EightBitNate
Member
The point is that they never mentioned it being 1080tr at launch.
-
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.
'Killzone: Shadow Fall' Class Action Lawsuit Can Proceed, Judge Rules
- Thread starter chadskin
- Start date
The point is that they never mentioned it being 1080tr at launch.
to reference the suit:
Code:
Sony may ultimately be correct that Killzone outputs video in 1080p even in multiplayer
mode.7 But Ladore does not allege that Sony misrepresented the final output resolution of Killzone.
Rather,[B] the heart of Ladores complaint is that Killzones multiplayer graphics were not originally
created or rendered in 1080p[/B] the output resolution was represented to be native 1080p when in fact
it was not. See, e.g., Complaint at ¶¶ 45-46 (alleging that Sony designed Killzone to produce a
frame equal to half the resolution of 1080p while using information from previous frames to attempt
to reconstruct a full 1080p image. While this reconstruction technique might be novel, it is
decidedly not the native 1080p Sony promised) (emphasis in the original) (internal modifications
omitted). Instead, Ladore alleges that Sony relied on a technological trick to turn lower resolution
graphics into graphics that, in Sonys own words, appear subjectively similar to native 1080p, but
which by Ladores account were blurry and subpar. Id. at ¶¶ 43, 54. Put simply, the
misrepresentation occurred where Sony allegedly represented that Killzone rendered graphics in
1080p (i.e., native 1080p), when in fact it renders graphics at a considerably lower resolution and
then combines pixels and motion vectors from multiple lower-resolution frames to reconstruct a
full 1080p image. Id. at ¶ 43 (quoting alleged admission of Sony employee that Killzone does not
render multiplayer mode at native 1080p).Yes, they used the temporal reprojection technique but the end result is still an image output at 1920x1080 resolution, unlike 1080i which is actually 1920x540.
So what I'm getting is, is that the end goal of this lawsuit is to prevent and punish any company saying their game is so-and-so resolution if their game or any mode within that game does not fully render in so-and-so resolution without any such techniques as was used in Shadowfall's MP or others like it.
So saying "Our game is 1080p" when a portion of the game is not 1080p would be punishable by law. Saying "Our game is 1080p" when a portion of the game does not render at 1080p without aid of techniques such as approximation will be punishable by law. Essentially any company daring to say their game is whatever resolution will be held liable to such detail as specified by this CAL.
What will happen if this CAL succeeds is we will no longer see any mention of resolution by developers or their publishers during hype of their games, and even more dodging and non-answers about it when pressed by the media. The resolution noted on game cases will now have disclaimers on them about which portions of the game don't fully render at so-and-so resolution or if they do but use techniques to achieve it will have to list what techniques are used.
So saying "Our game is 1080p" when a portion of the game is not 1080p would be punishable by law. Saying "Our game is 1080p" when a portion of the game does not render at 1080p without aid of techniques such as approximation will be punishable by law. Essentially any company daring to say their game is whatever resolution will be held liable to such detail as specified by this CAL.
What will happen if this CAL succeeds is we will no longer see any mention of resolution by developers or their publishers during hype of their games, and even more dodging and non-answers about it when pressed by the media. The resolution noted on game cases will now have disclaimers on them about which portions of the game don't fully render at so-and-so resolution or if they do but use techniques to achieve it will have to list what techniques are used.
good points laid out there thus could be a real pain in the ass for the industry
What would you say is an accurate indication of real native resolution in case of Killzone multiplayer?
It would be simple, if the rendering resulted in something other than a 1920x1080 resolution image. But fact of the matter is that even Digital Foundry believed (until Guerrilla explained their rendering technology) that the image was 1080p with some weird glitches when camera is rotated really fast.
I'd say the line is pretty easy to draw.
What is the framebuffer size being rendered prior to output? If that is 1920x1080, then the game is native 1080p. If it is 1600x900 or some other resolution, which is then scaled to 1080p before output, that is not native 1080p
this
is what every game does behind the scenes to some degree or other. Alpha coverage, shadows, colour depth compression. Everything is smoke and mirrors to try and get the best result from the limited performance available to the developers.
Rez Raider
Member
This is hilarious, but like others are saying it could actually be beneficial to us as gamers getting the truth right away and no pr bs.
Or it could go the complete opposite and devs will be discouraged or find that it's worth it to target 1080p. Who knows what this will prove.
Or it could go the complete opposite and devs will be discouraged or find that it's worth it to target 1080p. Who knows what this will prove.
it could dissuade developers from trying innovative approaches to rendering too
Or it could result in publishers finding innovative ways of describing graphics without measurable details. It cannot legally be called false advertising, if there is always a way to weasel out of any concrete interpretation.
RandyBobandy
Banned
I'm ok with this
Just a shame no one did this with Halo MCC or Driveclub
Just a shame no one did this with Halo MCC or Driveclub
DontBeThatGuy
Member
it's amazing what gets to a court and what doesn't in this country.
GHG
Member
CadetMahoney
Member
Can ppl sue if a company says 30fps? (with no mention of target)
If a game company says "native 1080p" in their PR but the game fluctuates resolution, has a lowered one in different scenarios, full hd during cutscenes etc. that's a no-no right and they can be sued?
What about 30fps without a "target" disclaimer? But is garbage and goes into the teens the moment more than 1 enemy is on screen?
If a game company says "native 1080p" in their PR but the game fluctuates resolution, has a lowered one in different scenarios, full hd during cutscenes etc. that's a no-no right and they can be sued?
What about 30fps without a "target" disclaimer? But is garbage and goes into the teens the moment more than 1 enemy is on screen?
people complaining about false advertising yet its been going on for 10+ years since the 360 was introduced with bullshots and lies.
Amazing that, those practices of false advertising are 100% justified. This lawsuit is stupid and the guy from a google search does nothing but sue for petty shit like this hoping to go in low come out insanely high.
Amazing that, those practices of false advertising are 100% justified. This lawsuit is stupid and the guy from a google search does nothing but sue for petty shit like this hoping to go in low come out insanely high.
So I bet you want Ubi too go too court for saying that AC would be 30fps or 343 for claiming that MCC had MP?
Do you have the original statements regarding resolution by the developer or Sony? I'd like to see them.
Tumle
Member
Sure I'm all for that.. Can you tell me what and how the native res of killzones multiplayer should be labeled?
I feel like most people who think this is good, don't even realize why it's bullshit. The fact also is that as far as we have been told: Gureilla games explained in detail how the game is infact 1080p on their blog, BEFORE the person in question that is sueing even bought the game.
So they explained themselves, the person sueing however didn't care to listen.
Robot Pants
Member
So which Gaffer who's a judge was this?
TheSlySoul
Member
Someone woke up and thought "This is totally worth attorney fees I may never get back."
Sure I'm okay with that. Devs and publishers been getting away with too much BS.
Also maybe this will be the end of broken rushed games. One can dream.
So? The resolution IS native 1080p
Costructed or not, this is the resolution, and this guy will lose lot of money for nothing.
The only person out any money if this fails will be the law firm.
thelastword
Banned
I Like the guys at guerilla games, they always push technology and are one of the best devs out there for this, they also seem like humble guys.
I'm sure we can find recent examples which are far worse than how they projected killzone mp to be. There are definitely games in far worse shape, games where devs promised stuff that never made it in or games that just plain don't work properly offline and online, also unfinished games which happen to hit the market. Guerilla had no issue like this with their final product, their game functioned properly from day one.
It is not for me however, to determine who anyone should sue, it's their prerogative. If anyone feels that the product they received was advertised falsely and they were duped in making a purchase, it is their right to take action, I won't be the one to judge them as it's their money paying for said product. In the same way, I won't hold a man at gunpoint who chooses to buy ET or superman64, neither will I chastise him.
Having said that, many of these devs/publishers have set a bad precedent in how they advertise their product. They present trailers, b-roll footage, screens that are not always representative of the final product, sometimes far-away in quality in the final product, they speak terms and in ways fool you into believing that their product will be at a certain standard of technical proficiency.
Guerilla is the only Sony team that was not straightforward in declaring their resolution
for the entire product, the way they portrayed their product prior to launch, no one would even question that there would be a disparity in quality between the SP and the MP of said product. It's Guerilla Games, we would never question their technical talent, however, when the final product dropped, the native 1080p quality in the SP is markedly superior to the "supposed" 1080p quality in MP. That is fooling people, plain and simple.
As I said, I don't think Guerilla is the worst, but usually it's not the worst that suffers in such matters it's who is caught and made an example of. I think we need new rules in this industry. Too many devs/publishers believes that customers are foolish and won't be able to make the distinguishment from what they project to what they present. If you're selling a product to a customer you should respect his intelligence and his knowledge of the product being sold.
In that light, I'd really like the language in this industry to be more precise. I'm tired of the semantics and useless wordplay. On the box should be written, TRUE-HD 1080p Native for said product, Any other method without the render quality of TRUE HD should be written 1080p output Non Native. Everybody would understand that language. I'm sure more devs would strive for the former due to the former's superiority in clarity and it would obviously be better for marketing purposes.
If Guerilla was so up beat about their output methods, they would have mentioned it before the game shipped, but clearly they didn't.
The number of persons defending guerilla or any company on this is really lost on me though, yet puzzling at the same time. I'm curious to know if guerilla offered a patch to play the SP in it's current native form or to play with this 960*1080p reprojected blurfest how many would choose the latter?
EightBitNate
Member
But then 5 months later they say
I don't know how to make it more obvious that they advertised it as native before release and then non-native once people bought it and started noticing.
GribbleGrunger
Dreams in Digital
Yes.
This is just stupid. There are 1920x1080 pixels on screen at all times. Not only that but the campaign IS native 1080p by any technical breakdown.
Time to sue Ubisoft over Watch Dogs, Assassins Creed, or any other of their recent blunders at least that would have some actual weight behind it.
Time to sue Ubisoft over Watch Dogs, Assassins Creed, or any other of their recent blunders at least that would have some actual weight behind it.
What this means, though, is that if this succeeds, the definition of native 1080p shifts to mean "every part of the pipeline is rendered at 1920x1080", which no game has ever done and likely ever will.
I agree with you in that I feel like developers would stop sharing technical information about their games. The narrative would simply shift to "outputs at 1080p" and we'll receive less information about the rendering techniques or actual native resolution to avoid potentially compromising situations. I'm of the mind that the internet response surrounding resolution today is an indicator that developers actually gain less from sharing this information than they do by being as opaque as possible, even though I appreciate it. Just look at the idiots still trumpeting the "Killzone isn't 1080p" for an idea of how many people seem to have such strong opinions about shit they know nothing about.
For one, this game outputs 1920x1080 new pixels every frame, making it 1080p, and does not scale the image, making it native. Yet forum warriors have redefined the terms native and progressive to mean something completely different every time they talk about this game. This has been going on since this novel and unique rendering technique was uncovered. I hate that someone's idiocy has resulted in a message to developers that explicitly states "shut up about your rendering pipeline otherwise I'll sue you".
Native has never ever ever meant that every part of the rendering pipeline is 1080p. That's preposterous. It's beyond idiotic to expect that. BEYOND it.
EightBitNate
Member
Watch Dogs at least runs as advertised. We got videos of the "downgradeton" before release.
But initial public showings showed something completely different. Do we not consider that advertising now?
Icefire1424
Member
Oh coooooooooome oooooooooooooon. Really? All the shit going on in this country, and this is considered important? The greed of some people noawadays is absolutely staggering.
EightBitNate
Member
So products arent allowed to change before release, even if they let the consumer know beforehand?
You ignored the paragraph before the one you posted.
I think this is the common definition of what "native" is. There are games like PS3's Okami HD which render at an internal resolution of 3840x2160, but we still consider it a 1080p game because it outputs at 1920x1080.
http://www.capcom-unity.com/gregaman/blog/2012/11/05/okami-hd-powered-by-technical-innovation-love
But that's the thing, it doesn't produce 1920x1080 new pixels every frame.
In the old times, we had interlaced graphics, where frames would update every other line each frame. The opposite of that is what the p in 1080p means, progressive, originally "sequential". If you are only updating half the screen, or if you are using half the screen to interpolate the other half, we are going back to the old interlaced times.
Wolfenstein is openly known to run on the same engine as Rage, which has been openly advertised to drop resolution to keep framerate, hell it is one of the features carmack advertised. Guerrilla only said about "temporal retroprojection" once people had the game in their hands and started to notice something off.
As a fun example to consider how silly the idea of native meaning every part of the pipeline, let's look at the idTech 5 engine. idTech 5 can use textures up to 128000×128000 pixels in size for pretty much everything in the game. If native meant every part of the rendering pipeline is 1080p, then it would preclude a game running on idTech 5 from advertising itself as native 1080p. The upcoming Doom 4 could output at 1080p with 1920x1080 unique pixels each frame yet still not be called native using that definition, even though part of the pipeline is actually much higher than that. Kind of similar to your Okami example.
In both cases, it sounds silly. It's silly because native has never meant every part of the pipeline is X resolution. I'm not sure the motivations or intentions of people who continuously spout this nonsense even after being corrected. It's getting out of hand.
But that's the thing, it doesn't produce 1920x1080 new pixels every frame.
Yes it does. It updates every pixel. It simply uses the data from previous pixels to draw a whole new pixel completely unique to that frame. It isn't interlaced. It isn't anything but a novel and unique way to render at native 1080p.