*spawn* Resolution vs detail

[GravityX]

Some comparisons show a difference in detail, in shadows, textures and asset in the PS4 versions of multiplats. PS4 versions are 1080p, however Xbox One versions seem to look sharper, have better contrast and colors.

Few examples.

http://youtu.be/AWJZzJH5Egk
http://www.gamespot.com/forums/syste...cost-31228853/

If you look closely at a lot side by side comparisons, Battlefield included, its is quite apparent that there are textures either missing or never finished loading (caveat, not sure they ever load). If you look at the videos which represent the same instance in time for both games,you clearly see a difference.

I would like genuine answers on this matter. Does 1080p trump all, if some detail is dialed back?

Thanks

 

[Lalaland]

Some comparisons show a difference in detail, in shadows, textures and asset in the PS4 versions of multiplats. PS4 versions are 1080p, however Xbox One versions seem to look sharper, have better contrast and colors.

Few examples.

http://youtu.be/AWJZzJH5Egk
http://www.gamespot.com/forums/syste...cost-31228853/

If you look closely at a lot side by side comparisons, Battlefield included, its is quite apparent that there are textures either missing or never finished loading (caveat, not sure they ever load). If you look at the videos which represent the same instance in time for both games,you clearly see a difference.

I would like genuine answers on this matter. Does 1080p trump all, if some detail is dialed back?

Thanks

This 'looks sharper w/deeper blacks' is an artifact of the ridiculous sharpen filter that was formerly applied by the XB1 scaler. The 'deeper blacks' are as a result of either a bad gamma curve or a daft desire to make the image 'pop' by enforcing a bad gamma curve causing black crush. 'Black crush' is when near black colours are forced to go to black and it does make everything appear to have more contrast but it costs detail and makes it hard to make out things in dark areas (as there is no almost black just black).

In general though resolution absolutely is not the be all and end all, all things being equal a higher resolution for any given level of quality (texture quality, shaders, post process effects, etc) is better. However as we are dealing with fixed hardware we can't have everything at once so trade offs are made, which of the triangle of Resolution, Frame Rate and Image Quality you want to emphasise means a reduction must be had on the others.

What has been notable thus far is that for largely equal levels of Image Quality and Frame Rate between XB1 and PS4 on multiplats the PS4 has been able to run at a higher resolution. Why that is is the subject of much debate but involves some of the following, an inherently weaker GPU, an exotic ESRAM + DDR3 RAM setup, less mature tools, the alignment of Jupiter and Saturn being favourable to Sony. Who knows we're too early to judge really as it normally takes 1-2 years before nice detailed post mortems become available from cross platform developers.

 

[GravityX]

This 'looks sharper w/deeper blacks' is an artifact of the ridiculous sharpen filter that was formerly applied by the XB1 scaler. The 'deeper blacks' are as a result of either a bad gamma curve or a daft desire to make the image 'pop' by enforcing a bad gamma curve causing black crush. 'Black crush' is when near black colours are forced to go to black and it does make everything appear to have more contrast but it costs detail and makes it hard to make out things in dark areas (as there is no almost black just black).

In general though resolution absolutely is not the be all and end all, all things being equal a higher resolution for any given level of quality (texture quality, shaders, post process effects, etc) is better. However as we are dealing with fixed hardware we can't have everything at once so trade offs are made, which of the triangle of Resolution, Frame Rate and Image Quality you want to emphasise means a reduction must be had on the others.

What has been notable thus far is that for largely equal levels of Image Quality and Frame Rate between XB1 and PS4 on multiplats the PS4 has been able to run at a higher resolution. Why that is is the subject of much debate but involves some of the following, an inherently weaker GPU, an exotic ESRAM + DDR3 RAM setup, less mature tools, the alignment of Jupiter and Saturn being favourable to Sony. Who knows we're too early to judge really as it normally takes 1-2 years before nice detailed post mortems become available from cross platform developers.

Yes. I understand about the crushed blacks and the higher contrast. However in later released games, like Trials Fusion you see they same thing, I believe the X1 sharperner had been removed due to it also magnifying alaising.

Not sure of the proper term, but seems like mipmapped(not sure this is the term) type areas are lacking depth and look flat on the PS4 versions.

Sorry if this make no sense.

 

[Boxercide]

Sebbi already said it was a bug and fixed.

 

[GravityX]

Sebbi already said it was a bug and fixed.

Was the bug specific to Trails? You can also see instances of this in Thief, Stryder and B4 as well.

 

[djskribbles]

Some comparisons show a difference in detail, in shadows, textures and asset in the PS4 versions of multiplats. PS4 versions are 1080p, however Xbox One versions seem to look sharper, have better contrast and colors.

Few examples.

http://youtu.be/AWJZzJH5Egk
http://www.gamespot.com/forums/syste...cost-31228853/

If you look closely at a lot side by side comparisons, Battlefield included, its is quite apparent that there are textures either missing or never finished loading (caveat, not sure they ever load). If you look at the videos which represent the same instance in time for both games,you clearly see a difference.

I would like genuine answers on this matter. Does 1080p trump all, if some detail is dialed back?

Thanks

In the case of BF4, the preview build of the XB1 version used the hardware scaler, and people comparing the preview builds were obviously using the XB1 prior to the update where they removed the ugly sharpening. DICE switched to a software scaler in the retail build and you can see the PS4 version has sharper textures from the resolution bump.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-battlefield-4-next-gen-face-off

Now for every other game you've mentioned, the IQ is usually the same or very similar (save for the resolution), but the Xbox One still has a problem with crushed blacks. Sebbbi even said here that Trials has the same IQ on both platforms. Gamma can make textures appear sharper, by boosting the black levels and giving textures more depth. The following is the same image, simply with a modified gamma curve (second image is the original).



So no, the PS4's IQ isn't dialed back, it's simply outputting proper levels. If you look at DF's articles, the PS4 usually looks similar to the PC, while the XB1 usually has crushed blacks. It was the same with PS3/360.

 

[GravityX]

Comparisons show a difference in detail, in shadows, textures and asset in the PS4 versions of multiplats. PS4 versions are 1080p, however Xbox One versions seem to look sharper, have better contrast and colors.

Few example:

If you look closely at a lot side by side comparisons, it is quite apparent that there are textures either missing or never finished loading (caveat, not sure they ever load).

If you look at the videos which represent the same instance in time for both games,you clearly see a difference.

I would like genuine answers on this matter. Does 1080p trump all, if some detail is dialed back?

Thanks

 

[djskribbles]

You're looking at isolated cases. DF has compared a lot more footage than us to come to a more solid conclusion. In the case of Trials, it's probably a streaming issue, which both versions have, but at different places it appears. Again sebbbi said himself that IQ is identical between both platforms.

For BF4, I don't know why you keep using pre-retail footage. Again, look at the DF article of the updated retail comparison.
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-battlefield-4-next-gen-face-off
Not only does the PS4 version run at a higher resolution, but it also holds a 10-15fps advantage over the XB1 version. Why would they 'dial back' the detail if the framerate was higher? And why would they do that just to run at 900p? There are a few places where the textures are different, but not necessarily higher in detail on XB1. We've discussed this in the DF thread already.

For NFS, the PS4 version uses bokeh depth of field like the PC version, while the X1 version has a simple blur filter. Are they dialing the detail back on the PC version too?

http://images.eurogamer.net/2013/articles//a/1/6/3/8/5/9/2/PC_070.jpg.jpg/EG11/resize/1920x-1
http://images.eurogamer.net/2013/articles//a/1/6/3/8/5/9/2/PS4_070.jpg.jpg/EG11/resize/1920x-1
http://images.eurogamer.net/2013/articles//a/1/6/3/8/5/9/2/XO_070.jpg.jpg/EG11/resize/1920x-1

And here's an example where the blur filter really hurts IQ on the X1 version.
http://images.eurogamer.net/2013/articles//a/1/6/3/8/5/9/2/PS4_069.jpg.jpg/EG11/resize/1920x-1
http://images.eurogamer.net/2013/articles//a/1/6/3/8/5/9/2/XO_069.jpg.jpg/EG11/resize/1920x-1
This is an isolated case though, just like your comparisons. For the most part, IQ is identical in NFS.

As for color/gamma differences, you can achieve the same result with the controls on your TV. The PS4 version outputs a proper gamma while the XB1 crushes blacks in a lot of cases. What you can't do with your TV controls, is increase the resolution.

But continue on thinking that developers are dialing back the IQ/detail on the PS4 just to hit higher resolutions.

 

[GravityX]

You're looking at isolated cases. DF has compared a lot more footage than us to come to a more solid conclusion. In the case of Trials, it's probably a streaming issue, which both versions have, but at different places it appears. Again sebbbi said himself that IQ is identical between both platforms.

For BF4, I don't know why you keep using pre-retail footage. Again, look at the DF article of the updated retail comparison.
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-battlefield-4-next-gen-face-off
Not only does the PS4 version run at a higher resolution, but it also holds a 10-15fps advantage over the XB1 version. Why would they 'dial back' the detail if the framerate was higher? And why would they do that just to run at 900p? There are a few places where the textures are different, but not necessarily higher in detail on XB1. We've discussed this in the DF thread already.

For NFS, the PS4 version uses bokeh depth of field like the PC version, while the X1 version has a simple blur filter. Are they dialing the detail back on the PC version too?

http://images.eurogamer.net/2013/articles//a/1/6/3/8/5/9/2/PC_070.jpg.jpg/EG11/resize/1920x-1
http://images.eurogamer.net/2013/articles//a/1/6/3/8/5/9/2/PS4_070.jpg.jpg/EG11/resize/1920x-1
http://images.eurogamer.net/2013/articles//a/1/6/3/8/5/9/2/XO_070.jpg.jpg/EG11/resize/1920x-1

And here's an example where the blur filter really hurts IQ on the X1 version.
http://images.eurogamer.net/2013/articles//a/1/6/3/8/5/9/2/PS4_069.jpg.jpg/EG11/resize/1920x-1
http://images.eurogamer.net/2013/articles//a/1/6/3/8/5/9/2/XO_069.jpg.jpg/EG11/resize/1920x-1
This is an isolated case though, just like your comparisons. For the most part, IQ is identical in NFS.

As for color/gamma differences, you can achieve the same result with the controls on your TV. The PS4 version outputs a proper gamma while the XB1 crushes blacks in a lot of cases. What you can't do with your TV controls, is increase the resolution.

But continue on thinking that developers are dialing back the IQ/detail on the PS4 just to hit higher resolutions.

Bottom line resolution is not end all, be all for graphic fidelity. If an image is blurry, muddy, missing textureg, bump mapping and runs at 1080p is that better than an image with a higher IQ that rans at lower resolution?

That is the question?

 

[HTupolev]

Bottom line resolution is not end all, be all for graphic fidelity. If an image is blurry, muddy, missing textureg, bump mapping and runs at 1080p is that better than an image with a higher IQ that rans at lower resolution?

That is the question?

You're not going to wind up with a single good answer to that sort of question, to the point that it's not really a useful question to ask in general.

Whether resolution is a worthwhile tradeoff for other things is basically always going to depend on what the target visual style is like, what the gameplay is like, what the exact compromises are, and who you ask.

 

[Deleted member 86764]

Crysis 3 running at 640x480 with high details, or it running at 720p/1080p with lower details? Higher resolution for me.

Also, GravityX's examples do not show higher IQ on Xbox One to my eyes, so in those cases when IQ is the same, I'd definitely choose higher resolution.

 

[Jwm]

Takes me back to the CRT vs LCD days, where I was running 2048x1500 something. My first LCD was 1024x768 I think. On the LCD I had framerate and higher settings, but I still preferred the CRT image at the time. Half-Life was amazing at that resolution! LOL

That said, with 900p and 1080p - once it is all in motion I don't stop to notice. (Unless)---> What does bother me in spots is the shimmering from the aliasing on the lower res counterparts, along with the aliasing itself. Tearing as well irks me. Ryse is a different example, so I exclude that as it has great quality in my view. I hated the 480i/480p era, and largely avoided it.

If it comes down to 700p range vs 1080p - then I am going with 1080p and certainly if the AA is better. I have yet to see anything on the multi-platform front that serves us better at a lower res. Textures appear to be the same to me in most cases so far.

 

[SlimJim]

Driveclub at 720p or Forza Horizon at 4K..

Driveclub would still kill it. So yes, detail over resolution, all day, every day.

 

[GravityX]

Driveclub at 720p or Forza Horizon at 4K..

Driveclub would still kill it. So yes, detail over resolution, all day, every day.

Yeah but Driveclub seems bare bones, no real time physics,no weather(at launch), 50 cars, no customization, small car clubs (FH2 1000 member car clubs), so yeah it should look better.

 

[iroboto]

Driveclub at 720p or Forza Horizon at 4K..

Driveclub would still kill it. So yes, detail over resolution, all day, every day.

DC photo mode vs FH2 photo mode I'm on the side that FH2 actually looks better. And photo mode should be ultimately both engines running their maximum.

So I'm not sure what the implications are here when discussing which engine has better detail. They clearly dial it back for gameplay, but the maximum potential on FH2 I believe reaches quite high.

 

[DrJay24]

What unit is the maximum potential measured in?

 

[iroboto]

What unit is the maximum potential measured in?

LOL measured in my own units. These are all subjective opinions we're going on is all I'm saying. My heart flutters for DC, but if I grab a bunch of photo mode FH2 screens and we line them up against DCs, I think it's most people are going to agree they are extremely close to each other.

TLDR; fh2 quite capable, whether the hardware can have all those extra features on for gameplay is different story.

Detail:

 

[DrJay24]

Is that photo mode or replay? If it is not real-time than it is useless. I can render the same image on a PS2 given enough time.