Aside from that, a Far Cry 4 developer has said that nobody cares about 1080p. What do those unbelievers have to say now?
http://www.forbes.com/sites/davidthier/2014/10/28/far-cry-4-dev-nobody-cares-about-1080p/
FarCry 4 Creative Director: Nobody cares aboot 1080p
- Thread starter Cyan
- Start date
http://www.forbes.com/sites/davidthier/2014/10/28/far-cry-4-dev-nobody-cares-about-1080p/
Unbelievers? Well 1080p and 900p are measurements both of which can be quantified. Does resolution effect the experience? Sure. Does it make the whole experience no. And that's what the developers are trying to say here. Once you get used to the resolution it's all gameplay from there he product is the same.
900p to 1080p is a measurable difference but I don't think it ruins the game or make a product inferior (what a harsh word), it just doesn't have that extra bit of clarity.
meant the Youtube comments.
I have Ryse and it could easily pass as a 1080p game. Powerstar Golf though doesn't seem to be 1080p and it is noticeable to some extent, though it's quite quite difficult to discern, maybe the lack of AA gives it out.
shredenvain
Regular
People do care about 1080p. Sometimes they care a little to much.
The people that really should care are the ones who own both platforms, but it turns out the people who care the most only care because they want to use it as some sort of falic measuring system.
I can’t wait until this console cycle ends… full of whiners and hypocrites. Hopefully during the next cycle, both systems will be more evenly matched, so that 1st party games will dictate the better choice. Not this buzzword checkmark game… nor, the game of pretending subpar IQ and performance is now acceptable because you own the subpar system.
D
Deleted member 11852
Guest
This. If it an arbitrary decision, and both are possible, who would chose 900p over 1080p? You want the game as sharp and as much detailed rendered as possible - especially with the size of TVs these day and people using projectors.
But if it's s performance issue sub-1080p is a valid engineering decision.
The smartest thing developers like Ubisoft can do is stop talking about it. In fact Ubisoft probably shouldn't say anything at all about their games before they are released.
For me, sitting relatively close (2.5m) to a 42" TV, I find I do really notice if it is native or not. However it does help when the HUD and menus are at least native, which should usually be the case on Xbox One.
I'm pretty sure people were really okay pretending that a recent first party driving game having unrealistic penalties and horrific server performance not being subpar!
Please- if you do want to whine about a certain semblance of lack of integrity/intellectual honesty, it'd do a lot of good to stop thinking in such loaded, one-sided terms.
Yes Chris1515, I keep repeating that but the FC4 dev, like many devs, sadly don't even begin to understand the real problem.
It's not about resolution per se. It's about native resolution. For instance for FC4, they took a lot of efforts to give us some decent image quality with HRAA (incidentally the guy that did HRAA recently left Ubisoft to Infinity Wards), but then they wouldn't care to wreck it by some awfully low quality bilinear interpolation upscaling?
It's not about resolution per se. It's about native resolution. For instance for FC4, they took a lot of efforts to give us some decent image quality with HRAA (incidentally the guy that did HRAA recently left Ubisoft to Infinity Wards), but then they wouldn't care to wreck it by some awfully low quality bilinear interpolation upscaling?
What is this? 1996? The ps2/xb wars? There is no need for this kind of post here.
FC4's bigger problem yet is it's cross gen. It looks wholly unremarkable due to that.
Isn't it one of the last big cross gen's? The other big franchises seem to have spun off to at least "current gen first" development (Unity and COD) and shuttled the last gen version to the side devs.
Those caught late to the transition wont fare well. I'd put BF Hardlines in that camp too.
FC4 looks pretty damn good to me, considering it's cross gen. Then again I'm wholly underwhelmed by Driveclub (GRRY GREY GREY!!!) so what do I know.
There's no need for bilinear. We've been past that since the 360, 9 years ago.
The fact that no-one could tell Ryse wasn't 1080p shows what a good job AA can do now. In most cases there are far better things to use that power on, especially with such weak sauce consoles.
Lucid_Dreamer
Veteran
That's not really accurate. A lot of people could tell Ryse wasn't native 1080p, unless they were looking at something other than a full frame image.
Eurogamer, Neogaf, and people who understand pixel counting can tell. It's funny though how the majority of people simply post screenshots and ask for someone to tell them what the resolution is, or more commonly just wait to hear. And so when a news site posts zoomed in, hand selected, still frames for comparison; then yes, most people can probably also see a slight difference. But at 6-10ft away from a likely uncalibrated TV, with the game in motion, while concentrating on playing; I doubt many people would notice really the difference.
The value of this is more in the psychological effect it creates, of either feelings of inferiority or superiority depending on your point of view; and hence why it is so important for some to understand those data points and share them. And, why that repetitive narrative, and the perception generated is so influential in purchasing decisions. So by that measure, it is definitely important. I think the gaming difference so far as end user experience goes, is much less so.
Last edited by a moderator:
When Crytek revealed that Ryse was 900 and using their own custom upscale filter there were cries of ' downgrade' until it was announced that it had always been 900. Even on Neogaf.
Indeed, but I'd add that the number of people who care is so very much greater than the number of people who can tell. Much to the detriment of console graphics.
1080p with unstable frame rates, awful texture filtering, and blur inducing AA that doesn't even have consistent coverage leading to geometry aliasing and pixel popping that's visible from further away from the tv than limited upscale blur. But at least it's a 1080p tech showcase!!*
*certain buffers only
I think most people commenting on the whole debacle should just stop making assumptions about what other people will and will not notice as it leads nowhere.
The best comment one can make is that to be perfectly honest, I, personally, would probably have no idea whether a game is running at 900p or 1080p, if the AA is good enough. Most times newer AA solutions (FXAA yuck) blur the hell out of everything so it's hardly constructive to talk about resolution.
I don't have two consoles to see both side by side, so there is probably no way I'd know the difference. And I have a pretty decent TV by any standard. Everything I've played on my PS4 looks remarkably sharp and all-round nice. Yet even at 1080p there's some aliasing issues I can clearly see.
All these people bitching about 900/1080p would be in the same exact situation as me, with no way to see them side by side and really, and most likely no way to tell the difference under normal gameplay conditions.
The best comment one can make is that to be perfectly honest, I, personally, would probably have no idea whether a game is running at 900p or 1080p, if the AA is good enough. Most times newer AA solutions (FXAA yuck) blur the hell out of everything so it's hardly constructive to talk about resolution.
I don't have two consoles to see both side by side, so there is probably no way I'd know the difference. And I have a pretty decent TV by any standard. Everything I've played on my PS4 looks remarkably sharp and all-round nice. Yet even at 1080p there's some aliasing issues I can clearly see.
All these people bitching about 900/1080p would be in the same exact situation as me, with no way to see them side by side and really, and most likely no way to tell the difference under normal gameplay conditions.