But why. It's a legitimate discussion.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Giant Bomb #6 | You'd be hard pressed to find 10 better threads this year.
- Thread starter Hot Coldman
- Start date
- Status
rakkadakka
Member
Turns out the resolution doesn't matter because the game isn't fun to play.
What a god damn revelation.
What a god damn revelation.
It is more people who insist everyone take it as seriously as they do and pick a side. Alex is the perfect person to address it as everyone hates him anyway
It's a legitimate discussion when people can sit and compare in person the difference between the two versions.
Until then, it's just a couple numbers on paper. And given what Jeff has said, is it such a big deal if the XB1 is 720p but has a rock-solid framerate while the PS4 is 1080p but fluctuates?
Basically, we need all the facts before we can have a real discussion.
It is more people who insist everyone take it as seriously as they do and pick a side. Alex is the perfect person to address it as everyone hates him anyway
I don't hate Alex but I think it's telling Alex usually reviews the ultra shitty games.
When did Jeff say the XB1 version has a rock solid framerate?
We have facts. There's only one non 1080p PS4 launch game AFAIK.
Yeah. That was extremely unpleasant.
Not all of them though.
I'm a little sick and slightly annoyed to begin with. That part almost made me close the stream. I still like what Patrick is saying though. I think both of them are relatively level-headed about their statement that this is just the launch games and the real shit begins when we actually compare a little more finalized games running on actual next-gen engines.
Let's say for the sake of argument that it does. What will the tone of the conversation be around here?
Surely we can make an informed comment about what we do have, and then change it when and if new information comes. Instead of this wait and see approach that is about as interesting as watching grass grow.
Oh man is Brad breaking dat NDA?!
I'd say then that Infinity Ward should have knocked down the resolution in the PS4 version if that's the case.
BTW, big kudos on lasting those 25 hours, I admire the hell out of you. Don't think I could do it.
I'm not buying Ghosts anyway, games like Contrast and Resogun are far more interesting. All I'll say about Kuchera is I take what he says with a huge grain of salt.
People have taken it way further than 'informed comment' though.
And your second sentence makes it just sound like everything is boring unless there is mad drama.
Yeah, that's what I get for posting from my iPad.
Let me stress I'm not saying it's one way or the other, as I haven't played Ghosts on any platform. But I'm incredibly curious what the reaction would be around here if the other shoe dropped and it turned out neither version was ideal. Would everyone who spit fire about this issue backpedal or stick to their guns?
It's not the two versions of this or that game that makes it an interesting discussion. It's the fact that two consoles built with the same architecture, coming out within a week of each other, and with a $100 price difference are showing a 125% performance delta, which is far bigger than any 360/PS3 game over the course of this entire generation.
Call of Duty 2013 being different doesn't make it interesting, what makes it interesting is what it says about the overall direction of the two companies when developing these consoles.
How did it affect you when Battlefield 4 was revealed to run at a higher average framerate, and have more effects on the PS4? As well as running at a higher resolution.
I wouldn't be shocked if the Xbone version ran at a higher average frame rate given it is pushing more than a million less pixels. Except for the fact that the Xbone version is embargoed for an extra week. It seems strange to hide good news like that.
I think it is an interesting issue. And depends on the severity of the frame drops. How often/noticeable. I think a lot of people would take a better image quality and not worry about a few frame dips now and then.
*edit but if it is stutter city...then man that could really wreck how a game like CoD plays
BronsonLee
Member
I think making a definitive statement based on what information we do know is way more interesting, yes. Whether you create the false equivalence that I'm saying no drama = boring is not up to me to argue.
This whole situation is obviously fucked, the hardcore people are being patronized by a not insignificant percentage of the gaming press and they're responding with typical vitriol. I don't trust someone like Ben Kuchera to do anything but editorialize, reporting seems to be a lost form for these peeps.
You know the guns will be hella sticky.
What exactly are you referring to?
clearly the community that raised 100k for charity
Like with every console generation, 90+% of people on the internet only care about performance differences when their team has the better performance. When their team is losing, it doesn't matter.
Yeah I was about to say, not exactly the right time to call the community shitty.
Strawman arguments like these are pretty damn pointless I must say.
It just seems like as the site grows (or adds users, or whatever term) the level of quality in the comments, conversation, etc from the community has just dropped. The chat in that stream just reminded me of this, is all.
I'd suppose this could be said for any place on the internet, though. I'm not knocking Giant Bomb, I'm knocking what a shitty place the internet can be.
Damn resolution deniers.
Resolution is best. I would disable AA, grass detail, and even shadows before I reduce my resolution.
In your heart you know that is true too. Ask yourself, to get framerate up in battlefield 4 you would turn preset settings to Low before reducing resolution to x720?
It wouldn't make a difference. You would still be in a situation where Infinity Ward feels that the resolution to performance trade of was acceptable on the PS4 and whatever that trade off on the X1 is it is unacceptable. SO even then it would still serve as an indication that the PS4 is more powerful at a cheaper price point. Know that still might not be important to some people but it is to most people following this whole thing.
I love you Brad
Hahahahah. Seriously what are you talking about? The Patrick stuff?
For someone who has already stated on numerous venues that you are bored and fed up with this discussion and that the children on the forums should just wait quietly, having you show up here now that there's a scratch on the PS4's armor is a little ironic. I'm actually more on your side on this but this sudden interest makes me laugh.
EmCeeGramr
Member
It wouldn't really change the argument at all. "Resolution is the end all be all of graphics, especially Call of Duty" was never really the argument; it was the revelation that the PS4'S on paper advantage actually translated into a significant difference in real world number crunching, and that instead of owning up to it and trying to focus on games, Microsoft kept trying to obfuscate and spin the issue in a way that came off as insulting.
I suppose you're in the 10% that is rational and capable of having an intelligent discussion about performance differences between products being released in the near future? Products which will significantly impact the discussion in video game oriented web sites, such as this and Giant Bomb, for the next decade?
TheLegendOfMart
Banned
What a surprise a wild Brad "No Opinion" Shoemaker appears.
Getting sick of so called journalists down playing the issue. While I agree people are taking a bit too far it is a legitimate issue. One that "journalists" are afraid to talk about just in case they upset someone and don't get their free console.
Idiots like Klepek and Navarro groaning and being condescending towards the people who support the site that employs them really gets on my tits.
Getting sick of so called journalists down playing the issue. While I agree people are taking a bit too far it is a legitimate issue. One that "journalists" are afraid to talk about just in case they upset someone and don't get their free console.
Idiots like Klepek and Navarro groaning and being condescending towards the people who support the site that employs them really gets on my tits.
Oh, you mean like last (this?) gen when it was almost always the opposite and 50p less resolution and lower shadow detail on PS3 was a HUGE DEAL in DF threads? And people where right. Numbers dont lie. "The other shoe" was the case almost every multiplat last gen, only 2010 onwards did PS3 catch up in multiplats.
On the case of CoD Ghosts, the PS4 version not hitting solid 60 is bad.
IW should have put in some dynamic resolution like WipeoutHD, or just bumped it down to BF4s 1600x900. Or had a simple toggle in the options menu between the 2?
Ehhh I don't know. That's a dangerous proposition because it requires lending some credence to their hotair to begin with.
I would imagine it just fades into the background, until the next "big thing" pops up.
brainzelda
Member
This is where you lose me. How is this a revelation in any way? Did people think that the on paper specs wouldn't translate to a performance increase in the real world? It's not like Microsoft has been putting up billboards with "Xbox is is more powerful than the PS4". Were people that doubtful that this real world translation would occur? To me it was a no brainer and I skipped over the COD news without even flinching because it was so obvious.
I really don't think that is it.
Well for a long time Brad in particular seemed pretty convinced that there would be no real world difference.
"a huge deal in DF threads" does not mean its a huge deal to most people.....
Albert Penello thought it was a big enough deal to come in here and make promises about the performance difference not being anywhere close to as big as said on here.
TheLegendOfMart
Banned
Why are they so reluctant to talk about the issue then, Brad is a "tech" interested guy yet he is scared to actually have an opinion on the matter.
I still see it as two separate but related topics. The first being that there seems to be a significant gap in performance between the two and that saying there's barely a difference between 720p and 1080p is disingenuous as hell. The second and (IMO) more important issue being that neither of these boxes appear to have made an appropriate leap in performance vs. their predecessors given how much time has passed.
No billboards, but Penello and Nelson have both made public statements disputing there would be any sort of noticeable difference in games because of the hardware difference.
Then we got the Battlefield 4 evidence and they went silent.
Most people are incapable of understanding what specs translate to.
Brad said "around here" so I thought he meant those types of threads.
I guess I just don't feel that the delta can truly be discussed until we have the games in hand which exhibit that delta. And I do mean in hand, simply reading about how one game is X while another is Y isn't really enough.
Until then it seems that this discussion is way too couched in maybes, possibles and shoulds.
Neither Giant Bomb or NeoGAF are websites for "most people". Also sites like IGN and Eurogamer that are, have been running comparison videos and even an interview about this subject.
brainzelda
Member
But the people who are making the most light of the resolution differences do understand this translation, which is why it baffles me that this somehow surprises them.
- Status