or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Gaming & Content Streaming › Home Theater Gaming › Xbox Area › The Official Xbox One thread...
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Official Xbox One thread... - Page 269

post #8041 of 14775
Quote:
Originally Posted by c.kingsley View Post

DICE possibly will use Kinect for corner peeking in BF4 and confirm 60FPS on XB1.

http://www.gamespot.com/news/battlefield-4-on-xbox-one-could-feature-head-tracking-6414538
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
Also in the Xbox Wire interview, Bach confirmed that Battlefield 4 on Xbox One will support 64 players and run at 60 frames-per-second. "This is a big deal for us because it's always something we've wanted to deliver but we couldn't do it without taking away from the core 'Battlefield' experience," he said.

Big question now, what resolution?

We also need to see these console versions stat. So far they've been absent besides behind closed NDA doors.
post #8042 of 14775
Quote:
Originally Posted by TyrantII View Post

Big question now, what resolution?

We also need to see these console versions stat. So far they've been absent besides behind closed NDA doors.

900p.
post #8043 of 14775
Quote:
Originally Posted by darthrsg View Post

900p.
We only know that for Ryse. No word on BF4 that I've seen, but if you have a source, post it.
post #8044 of 14775
Quote:
Originally Posted by darthrsg View Post

900p.

I thought Aaron Greenberg said it was 1080p. Not that I really expect him to know the technical side.

edit: I see I was right but he did a follow up tweet later noting the change.

https://twitter.com/aarongreenberg
post #8045 of 14775
I really don't get the focus about resolution. I find it funny this is launch and people are hung up if a game is 1080p but heaven forbid it is 720p now. If a dev has to cut something and we get a 900p resolution then cool do your job and put out the best product in the timeframe you have. Be happy it ain't a gimped game.

1080p wasn't promised for every game on both the PS4 and XB1 and just because people expect it shouldn't even try and call out devs on it. Some people seem more concern about resolution than actual playing of the game and getting on the internets to brag/sneer devs on the least concern of their overall hard work.
post #8046 of 14775
Gul
Quote:
Originally Posted by mboojigga View Post

I really don't get the focus about resolution. I find it funny this is launch and people are hung up if a game is 1080p but heaven forbid it is 720p now. If a dev has to cut something and we get a 900p resolution then cool do your job and put out the best product in the timeframe you have. Be happy it ain't a gimped game.

1080p wasn't promised for every game on both the PS4 and XB1 and just because people expect it shouldn't even try and call out devs on it. Some people seem more concern about resolution than actual playing of the game and getting on the internets to brag/sneer devs on the least concern of their overall hard work.

Fully agreed. Give me 720p over 1080p every time if it means better fps/gameplay.
post #8047 of 14775
Quote:
Originally Posted by mboojigga View Post

I really don't get the focus about resolution. I find it funny this is launch and people are hung up if a game is 1080p but heaven forbid it is 720p now. If a dev has to cut something and we get a 900p resolution then cool do your job and put out the best product in the timeframe you have. Be happy it ain't a gimped game.

1080p wasn't promised for every game on both the PS4 and XB1 and just because people expect it shouldn't even try and call out devs on it. Some people seem more concern about resolution than actual playing of the game and getting on the internets to brag/sneer devs on the least concern of their overall hard work.

I bought my first 1080p TV in 2008. For a console releasing in 2013, that will probably last until 2020 before the next gen....not supporting 1080p in every game is pretty lame.
post #8048 of 14775
Quote:
Originally Posted by mboojigga View Post

I really don't get the focus about resolution. I find it funny this is launch and people are hung up if a game is 1080p but heaven forbid it is 720p now. If a dev has to cut something and we get a 900p resolution then cool do your job and put out the best product in the timeframe you have. Be happy it ain't a gimped game.

1080p wasn't promised for every game on both the PS4 and XB1 and just because people expect it shouldn't even try and call out devs on it. Some people seem more concern about resolution than actual playing of the game and getting on the internets to brag/sneer devs on the least concern of their overall hard work.

We were promised a true HD generation last gen and didn't really get it (20% of the time at 720 native, maybe?)

With new hardware, next gen, and the costs of upgrading; you're damn right I want a real HD experience. 900P is better, but it's 44% less pixels on screen than 1080P. In a game like BF4, or any open world game with huge draw distances, it's almost essential to resolve fine detail at distance.

Personally I'm for better image quality than Dev's jumping tons of rendering resources into inefficient new shaders and particle systems if the tech isn't ready yet. Forza is taking the approach of using what they know from last gen and dialing up their last gen tech to 11, and it's arguably the best presentation we've seen so far for a XBone launch game. Do what they're doing and don't try to throw too much at the hardware especially if it's forcing you to reduce resolution and causing you to run at 30fps...

Hopefully this issue will be overcome (prob just new tech learning pains), but it's looking like either that eSRAM is causing early issues, or that rumor of the MS API being behind is true (MS rushing things to catch up).
post #8049 of 14775
Quote:
Originally Posted by TyrantII View Post

We were promised a true HD generation last gen and didn't really get it (20% of the time at 720 native, maybe?)

With new hardware, next gen, and the costs of upgrading; you're damn right I want a real HD experience. 900P is better, but it's 44% less pixels on screen than 1080P. In a game like BF4, or any open world game with huge draw distances, it's almost essential to resolve fine detail at distance.

Personally I'm for better image quality than Dev's jumping tons of rendering resources into inefficient new shaders and particle systems if the tech isn't ready yet. Forza is taking the approach of using what they know from last gen and dialing up their last gen tech to 11, and it's arguably the best presentation we've seen so far for a XBone launch game. Do what they're doing and don't try to throw too much at the hardware especially if it's forcing you to reduce resolution and causing you to run at 30fps...

Hopefully this issue will be overcome (prob just new tech learning pains), but it's looking like either that eSRAM is causing early issues, or that rumor of the MS API being behind is true (MS rushing things to catch up).

It sounds like every game will be a true HD experience. HD is 720P also. So it sounds like 720P is the minimum resolution from the next gen of games.
post #8050 of 14775
Quote:
Originally Posted by bd2003 View Post

I bought my first 1080p TV in 2008. For a console releasing in 2013, that will probably last until 2020 before the next gen....not supporting 1080p in every game is pretty lame.

So now we are supposed to just expect everything to be perfect before these things are even out. I bought a 1080p display in 2005. Big whoop. We get 1080P displays(now 4k). Most can't tell the difference and most it doesn't matter. Especially people rocking 23in monitor/tv. Also you do mean consoles not just this console right? I mean we have games like Drive club trying to achieve 60fps for a racing game that has been in development just as long as Forza. Nobody here is getting every single game released for both systems so honestly what is the complaint about for people who have no intention playing the game. If the games premise doesn't even intrigue you to play it what does it matter about resolution, fps or if it has real time lighting in the game?

TyrantII,

From what I have read it isn't an "issue" with ESRAM, it is just different than how EDRAM with the 360. All I am saying is that irrelevant that it is 2013 we shouldn't expect everything to be perfect. It never is with any system. I am more worried about PSN working on launch day than features that devs will get better with a console overtime. 720p is HD and we have 1080p/4K displays. Be happy folks that we are not dealing with 600p but if the game is the sh*t doesn't it matter? To most it don't.
post #8051 of 14775
you think it'd be possible to use the xbox one replacement housing to hold standard PC guts? I do have some spare PC parts that I could fashion a PC from. wonder if the holes at the bottom will line up with a standard MB. Would be cool to have a PC that looked like my Xbox One. I'm sure Ben Heck could work some magic with these parts...

http://www.alibaba.com/product-gs/1227664269/for_Xbox_One_Replacement_Housing.html

post #8052 of 14775
Don't forget where you're posting. Maybe average joe can't tell the difference, but I'd say for the majority of AVS, 1080p isn't perfection, it's the bare minimum they'd expect from any of their content in 2013. Not to say that anything less automatically disqualifies it, but it's disappointing nonetheless, no matter which game or system. If everyone had such low standards, we'd still be watching DVDs and gaming in SD on a PS2.

They've shown enough impressive looking games at 1080p/60, that no one has any excuse for slumming it at 900p/30.
post #8053 of 14775
Quote:
Originally Posted by bd2003 View Post

I bought my first 1080p TV in 2008. For a console releasing in 2013, that will probably last until 2020 before the next gen....not supporting 1080p in every game is pretty lame.

I have to agree to this. It's been 8 years since the 360 came out. In fact, I can remember certain original Xbox games that ran in 720p (I think one of the NBA 2K games ran in 720p, or maybe it was college hoops) So, we've been doing 720p for a LONG time now. You'd think we'd be past that.
post #8054 of 14775
Quote:
Originally Posted by bd2003 View Post

Don't forget where you're posting. Maybe average joe can't tell the difference, but I'd say for the majority of AVS, 1080p isn't perfection, it's the bare minimum tIf everyone had such low standards, we'd still be watching DVDs and gaming in SD on a PS2.

They've shown enough impressive looking games at 1080p/60, that no one has any excuse for slumming it at 900p/30.

care for hyperbole much? I don't know how you equate 1080p to 480p. not sure about your eyes but my eyes can tell a difference.

and ryse is not slumming it. it's one of the most impressive looking games of all launch titles.
post #8055 of 14775
Quote:
Originally Posted by bd2003 View Post

Don't forget where you're posting. Maybe average joe can't tell the difference, but I'd say for the majority of AVS, 1080p isn't perfection, it's the bare minimum they'd expect from any of their content in 2013. Not to say that anything less automatically disqualifies it, but it's disappointing nonetheless, no matter which game or system. If everyone had such low standards, we'd still be watching DVDs and gaming in SD on a PS2.

They've shown enough impressive looking games at 1080p/60, that no one has any excuse for slumming it at 900p/30.

It isn't about low standards. It is about common sense. How can you or anyone honestly expect every game to be 1080p/60 based on time, money, engines and different talents of developers. Also not everyone has an HD television or 1080p for that matter. The systems upconvert to 1080p and are u telling me 900 seriously affects because it wasn't 1080p? COD is 1080p/60 but that doesn't stop TyrantII from complaining about the engine being used for that game so the complaints just don't stop lol.
post #8056 of 14775
Quote:
Originally Posted by onlysublime View Post

care for hyperbole much? I don't know how you equate 1080p to 480p. not sure about your eyes but my eyes can tell a difference.

and ryse is not slumming it. it's one of the most impressive looking games of all launch titles.

1080p is as pedestrian nowadays as 480p was in 2001...it's not hyperbole at all. It's not like you see studios releasing blu-rays in sub-1080p because they don't think people care enough to notice.

I can accept that 1080p and 60fps for every game is a stretch on the X1 hardware, but come on....at least pick one or the other and make it work.
post #8057 of 14775
Quote:
Originally Posted by mboojigga View Post

It isn't about low standards. It is about common sense. How can you or anyone honestly expect every game to be 1080p/60 based on time, money, engines and different talents of developers. Also not everyone has an HD television or 1080p for that matter. The systems upconvert to 1080p and are u telling me 900 seriously affects because it wasn't 1080p? COD is 1080p/60 but that doesn't stop TyrantII from complaining about the engine being used for that game so the complaints just don't stop lol.

Realistically I don't expect it, because there's always going to be some games that are better than others. But I'm not going to make excuses for the ones that phone it in.

Either way, the Xbox one doesn't even support SDTVs, so the whole "not everyone owns an HDTV" argument is obsolete. If you own an Xbox one, you own a HDTV. Like I said...remember where you're posting. I bet there's not a single person in this thread, maybe even the entire gaming subforum that doesn't own a HDTV or doesn't care about video quality. Otherwise they'd be posting at IGN, not AVS.
post #8058 of 14775
Resolution is just one factor. I really don't want secs locking themselves into 1080p no matter what. Going 720p or less means they can do so much more in other areas that effect graphics, polygons, textures, physics, number of items on screen, ai etc etc etc all take up resources.
post #8059 of 14775
Quote:
Originally Posted by bd2003 View Post

Don't forget where you're posting. Maybe average joe can't tell the difference, but I'd say for the majority of AVS, 1080p isn't perfection, it's the bare minimum they'd expect from any of their content in 2013. Not to say that anything less automatically disqualifies it, but it's disappointing nonetheless, no matter which game or system. If everyone had such low standards, we'd still be watching DVDs and gaming in SD on a PS2.

They've shown enough impressive looking games at 1080p/60, that no one has any excuse for slumming it at 900p/30.
I can play old games like WoW at resolutions in excess of 1080p but that doesn't make them next gen. Do you think HL2 looks better than Crysis 3 if we equalize the resolutions? I hope everything ends up 1080p native but it doesn't surprise me that a game that was started as a 360 project and then shuttled to XB1 doesn't quite make it to the bar. It still looks quite nice and that is because resolution isn't the only metric that matters.
post #8060 of 14775
Personally, while I'd like everything to be native 1080p, ultimately it's about what the developer is trying to present. If art design or other choices necessitate a decreased render target, then so be it. These are tradeoffs that they're all used to making, and it's just part of the development process. And these are launch titles... If 900p is where we're starting at that level of visual quality, things will only get better as they learn the ins and outs of the architecture. Even on my 120" screen where every pixel counts, that game's gonna be very pretty.
post #8061 of 14775
There is blood in the water, smoke over that distant horizon...or maybe it isn't final hardware the guy is snapping a picture of, or maybe the Chinese clone is real specs, or maybe the PS4 draws more than 100w, or maybe Kinect 2 draws major power, or maybe just maybe the tooth fairy is real:

http://www.reddit.com/r/xboxone/comments/1mku5n/any_know_the_xbox_one_power_supply_specs/

smile.gif
post #8062 of 14775
Quote:
Originally Posted by mboojigga View Post

It isn't about low standards. It is about common sense. How can you or anyone honestly expect every game to be 1080p/60 based on time, money, engines and different talents of developers. Also not everyone has an HD television or 1080p for that matter. The systems upconvert to 1080p and are u telling me 900 seriously affects because it wasn't 1080p? COD is 1080p/60 but that doesn't stop TyrantII from complaining about the engine being used for that game so the complaints just don't stop lol.

Sure, I complain about that engine because of its diminishing returns and lack of efficiency. It made perfect sense in 2006 to use it, because it got them what they needed while putting out 60FPS (I seem to remember even they were sub HD for a while though).

Now though they’re just dialing up assets and effects trying to keep up, and it’s taxing the engine that can’t do it efficiently. Because of their marketing around 60FPS something needs to give, and it’s their ability to make a true next gen looking game without ditching the engine for a ground up rewrite for the things they’re trying to do.

I also tend to have an issue with them calling what is essentially a glorified expansion pack a new $60 game, and going as far as to call each one a new engine. It’s false marketing. It’s a complaint on the lack of investment from Activision and a general attitude towards their fans that they’ll take a beating and come back no matter what they say and do.

Back to the topic, mid-range PC’s has easily been putting out 1080P 30/60 for a while now. 1080P is the standard across our living rooms. I think expectations are there because of that and people are right to be a little bit disappointed. That said if they can provide a 60fps locked version at 720, it’s probably worth the trade-off. 900/30 seems like a really weird target.
post #8063 of 14775
post #8064 of 14775
Quote:
Originally Posted by TyrantII View Post

Sure, I complain about that engine because of its diminishing returns and lack of efficiency. It made perfect sense in 2006 to use it, because it got them what they needed while putting out 60FPS (I seem to remember even they were sub HD for a while though).

Now though they’re just dialing up assets and effects trying to keep up, and it’s taxing the engine that can’t do it efficiently. Because of their marketing around 60FPS something needs to give, and it’s their ability to make a true next gen looking game without ditching the engine for a ground up rewrite for the things they’re trying to do.

I also tend to have an issue with them calling what is essentially a glorified expansion pack a new $60 game, and going as far as to call each one a new engine. It’s false marketing. It’s a complaint on the lack of investment from Activision and a general attitude towards their fans that they’ll take a beating and come back no matter what they say and do.

Back to the topic, mid-range PC’s has easily been putting out 1080P 30/60 for a while now. 1080P is the standard across our living rooms. I think expectations are there because of that and people are right to be a little bit disappointed. That said if they can provide a 60fps locked version at 720, it’s probably worth the trade-off. 900/30 seems like a really weird target.

That's the kicker right there. Halo and CoD fans would buy and play the game even if it were 120i and 5FPS. With that hook, there's no reason to try anymore, despite the fact that other similar FPS multiplayer games out there are far superior in every way. Until consumers make them pry open their wallets with a crowbar of innovation and real improvement, and not just plop down hard-earned cash without a peep, things will never change.
post #8065 of 14775
Quote:
Originally Posted by onlysublime View Post

care for hyperbole much? I don't know how you equate 1080p to 480p. not sure about your eyes but my eyes can tell a difference.

and ryse is not slumming it. it's one of the most impressive looking games of all launch titles.

Just for perspective and not to flame anything but the guys at Giantbomb (pro MS most days of the week) have said Ryse doesn't look that great. I suspect it's fine. Truth is usually in the middle.
post #8066 of 14775
Quote:
Originally Posted by darthrsg View Post

Just for perspective and not to flame anything but the guys at Giantbomb (pro MS most days of the week) have said Ryse doesn't look that great. I suspect it's fine. Truth is usually in the middle.

Campaign looks great from what I have seen. The multiplayer doesn't look as good.
post #8067 of 14775
Quote:
Originally Posted by spyder696969 View Post

That's the kicker right there. Halo and CoD fans would buy and play the game even if it were 120i and 5FPS. With that hook, there's no reason to try anymore, despite the fact that other similar FPS multiplayer games out there are far superior in every way. Until consumers make them pry open their wallets with a crowbar of innovation and real improvement, and not just plop down hard-earned cash without a peep, things will never change.

They'd kill that franchise if they ever dropped it to 30fps.

It'll be pretty hilarious if Titanfall does become the new king of shooters though. The same dev team using the same engine (by tyrantII's definition) will have dominated an entire genre, arguably the entire industry, for over a decade. That's insane.
post #8068 of 14775
Quote:
Originally Posted by bd2003 View Post

I bought my first 1080p TV in 2008. For a console releasing in 2013, that will probably last until 2020 before the next gen....not supporting 1080p in every game is pretty lame.

But you have to have such a large monitor to get the benefit of 1080p.

Here is a link to what I am talking about:
http://www.rtings.com/info/television-size-to-distance-relationship

I only have a 55" display and it is 1080p, I sit about 10 feet away(I may be a little further). So I am barely in the window to see any benefit of watching in 1080p versus 720p. 4K is of basically no significance to me at all unless I get a TV that is minimum of 80"

So count me as one for the crowd of wanting 720p with higher frame rate.
post #8069 of 14775
I have an 80" sharp and sit between 10-12 away.
I can tell if something is in 720P But I can't tell if it is 720P up-scaled to 1080. As long as they don't leave it in native 720P it may be a bit softer but overall won't be noticeable
post #8070 of 14775
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kimeran View Post

But you have to have such a large monitor to get the benefit of 1080p.

Here is a link to what I am talking about:
http://www.rtings.com/info/television-size-to-distance-relationship

I only have a 55" display and it is 1080p, I sit about 10 feet away(I may be a little further). So I am barely in the window to see any benefit of watching in 1080p versus 720p. 4K is of basically no significance to me at all unless I get a TV that is minimum of 80"

So count me as one for the crowd of wanting 720p with higher frame rate.

Those charts aren't really applicable to games, because film doesn't have any issues with aliasing, texture crawl, etc. Antialiasing isn't good enough to cover all those flaws completely. Even at your distance, a 1080p game will still look much better than a 720p game. It might not be sharper, but it'll be more stable and free of rendering and scaling artifacts.
Edited by bd2003 - 9/18/13 at 9:36am
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Xbox Area
AVS › AVS Forum › Gaming & Content Streaming › Home Theater Gaming › Xbox Area › The Official Xbox One thread...