Call of Duty: Ghost (Consoles)

Considering that CODG isn't exactly a graphical powerhouse, it would be surprising (in a bad way) if they actually did have trouble getting it to run 1080p on final hardware. At this point, I wouldn't be shocked, though. Every title on PS4 with confirmed resolutions is 1080p. Yet we have quite a few titles on XB1 that are already confirmed to be running less, either 720p or 900p. We've got what... Forza and FIFA confirmed at 1080p? And neither one looks all that great, not exactly pushing the hardware.

Digital Foundry's going to be NUTS in about a month.

 

Bishoptl is a game developer and a mod who looked for confirmation it seems and came back with that post.

 

The rumour is based on a very weak source claiming that they know it is 720p after a play test.

Albert Penellos post says:
"Man these threads crack me up. Well done on the Nickelback gif.

I'm not going to convince anyone differently, but it's funny how people interpret the tweet as confirmation.

First - I don't know the resolution. I don't have more sophisticated tools than anyone else. I watch the game on a nice TV with the XBO set to 1080p for every game, there is no way for me to know what's native vs. upscaled unless I'm told.

Second, if I did know, it wouldn't be my place to say anything.

If the Ryse footage last week showed me anything, it's that you get a much more interesting discussion when you're looking at real footage.

So now I've seen the PS4 footage, and I've seen XBO running live. To me, they both look great.

The resolution will be what it will be. It will be known when Activision wants it to be known. The only thing I was curious about was if the games look different, and based on the assets available to me, they don't.

So I think when XBO footage comes out, and people can compare resolutions, effects, framerate and other things the debate will be more interesting.

All that doesn't come across in Twitter-sized bites."

Many on Gaf believe that it should be no problem to tell a native vs upscaled game just by playing. I'm not sure how many have actually put it to the test on themselves since AA and upscaling can make this difficult to determine without direct comparisons.

 

Damn...I was hoping for better shaders and a lower resolution on the X1 version.

 

Considering CoD Ghosts is probably the least impressive looking next-gen title (IMO anyway), I didn't really believe it either. But Penello didn't deny it... he simply said, "I've seen COD: Ghosts running on Xbox One. It looks f'n amazing. Wait for real footage, then judge for yourself.". That to me seems to suggest that it's true. Or does NDA restrict the console makers from releasing info about third-party games?

To add fuel to the fire, IGN was showing the PS4 version of the game. CoD is almost always showcased on Xbox hardware.

 

I wouldn't be surprised if it wasn't 1080p. I would be a little more surprised if it was 720p, but not completely shocked.

 

Alright here is his last reply to add some clarity to the situation. I know the majority are experts on Gaf and can determine resolutions at first glance but hopefully this puts some perspective to it all.

Albert P:
"Look, I get some people claim such amazing eyesight as to be able to instantly distinguish native vs. upscaled when you're in a room watching and enjoying a game demo, despite the fact that it requires normal people access to a direct feed screenshot with very particular sections zoomed up 8x to pixel count, while also making sure you're accounting for other intentional environmental effects that may blur or otherwise impact the image.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthre...pixel+counting

But hey, if you're saying you can tell the difference with enough accuracy to make a public disclosure about it, just by watching someone play the game, then I say wow.

I've seen a bunch of other 3rd party games running at various times, and I can't tell you the *native* resolutions of those either.

So me, I'm not making that claim. I'm sorry if you think that's a job requirement."

 

Um...yes. Film is not point sampled, it effectively has an infinite sampling rate. I assume you're being facetious? Our games would look just as clean at 720p if we sampled each pixel a million bazillion times.

A game can look very good at 720p if the sampling rate is sufficiently high. Keep in mind, devs now have the ability to oversample only the pixels that need it, and even within a pixel they can selectively oversample only the functions that need it! On top of that, they can take care of simple edge aliasing with very cheap post-process filters like FXAA. This is preferable to simply raising the rendering resolution IMO.

Also: Holy cripes this thread moves fast! I need to retreat back to the PC games forum

 

https://twitter.com/ScottLowe/statuses/392417250751180800

Console threads only move this fast when there is a rumor about perceived weakness of one console over the other...

 

Ya, just joking

 

CBOAT stepped in and is hinting that Titanfall is too.

 

this has been known. The developers have always said 60fps , resolution is secondary.

 

I understand, it's just that the frequency of posts is so high I can hardly keep up and I check this site many times daily! Guess in forums like neogaf this is the status quo but it is really jarring here (the only forum I am active on).

Cool .

Edit with resolution scaling being trivial these days, I expect the question "what res does game X run at" will be rendered meaningless. It is so much better to sacrifice resolution than frametime IMO.

 

yeah because we should take the word of some well known liars that claimed GPU downclock and other countless of lies as facts? especially coming from that poo hole of forum

 

Considering that neogaf and the validity or reliability of sources is banned here, that leaves pretty much nothing to discuss. Before the pitchforks and torches come out, it's probably best to wait for screen grabs and direct-feed video. There's no point in crying about it, or going into a defensive rage when you probably have a 50/50 chance of being wrong in either case.

 

exactly , like I said we have about a month left , if this is true they can't hide it for much longer.

I'm betting that its either 900p or whoever started the rumor (which all the neogaf "insiders" latched onto) was just bullshitting.

We already know the game went gold as people have an unboxing of the xbox one verison

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Zwt7Ucpi5M

 

I'm sorry but most of these guys "confirming" this rumor are the same guys that "confirmed" a XOne downclock. Also just because Bishop is a game developer and a mod on GAF doesn't mean he has inside connections to Infinity Ward.

It's funny because this entire rumor is based on a bunch of comments on GAF that don't clearly say anything.

Do they even understand that power difference between a console running 720p@60fps and 1080p@60fps, the power gap isn't even close to this big.

 

While the difference in console power may not be as big but the difficulty of working with ESram could be a factor. Makes me wonder if Xbone would re-enter the sub 720p land in BF4.

 

I'm sorry but give me a break on this one but honestly?

I love how it's no longer a "power gap" but now everything is caused by the ESRAM, the engineers themselves said that anyone used to developing on the X360 won't have a hard time with the XOne.

 

Not from what I've been reading, but hey maybe it has more AA on a 704p buffer, or 720p for that matter.