It makes sense since it's a TV centric device that also plays games
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Rumor: Titanfall also 720p?
- Thread starter ridethepiggy
- Start date
It makes sense since it's a TV centric device that also plays games
Im much more worried about 4K rather than 1080p. Most of sony's stuff is hitting 1080p, some of MS....but shouldnt both consoles hit 1080p NO PROBLEM out the gate?
When 4K tvs become consumer level priced im thinking both consoles are gonna limp by, in which case...time to switch to PC forever.
phosphor112
Banned
Hahaha... ah...haha...
He really is better than this.
Doesn't even make sense.
Ay yo, I think ABC has the best AA on their picture. Gets rid of all da jaggies!
The news dropped before Cboat got involved (if you discount that CBOAT called the 720p/900p x1 normality for most X1 future titles, 2 weeks ago)
It was Mort from kutaku teased the issue that would "break GAF" .,.. Prolite stated xbox not only has 720p issues but the OS crashes to the desktop during mulitplayer games aswell... Bruceleeroy also stated the 720'p, Thuway came out, balls on the table stating it first (also a V reliable source) - once everyone confirmed their sources, it all pulled together and everyone came out - So its not just from 1 dude
AH. Wasnt aware. I just saw CBOAT said titanfall 720p and thought the internet broke.
Carry on gaf
The sequel to Resogun!
I do care about graphics but image quality is only 1 part of graphics (and my tv is only 720p anyway). Xbox One will still have more effects, higher res textures, far more polygons and possibly more stable framerates over current gen, its not like the 720p Xbox One games are going to look identical to current gen games simply because of similar resolution. Christ.
SuperSonic1305
Member
How is this wrong? Xbox One has no indie games at launch.
Things change, get cancelled, get moved, etc etc.
Why would something that's stable change?
I think at this point it's a bit more than a rumor. Lol I can't wait till someone validate or deny this. Shitstorm is going down.
CreateNowSleepLater
Member
WIll wait for the 1080p PS4 version.
It's a downright hoot, but I just can't decide who's worse: the Xbox fans who act like 1080p is no big deal or the Playstation fans who spent the last 7 years doing the same thing but now have magically seen the light.
something fishy
Member
cboat definitely closer to ms than the other two so that would be the one that blew it up understandably.
BruiserBear
Banned
The adoption of 4K tv is going to be far slower than it was for even 1080p tvs.
Also, to even run most PC games at 4K resolutions you need a monster (ie, very expensive) PC to do it. No one should be buying these new consoles with 4K in mind.
And yet they claim these are both "10 year machines".
Wonder Cheese
Banned
Holy crap.
SEGAvangelist
Member
I feel the same way. March gives Respawn some time, so maybe 720p is the resolution it's running at right now.
If this gets verified and X1 cant run 1080p COD games...............game set match.
Im hoping the lack of full 1080p games is just do to it being the consoles launch.
Does anyone know the full resolutions of 360 and ps3 games at launch? Were they all 480p or something? In other words....did they improve across the board after launch?
something fishy
Member
yeah there's no smoke without fire but surely cod is the one that's beyond resolving if true, not this?
Mr_Antimatter
Member
Both sides last gen were keen to hype up when they got the superior version of this or that. It was the wii folks who claimed graphics, resolutions, etc didn't matter.
they still do that, in fact, given the wii U's performance.
Now we are just seeing the xbox folks join in enmass it seems.
SolidSnakeUS
Member
The idea of not being able to run a Source game at 1080p in the modern day is pretty insane (as in bad). I'll probably play it on the PC regardless though.
Portugeezer
Member
4K adoption still has many years before it becomes important.
It took HD to 2010 to get 50%, and that's including 720p TV's.
http://www.dealerscope.com/article/...ark-according-leichtman-research-group-inc/1# (Posted December 2009, under 50% adoption rate)
Theres just NO WAY these are 10 year machines right? Id hope both companies go the sony route for the next gen and plan much much earlier.
5 years seems fine for a console gen, honestly, at least to me in todays world. People have no problem dropping 500+ on an ipad that will be fully featured and able to run everything for what, 3 years maybe?
Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't there still some significant technical barriers to reach before we see 4K gaming, even on high end PC's?
TAJ
Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.
Nintendo-only folks briefly jumped back on the graphics bandwagon about 1.5-2 years ago, predictably.
4k performance is pretty awful right now. AMD was just bragging about how their new top card runs Tomb Raider (a DX11-enhanced last gen game) in Ultra at 30fps.
I'm not a PC gamer (well not anymore) and 1080p doesn't bother me as i only own a 720p tv but i also recognise that some of these 'wa'r threads are ridiculous and if people really do care that much then they would play on PC.
Loads. But these being "10 year consoles" youd think thatd be long enough for 4k to start getting down to reasonable prices
Neuromancer
Member
Completely agree. As fast as technology moves, these consoles will be ridiculously outdated in just 4-5 years. At that time 4k should be popular and I'd love to upgrade to a PS5.
KevKevinator
Neo Member
Amen. I'll usually take gameplay and innovation over graphics any day, but this is kinda sad. I've been on the fence for a while now on which console to get (mostly because of Forza 5), but if the Xbox can't run these games at 1080p, imagine how this console will age? I'll stick to my PC until that game I simply must to have comes to a console, which I think will probably be The Order: 1886.
EDIT: Or Destiny.
It's probably the situation you just made up off the top of your head that isn't actually accurate.
soul creator
Member
Around 8-10ft. Though I did walk up to like a foot away from my TV and tried to spot the differences, and still didn't really notice anything drastic.
I can generally notice 30 vs. 60 framerate differences, tearing, and if actual textures are blurry or not. But I honestly couldn't eyeball big differences with resolution specifically (once past a certain threshold, which I guess happens to be 720p for me?).
I can sometimes notice it in screenshots when directly flipping back and forth between them on a computer monitor, but not in a standard gameplay situation or benchmark (when things are actually in motion).
Vizzeh said:
I rarely notice differences in 720p vs. 1080p videos at fullscreen, but I can notice differences in horribly compressed videos (like Youtube) vs. better quality ones when I'm sitting at my computer monitor. For example, I often find videos on Vimeo seem to be much higher quality than Youtube, even if they aren't necessarily different in resolution. Are Vimeo videos actually compressed at a higher bitrate?
I guess I'm honestly more likely to notice differences in graphics in pretty much every area except resolution, at least, once I'm past a certain threshold. I can tell the difference between 360/480p vs. 720p, for example, but apparently 720p vs. 1080p is harder for me to notice. I might go see if my Best Buy has some 4K content to look at, and do some more personal testing, heh. Maybe that's the jump I need for me to notice.
Of course, this isn't to say that every other person is wrong or anything, since we all value different things, but I just figured I'd offer a different perspective, and possibly why so many folks (and developers) don't seem to have a problem going 720p, and still thinking things look fine and "next-gen". Sure, all else being equal, I know that objectively a higher resolution is better, but with game development and game consoles, there's rarely an "all else being equal", so for me, 720p doesn't necessarily imply "lack of next-gen" or whatever. There's a million other things higher on the graphics priority list for me personally.
And of course, one could easily make the argument that all this implies that the "ceiling" for Xbox One power is lower, and that's a completely fair point, and I can't really argue with that. That said, that's not the reason why I'm interested in new consoles anyway, so I guess that's why these 80 page resolution discussions are odd to me, heh.
This post ended up being way longer than I thought.
Timeaisis said:
Well, in my case, it's all the other thing a console does. In 2013, there isn't really a Genesis vs. SNES situation where literally the only thing the console does is take in a cartridge and boot up a game. Consoles have a ton more variety in feature sets, so there's more to factor into a purchase than solely a resolution bump.
Granted, I recognize some people do just insert a game and boot up a system to play it, and don't really do anything else. And that's fine too! So I get why someone would pick one system over another, if that was their personal gaming habits. But I'm not sure why people are shocked that other qualities may factor into a purchase.
But what happens if Titanfall is a timed exclusive and the Ps4 has another year in development?
This guy is awesome.
Pseudo judo
Member
There's a fundamental misunderstanding between future X1 owners and PS4 buyers. Me, I'm on the fence with X1, got it pre ordered but the $700 I might spend may be better spent on the PC I'm slowly putting together. That being said, I want the X1 for the games. Some of the other stuff that MS is offering through their console is appealing but not a deciding factor, just cherries on the sundae.
I'm retail game kinda a guy. I don't care for free to play, don't care about Indy offerings. That means Sony's console isn't saying much right now. Kill Zone has been unappealing to me since the franchise started and Knack is not worth conversing about, as far as my tastes are concerned. So that means despite the $100 price difference between X1 and PS4, for me, the PS4 is the poorer investment. In a year that clearly won't be the case but right now it certainly is.
FYI, the "investment in the future" argument is pointless. I'm an early adopter. If I wanted to invest in the future I simply buy the console in the future.
Bahahaha. Man, that's great.
Mr_Antimatter
Member
What that means, at least historically, is support for 10 years. In other words, sony will make ps3 games, even if just B teams doing up-ports from Vita, till at least 2016. This is in contrast to something like the wii, which was killed dev wise a year before the wii U, and recently killed production wise in japan.
In time, the ps4 will become nothing more then an up-port value console in favor of the ps5.
This guy is such an amazing character. In my mind, its just one ugly Xbox avatar yelling everywhere he goes lol
Thats what I think the big issue is. You'd hope these consoles would both be in a position that we arent even talking about resolutions, everything can run 1080p no problem.
I mentioned it earlier but Im hoping its just because of crunch time for launching the game. I really want to know what PS3 and xbox 360 games were resolution-wise at launch
It depends on what the limiting factor is and why its 720p, but there seems to be a pattern amongst most X1 Games and thats 720 or 900p Games, what is theorized is that the bottleneck is the eSRAM, there is only 32MB of it, to be able to achieve a good 1080p image on screen with AA, 60FPS you need 53mb ram for the frame buffer ( various combos will have different results)
It seems depending on the game and what tech effects/game engine/game type etc it may have to be a sacrifice, FPS or Resolution but not both (in most cases). Cod and titanfall WILL NOT choose 30fps, so their seemingly limited to 720p. This will apparently be a trend going forward. Blame the EsRam
- imo...SmoothRunningGun
Member
Xbox One : Football is only 720p. You like football, right?
Mass Effect
Member
Whether or not this new gen does in fact last 10 years it was certainly the initial plan to last 8-10 years as plenty of people in the know have said that, i think even Microsoft and Sony pretty much said the same themselves.
I don't know if that will happen now what with the consoles coming in a bit under powered (well not underpowered, just 3 years late), it will probably all rest on how popular they are over the first 3 or 4 years. Sony have said that consoles are going nowhere and i'm sure Microsoft will feel the same and i have a sneaky feeling that PS5 and Xbox4 will be powerhouses that really WILL last upwards of 10 years as they will save so much money as they will pretty much miss out on a console gen.
Metalingus5150
Member
If resolution doesn't matter, why not just buy it on the 360?
Saint Gregory
Member
I could be remembering wrong but it seemed to as the gen went on internal rendering resolutions got worse but graphic fidelity improved. It may not have been a clear trade off but that's how it seemed.
This sounds like something Nintendo would say. It really doesn't seem like either the PS4 or Xbone is as future proof as their predecessors.
SEGAvangelist
Member
I love Tim Dog. So much.
soul creator
Member
I really hope posts like these are just sarcasm/snark :/
Pseudo judo
Member
Really? He kinda seems like an asshole. You can make valid points and express you distaste without sounding like an asshole. No one wants to converse with an asshole which means his talking to himself and people like himself who find general douche bag behavior entertaining.
Don't forget the numerous TRUTHFACTS that he dropped over the years including todays ones which seems almost confirmed.
#TeamCboat