FarCry 4 Creative Director: Nobody cares aboot 1080p

[function]

If you're relying on the same resources to calculate gameplay critical components of the simulation, then there could be a direct tradeoff.

Currently, this does not seem to be much of an issue as graphics are largely GPU limited (AC:U aside) and gameplay calculation is largely CPU dependent. Graphics' negative impact on gameplay is likely to be due to someone fearful of fanboy rage pushing resolution before gameplay-nurturing visual refresh rates.

As GPU compute becomes a significant factor in gameplay critical simulation, then there will be a tradeoff between mechanics and graphics fidelity. No doubt leading to the massed chimps of the fuckwit army to try and confusedly masturbate over two things they don't understand at once. Angrily.

 

[Cyan]

???

Your statement is confusing... very confusing.

As console and PC technology advances, so does the possibilities of implementing better gameplay mechanics. As for resolution outputs - be it 480p, 720p, 1080p, 4K and even 8K, that doesn’t stagger game design. Poor development planning and going beyond the systems limitations, creates issues. It would be quite silly for me to develop a 4K game on the PS4/XB1 knowing the systems limitations. So blaming a render output is quite silly IMHO…

It's just that 1080p looks to me like an artificial buzzword to the detriment of gameplay.

I'd rather prefer next next generation games to run at 120/240 fps by default than 8k, so to speak

 

[Deleted member 11852]

It's just that 1080p looks to me like an artificial buzzword to the detriment of gameplay.

It's not an artificial buzzword, it has a technical meaning.

Just ignore it. If you are happy with your hardware and the gaming experiences it provided then that is the only thing that is important.

 

[L. Scofield]

4+ million Watch_Dogs sales say he's right.

 

[zed]

4+ million Watch_Dogs sales say he's right.

And Desttiny (which has outsold watchdogs I think) saiz hes wrong, did you see what I done there

 

[BRiT]

And Desttiny (which has outsold watchdogs I think) saiz hes wrong, did you see what I done there

And the millions of Mario game sales says they're wrong!

 

[Cyan]

And Desttiny (which has outsold watchdogs I think) saiz hes wrong, did you see what I done there

Apart from L. Scofield and BRiT replies... What about CoD in the previous generation?

 

[Malo]

4+ million Watch_Dogs sales say he's right.

Watch dogs was mass pre-ordered and first day sales. I'd personally never use that game as a sales indicator.

 

[L. Scofield]

Pre-orders are all the rage these days.

 

[zed]

Pre-orders are all the rage these days.

True lets not wait to see if the products good or not, cause we're not that smart we'll prefer to give them our money straight away cause the media hype/manipulation is huge and it makes me want that game instantly

PS biggest mario game of all time, Super Mario Bros was at max resolution & GTAV (bigger seller than any COD) also max resolution

 

[shredenvain]

There are some bizarre arguments being thrown around this thread that I’m struggling to understand; if resolution / framerate / effects have no relevance and next-gen can only be defined by gameplay, then why ever upgrade the hardware in consoles? Surely, we’d all still be happy playing on a NES, since new gameplay ideas can happen regardless of power. I don’t get it.

Is there much of a numerical differential between 900p and 1080p? Yep, there’s a fair amount.

Can you tell the difference between them? Sure you can.

Does the differential in resolution match the perceptive change? Probably not, because of diminished returns.

I’m very sorry but I totally bought a new console so that I can play games in a resolution that matches the output of my television, also because I want the graphical effects to be a lot better, with ideally, a better framerate. I’d very much like gameplay to improve with the new consoles, only I don’t see it as being a massive difference between what came before since you can always innovate and it doesn’t necessarily require better hardware. I can’t say I care too much if I’m playing BF at 900p, even if the preference is still the resolution to match my TV.

Last gen, the differences in games between the two systems were less about resolution and more about effects. This time the difference in power between the hardware is easily fixed with a resolution switch. It’s as simple as that. Should Xbox One owners care that they’re playing in a lower resolution than their PS4 owning counterparts? I sure don’t think so.

Not that I disagree with your points I just wanna point out that aside from Resolution there are several things that can make a next gen expeirence. 60 fps doesnt count as next gen being that console games have ran at 60fps forever. To me more poly detail is a part of next gen. If the current gen systems pushed the same amount of polys as last gen at 1080p that wouldnt be very next gen. Texture detail is another important thing low res textures with a high pixel count is blah. Particle density has increased pretty drastically this gen over last.
One example is Killer Instinct. Npc count is important in some titles as well. Higher precision effects and new effects that werent possible last gen play a pretty large part. There is much more graphically that makes a game something that wasnt possible on previous consoles than just pixel count. We all are going to have to face the fact that if this gen lasts 5 or 6 years we will most likely see several sub native titles on both systems towards the end of the cycle. To me thats when we actually see the fruits of the new hardware really blossom.