display, higher resolution texture minimise pixelization during the zoomed-in phase.
Blue-ray movie with 1280x720p display resolution shows captured content from atomic level resolution (real life) sources.
Next gen is here, you just have to look for it in the right places.
You seriously just lie non stop nowadays. Honestly, is this how you get your fun now?
Windwaker is a decade old, it's not a next gen game.
Mario 3d World is NOT 1080P.
The rest of those games are NOT out and you only have BS Nintendo site rumours to back that up. (albeit wouldn't be surprised if Smash was)
Even 2D Mario, last gen 360 ports and simple minigames can't hit 1080P on WiiU. Some next gen.
I was mistaken and corrected about Zelda and Mario 3D World earlier in this thread. Yay, I made an honest mistake. Bite me.
The rest of those games ARE 1080p and 60FPS. They have been confirmed to hit those targets. This was confirmed by Nintendo and multiple journalists last E3.
I know you can't stand the thought of Nintendo actually getting something right, but that is what it is. Deal with it.
Next gen is here, you just have to look for it in the right places.
You seriously just lie non stop nowadays. Honestly, is this how you get your fun now?
Windwaker is a decade old, it's not a next gen game.
Mario 3d World is NOT 1080P.
The rest of those games are NOT out and you only have BS Nintendo site rumours to back that up. (albeit wouldn't be surprised if Smash was)
Even 2D Mario, last gen 360 ports and simple minigames can't hit 1080P on WiiU. Some next gen.
I was mistaken and corrected about Zelda and Mario 3D World earlier in this thread. Yay, I made an honest mistake. Bite me.
The rest of those games ARE 1080p and 60FPS. They have been confirmed to hit those targets. This was confirmed by Nintendo and multiple journalists last E3.
I know you can't stand the thought of Nintendo actually getting something right, but that is what it is. Deal with it.
LOL still lying. I love when Nintendo get things right. I just get bored of fanboys LYING and BULLSHITTING and MAKING EXCUSES all day.
Call me when a single Nintendo game is 1080P/60fps, liar. Least Forza and Killzone hit it and are actually out and PROVEN to be.
"Deal with it"? I deal with facts sir, and yours are often wrong. Double check before you make such sweeping generalisations.
Next gen is here, you just have to look for it in the right places.
You seriously just lie non stop nowadays. Honestly, is this how you get your fun now?
Windwaker is a decade old, it's not a next gen game.
Mario 3d World is NOT 1080P.
The rest of those games are NOT out and you only have BS Nintendo site rumours to back that up. (albeit wouldn't be surprised if Smash was)
Even 2D Mario, last gen 360 ports and simple minigames can't hit 1080P on WiiU. Some next gen.
I was mistaken and corrected about Zelda and Mario 3D World earlier in this thread. Yay, I made an honest mistake. Bite me.
The rest of those games ARE 1080p and 60FPS. They have been confirmed to hit those targets. This was confirmed by Nintendo and multiple journalists last E3.
I know you can't stand the thought of Nintendo actually getting something right, but that is what it is. Deal with it.
LOL still lying. I love when Nintendo get things right. I just get bored of fanboys LYING and BULLSHITTING and MAKING EXCUSES all day.
Call me when a single Nintendo game is 1080P/60fps, liar. Least Forza and Killzone hit it and are actually out and PROVEN to be.
"Deal with it"? I deal with facts sir, and yours are often wrong. Double check before you make such sweeping generalisations.
Me, lying? Lol, I made honest mistakes about Mario and Zelda, and I admitted to that. The others are all confirmed to be 1080p.
So you know what, next time before calling someone a liar repeatedly, blatantly, openly, at least fucking do your research. You look like a dick otherwise. Repeatedly attacking and accusing me for no reason whatsoever,
I know Forza hit 1080p at 60FPS. I know Killzone hits 1080p at 30FPS.
You deal with facts? You love it when Nintendo gets things right?
'Even 2D Mario, last gen 360 ports and simple minigames can't hit 1080P on WiiU. Some next gen.' 'Call me when a single Nintendo game is 1080P/60fps, liar.'
Your bitterness betrays you. Sorry that Nintendo got it right. Guess you'll just have to deal with the facts that you claim to love so much.
Next gen is here, you just have to look for it in the right places.
You seriously just lie non stop nowadays. Honestly, is this how you get your fun now?
Windwaker is a decade old, it's not a next gen game.
Mario 3d World is NOT 1080P.
The rest of those games are NOT out and you only have BS Nintendo site rumours to back that up. (albeit wouldn't be surprised if Smash was)
Even 2D Mario, last gen 360 ports and simple minigames can't hit 1080P on WiiU. Some next gen.
I was mistaken and corrected about Zelda and Mario 3D World earlier in this thread. Yay, I made an honest mistake. Bite me.
The rest of those games ARE 1080p and 60FPS. They have been confirmed to hit those targets. This was confirmed by Nintendo and multiple journalists last E3.
I know you can't stand the thought of Nintendo actually getting something right, but that is what it is. Deal with it.
LOL still lying. I love when Nintendo get things right. I just get bored of fanboys LYING and BULLSHITTING and MAKING EXCUSES all day.
Call me when a single Nintendo game is 1080P/60fps, liar. Least Forza and Killzone hit it and are actually out and PROVEN to be.
"Deal with it"? I deal with facts sir, and yours are often wrong. Double check before you make such sweeping generalisations.
Me, lying? Lol, I made honest mistakes about Mario and Zelda, and I admitted to that. The others are all confirmed to be 1080p.
So you know what, next time before calling someone a liar repeatedly, blatantly, openly, at least fucking do your research. You look like a dick otherwise. Repeatedly attacking and accusing me for no reason whatsoever,
I know Forza hit 1080p at 60FPS. I know Killzone hits 1080p at 30FPS.
You deal with facts? You love it when Nintendo gets things right?
'Even 2D Mario, last gen 360 ports and simple minigames can't hit 1080P on WiiU. Some next gen.' 'Call me when a single Nintendo game is 1080P/60fps, liar.'
Your bitterness betrays you. Sorry that Nintendo got it right. Guess you'll just have to deal with the facts that you claim to love so much.
I apologise. I was too mean. I just get annoyed at misinformation. I like truth. So, sorry! *hugs*
Loads of crap gets "confirmed" and then later changes or gets cancelled. I will simply never trust what we are told about "in dev" games. I only believe what we get on release day, in our hands, as gamers. When those games are actually PLAYABLE by you and me, THEN a post about the WiiU being "the place for 1080P/60FPS" games will be 100% true and I'll +1 or Like it or whatever :P
Dude, I'm bitter because I'm a fan of Nintendo games and sick of the suckiness and ass draggery, not to mention the excuses so many people make for them! The day Nintendo (console) games return to the cutting edge of quality will be a glorious one!
Log in to comment