Mixed Information on Consoles or How I learned to loathe PR *spin off*
- Thread starter rockaman
- Start date
-
- Tags
- snowflakes
Personally I'd be very surprised if they don't use some kind of checkerboard or dynamic res on some XBOX (XBox One X - get it? Get it??) games.
Especially dynamic res, which I'm surprised isn't used more often on all games that might require it.
TVs, especially 4k TVs, aren't able to resolve 4K in moving images anyway - not even close - so all that information is completely lost to our eyes. There is literally no point in rendering full 4k in games that have fast action and camera pans. You're not seeing it anyway because your TV isn't showing it to you.
All that rendering time could go to much better use.
In my humble - but totally right - opinion.
Especially dynamic res, which I'm surprised isn't used more often on all games that might require it.
TVs, especially 4k TVs, aren't able to resolve 4K in moving images anyway - not even close - so all that information is completely lost to our eyes. There is literally no point in rendering full 4k in games that have fast action and camera pans. You're not seeing it anyway because your TV isn't showing it to you.
All that rendering time could go to much better use.
In my humble - but totally right - opinion.
At this point it's only a matter of time when most of the third party AAA games are "non true 4k" which directly contradicts to what Phil has advertised the system to be. I think everyone all saw this coming no? It's a powerful system alright but MS really need to change their way of advertising and be more honest.
going by ms definition it's true 4k. 2160p framebuffer.
native != true
... especially because the biggest WOW, by far, is provided by HDR and not by the increase in resolution, which can't be seen easily and it isn't even resolved by the TV half the time.
Clever rendering techniques to avoid fixed 4k native are there for a reason and should be used. That way we get better shadows, lighting, anything really that can actually make the game look better for anyone who isn't taking screenshots and counting pixels.
Clever rendering techniques to avoid fixed 4k native are there for a reason and should be used. That way we get better shadows, lighting, anything really that can actually make the game look better for anyone who isn't taking screenshots and counting pixels.
Why are you assuming this? It will be more work for most developers to not make their games native 4K on One X.
i would need to go check, but i thought true encapsulated all of that.No, that's wrong.
This is the branding.
4K Ultra HD may be just a 2160p frame buffer, but True 4K is native and only native 4K. That's why they make the distinction.
either way it sounds to me that true is their marketing term.
Tkumpathenurpahl
Veteran
In reference to Assassins Creed Origins, I'm going to quote Stevie Wonder: "so what the fuss?"
The PS4Pro has ensured that checkerboard rendering is going to be commonplace and integrated into numerous engines. A straight 4K version of the XBoxOne version would be possible (albeit with better textures and shadow maps) but, if they can render it in checkerboard and spend some more horsepower elsewhere, surely that's a valid choice for the developer to make without it being a fault of Microsoft's messaging?
If I was ever going to buy the XBoxOneX1ExWonWon then I'd probably want the option: native 4K, checkerboard with extra bells and whistles, or 1080p with extra extra bells and whistles and foghorns. But I'd settle for checkerboard with extra bells and whistles.
The PS4Pro has ensured that checkerboard rendering is going to be commonplace and integrated into numerous engines. A straight 4K version of the XBoxOne version would be possible (albeit with better textures and shadow maps) but, if they can render it in checkerboard and spend some more horsepower elsewhere, surely that's a valid choice for the developer to make without it being a fault of Microsoft's messaging?
If I was ever going to buy the XBoxOneX1ExWonWon then I'd probably want the option: native 4K, checkerboard with extra bells and whistles, or 1080p with extra extra bells and whistles and foghorns. But I'd settle for checkerboard with extra bells and whistles.
DuckThor Evil
Legend
There are different speeds of motion, not just static image and a fast moving image, and often in games or video footage most pixels are static or slowly moving. A third person game where you move "towards" the screen is a good example and in these cases you can perceive the resolution just fine, the motion resolution only starts to fall apart in fast moving scenes and those are not the majority, at least not the majority I watch.
LCD TVs are measured as having only 300 lines of vertical resolution in many motion resolution tests, but does a 300p or even something like a DVD-resolution look the same as a good quality 4k footage? No it does not and neither does 1080p if the source has enough details and you sit close enough for your eyesight. 300 lines only applies to fast motion and yeah it's a problem, in some cases quite annoying, but it's not all there is.
It's the eyes that are the problem anyway BTW. The TVs show the image just fine in full resolution, we just can't see it, but that is nitpicking..
Great! The sooner we get out of this 4k nonsense and settle into our checkerboard X1X future, the better IMO. We've known X1X really doesn't have the raw power for 4k and the graphical improvements we want at the same time.
Looks like 3rd parties will be the initial sensible ones while MS will try to push contrived 4k for a little while.
ms has already switched to 2160 framebuffer which includes native, checkerboarding, dynamic.
so i assume even 1P can release 2160cb and be totally fine with what they've said.
at least they've repositioned way before console launch, although i know that won't be enough for some people.
I'm sure someone here quoted MS as having explicitly said they support ID buffer (software) solutions for things like reconstructive rendering.
Agreed. And the whole "lines of motion resolution" is an old and slightly misleading methodology, but if we stick to it for the moment, it does give you an idea of how bad things are when a 2160p screen can only resolve 300p in fast motion. That's a humongous drop off.
But the variables, as you say, are great. The point remains that a lot of games spend a ridiculous amount of rendering time to output a whole lot of information that we literally cannot see for various reasons. So it follows that that performance should be put to better use, where applicable.
Then again I just saw a video that shows Assassins Creed Origins doing checkerboard 2160p on XBOX so there you have it. First I heard.
Many will follow, and we all gain from that.
But the variables, as you say, are great. The point remains that a lot of games spend a ridiculous amount of rendering time to output a whole lot of information that we literally cannot see for various reasons. So it follows that that performance should be put to better use, where applicable.
Then again I just saw a video that shows Assassins Creed Origins doing checkerboard 2160p on XBOX so there you have it. First I heard.
Many will follow, and we all gain from that.
What actual and specific graphical improvements are "we" demanding that Scorpio can't provide at 4k?
Can the X do 4K at ultra settings like some high end PC? No. There was never any real expectations that it could nor did MS assert such a claim.
The XBOX was never marketed as a console that could best or rival i7+1080 gaming PCs. Native 4K at console settings seem practically a given but third party devs are given the power to decide how to tap into the performance of the console. And that reality is something we have known for almost a year now.
MS calls it a 4K console and simply going 4K is probably one of the cheapest route to delivering an enhancement. If devs want to go the extra mile and use a multitude of enhancements in lieu of native 4K to get the best IQ then so be it.
Put it this way MS could have mandated 4K support on all XBOX supported titles and took the choice anyway from devs. But are you as a gamer better served by MS dictating resolution settings or the devs themselves controlling the IQ of their own titles?
4K is something that the XBOX can provide and is easily marketable and the awareness is already there. It's not like MS has been alone in its use of 4K in marketing. But when marketing these consoles, Sony nor MS is looking to break down all the different ways the hardware can be exploited and provide an enhancement over base consoles. 4K gives both an easier way to market the performance of their product. Hence it being touted by both.
Last edited:
Silent_Buddha
Legend
Unless the engine was already developed with checkerboarding as the default renderer due to having to support the weaker PS4-P. At that point it'd represent no extra effort.
However, that would also mean they'd a lot of extra GPU cycles left over with which to pump up the graphical IQ significantly higher than the PS4-P if they wanted to and weren't contractually prohibited from doing so (IE - if for some reasons Sony said you can't release titles on PS4/PS4-P if the competition has higher graphical IQ settings).
Regards,
SB
DuckThor Evil
Legend
I'm ok with 1440P and various cheaper 4K methods, but I don't want to go down to 1080p on these higher spec consoles on a 4K TV. I value an overall clear image and clarity generally more than quite a few graphical effects, of course there is always a good balance point.
1080p is a big no. Unfortunately there's a lot of Pro games running at 1080p because reasons.
XBOX will help a lot in this regard. It already has, in fact. We're finally getting a Witcher 3 patch after months of denials by CD Project Red. XBOX announced, and they announce a Pro and XBOX patch.
This is good stuff!
Last edited: