Try our new beta!Click here
Submitted by MariaHelFutura 840d ago | opinion piece

Will The Xbox One Or PS4 Have More Native 1080p 60fps Games?

It looks like things have taken a pretty dour turn for Microsoft and the Xbox One, about as dour as an omelet made with moldy cheese. On the PlayStation side of things the PS4 has been dipped in countless amounts of praise and has been confirmed to run several games in the coveted native 1080p, 60fps bracket. (PS4, Xbox One)

Gozer  +   840d ago
Sacrifices have to be made to reach 1080p. Just because a game is 1080p doesn't necessarily mean a game has good graphics. The 2 best looking titles for the X1 and ps4 are sub 1080p. Ryse which is 900p and The Order which is 800p, both look better than anything else for their respective systems., 1080p or not.
KUV1977  +   840d ago
Well, the Order is 800p because they use letterboxing for a more cinematic effect. I believe that this was a choice that was made well before hitting any technical barriers. I agree however that Ryse with 900p upscaled looks great and I for one am fine with games that put more weight into artwork and effects than into checking the 1080p/60 box for advertizment-purposes. Most people would never have known about Ryse being below 1080p without the internet.
awesomeperson  +   840d ago
Yep, even the concept art for The Order had the black bars on them. It was designed to be that way from the start, but it did have the benefit of freeing up power to do other things with.
majiebeast  +   840d ago
The order 1886 is 1920X800 which is not 800P.
UltimateMaster  +   840d ago
So far, the Wii U is first followed by the PS4.
Xbox One has 1 1080p game so far, FM5.


Exactly, they are going to a widescreen feel I'm guessing.
Instead of 1920X1080p they are going 1920X800.
Like some widescreen movie has.
#1.1.3 (Edited 840d ago ) | Agree(7) | Disagree(6) | Report
ABizzel1  +   840d ago
@Gozer & KUV1977

It doesn't work like that, you can't just take the second number of a resolution and claim 720p, 800p, 900p, or 1080p. The resolution is based on the the combined horizontal lines * vertical = ???p.

In this case The Order has a higher resolution than Ryse.

Native 1080p
1920 x 1080 = 2,073,600 pixels (aka 1080p or 2.1 Megapixels)

1600 x 900 = 1,440,000 pixels (aka 900p or 1.44 Megapixels)

The Order
1920 x 800 = 1,536,000 pixels (aka ???p, or 1.54 Megapixels)

The Order isn't 800p it's basically 910p or as described cinematic 1080p.
#1.1.4 (Edited 840d ago ) | Agree(35) | Disagree(3) | Report
NewMonday  +   840d ago

Depends on the power of the console

For example the PS4 can run CoD at 1080p, but the XB1 can only handle it at 720p
4Sh0w  +   840d ago
Some want to wave the 1080p as if its all that matters, if so buy a wii u, it has plenty more 1080p games than both, still its visually behind, so its not the res its what you do overall.

ps4 has only two next gen launch games 1 is on an shooter running on a old engine that is 30fps sp and 60fps on mp "most of the time" as claimed by the devs themselves. The other game is a platformer which in both visuals and the gameplay vids we've seen so far dont even come close to last gen Ratchet n Clank games. So for me I'll take 900p Ryse with, new tech performance capture, 85k poly vs KZ SF highest LOD 40k poly count(it drops significant for charachters beyond 2ft from screen) at 1080p. I'll take KI at 720p which admittedly isnt a masterpiece of next gen tech but does show off great fighting mechanics, great particle effects, great combo system with revamped characters vs Knack which honestly a very unimpressive platformer. Then theres DR3 open world no loading, no streaming, tons of zombies on screen vs ps4 nothing. Then theres Forza5 1080p 60fps best racing graphics and sim gameplay running new tech, AI cloud intergration.
#1.1.6 (Edited 840d ago ) | Agree(3) | Disagree(22) | Report
kingPoS  +   840d ago

How is it not progressive? I thought we were past interlaced video. Should it say 800i instead?
#1.1.7 (Edited 840d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(3) | Report
Angels3785  +   840d ago

While I am not trying to downplay what you just said or anything like that. Don't you think at the very least that should be confirmed by an actual employee? I wrote a blog about this very subject here on N4G check it out because you could end up sounding foolish as that is a RUMOR not a FACT at this moment.

In this blog I was trying to be as balanced and logical as possible in my speculation relating to the recent news.

#1.1.8 (Edited 840d ago ) | Agree(3) | Disagree(1) | Report
WrAiTh Sp3cTr3  +   839d ago
"The Order isn't 800p it's basically 910p or as described cinematic 1080p."

Only sony fanatics would spin info like this into something it's not. Cinematic 1080p? F&%* outta here. It's not 1080p in any shape form or fashion.
xXxSeTTriPxXx  +   840d ago
Cool stroy bro.
mdluffy  +   840d ago
Nonsense, killzone looks better than anything at launch. and it is 1080p!
Mohlest   840d ago | Spam
BX81  +   840d ago
Bf4 looks better than kz to me. Can't wait to play them both. I paid off bf4 for Xbox one, I'm skipping bf4 this gen. I think it'll be well worth the wait.
SlyFoxC  +   840d ago
just want to throw this out there. Ryze is built on a 360 if your logic is valid then it is okay for Ryse to be 900p because it is running a current gen engine.

Ryse was suppose to release on the 360 never dide.
a08andan  +   840d ago
@Maijebeast: 1920x800 IS 800p. When saying something is "XXXp" its the lowest "number" in the resolution that desides what it is. In this case 800p.
thehitman  +   840d ago
HUH lol.
ABeastNamedTariq  +   840d ago
That isn't how it works. It's not that simple.

If I have a resolution such as 2,345 x 1,080 (made the first part up), that ISN'T 1080p. It's not always the lower number.
majiebeast  +   840d ago
I thinks its 1020P or something around that. Same as Blurays.
#1.4.3 (Edited 840d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(2) | Report
ABizzel1  +   840d ago

You're dead wrong, and spreading misinformation. Resolution is determined by the numbers multiplied by one another, not the number at the end.
mav805  +   840d ago
You're wrong. Cinematic 1080P still has something like 40% MORE pixels horizontally than an 800P image would.

Also, those 800 pixels vertically are more dense than an 800P image would have them, so the image quality and clarity is far higher than what an 800P image would ever be.
kingPoS  +   840d ago

So your saying on the virtue of it not being progressive, it has more resolution.

Last I checked 1080i was less than 1080p, but at 800 that may play out differently. Who knows? No one's ever played around with that exact resolution before, so you might be right.
Hicken  +   840d ago
Yes, it's 800p, but there's a critical difference. The image is still 1080p, but there are black bars at the top and bottom that are actually intentionally displayed there that make the resolution 800p.

That's not at all the same as being shown in ACTUAL 800p.
Mr_cheese  +   840d ago
we need a new bubble down option for "wrong information" or something along them lines.
a08andan  +   840d ago
I didn't mean that is how you count pixels to determine resolution. What I meant was that if you say X is 800p, although its resolution is 1920x800, its because the height OR base is 800. English isn't my native language and this is the internet. So its easy to be misunderstood :P
Rayansaki  +   840d ago
wrong. 800p is 1422x800.

The order is cinematic 1080p. A lot of "FULL HD" movies have the same type of resolution. Full 1920 horizontal but shorter vertical resolution for a more panoramic experience.

For example, the first edition Bluray version of The Dark Knight (2008) had the exact resolution of 1920x800, the same as this game. Later versions, titled IMAX Edition were full 1080p.
#1.4.10 (Edited 840d ago ) | Agree(1) | Disagree(1) | Report
Cuzzo63  +   840d ago
Uh oh... a not so knowledgable tech has been mislead
callahan09  +   840d ago
The terms 1080p, 900p, 720p, etc. only apply when the aspect ratio is 16:9. So 1920x1080 is 1080p because it has a vertical resolution of 1080 pixels while having an aspect ratio of 16:9. Similarly, 900p means 900 pixels vertical resolution with a 16:9 aspect ratio, which therefore means it must have a 1600 pixel horizontal resolution (16:9 = 1.778 multiplier on the vertical resolution, so 900x1.778 = 1600). If the aspect ratio isn't 16:9, then technically it isn't ANY kind of ???p.

That said, something with a higher aspect ratio than 16:9 could be said to be an equivalent of (whatever the horizontal resolution is divided by 1.778)p with a portion of the vertical resolution not rendered. AKA, something like ABeastNamedTariq's example of 2345x1080 would actually be approximately 1320p, with 120 pixels not rendered on the top and bottom (creating a letterbox), because 1320 would be the full vertical resolution at 16:9 aspect ratio, so subtracting 1080 (the actual vertical resolution being rendered) from 1320 gives you 240 pixels combined on top & bottom of the screen that aren't being rendered, divided by 2 means 120 pixels of the top and bottom of the frame being the letterbox portion of the image.

Therefore 1920x800 is actually the same resolution of 1080p, with 140 pixels each on the top & bottom of the frame being reserved for letterboxing.

Actual 800p would be 800 pixels vertical resolution in a 16:9 aspect ratio, which means you would multiply 800x1.778 to get the proper horizontal resolution, which would mean 800p = 1422x800.

Obviously 1920x800 is not the same thing as 1422x800. It is actually 35% higher of a resolution (1.536 megapixel vs 1.1376 megapixel). 1920x800 is NOT 800p, and The Order: 1886 is NOT an 800p game. It is a letterboxed 1080p game.
#1.4.12 (Edited 840d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report
Rayansaki  +   839d ago
uh, then I guess Gran Turismo 5 was 1080p, since the resolution was 1280x1080
ABeastNamedTariq  +   840d ago
The Order isn't 800p. I was corrected about that a while ago. If it was 800p, it would be a different resolution.

Think of it as a 'cinematic' 1080p. Nothing is stretched to fit the 1080p resolution; everything is 1080p except the two black bars at the top and bottom of the screen.

Someone can explain it better than I can.
mistertwoturbo  +   840d ago
It's letterboxed, basically just like movies played in 2:40:1 ratio.
McScroggz  +   840d ago
I almost think they should create a new term for density of pixels. That way it would be easy to talk about visual fidelity. The Order is native 1080p, but with black bars on the top and bottom making it appear as a different screen ratio. The amount of pixels per inch is the same though.

Of course, I'm fine with cinematic 1080p as it makes sense to me. It's weird that some people know enough information to know the screen size yet they think it's of a lower resolution than Ryse. Weird.
4Sh0w  +   840d ago
lol, either way you slice it its rendering less pixels, they simply blackout a good portion of the screen to up the resolution as call it what you want but its a "trick" to save processing power for other performance so why does the order get away with making your screen size smaller at this "pseudo cinematic 1080p" and thats fine but you same guys swear a game at full screen size rendered at 900p is unbearable. Ironic too sense it looks better than any ps4 games. I guess all games should cut off a significant portion of the screen to acheive 1080p, also how is that game even revelant since any non-launch game compared to a launch game thats under type time constraints and barely time with the console is a fair comparison. ps4 LAUNCH games boil down to a better looking shooter than the previous one, a unimpressive platformer even by last gen standards, and some indie games. Micros launch lineup easily outclasses what ps4 is doing.
#1.5.3 (Edited 840d ago ) | Agree(1) | Disagree(2) | Report
ABeastNamedTariq  +   840d ago

I didn't say anything about Ryse. Don't put words in my mouth. I'm just pointing out that it isn't 800p.

And that last part is your opinion. So.. Have fun? Lol.
stuna1  +   840d ago
It's pretty obvious that sacrifices will be made, but it seems at this point more sacrifices will be made on the Xbox1 side then on the PS4 side of the coin! I think the CEO of Crytek did a good job of pointing that out with his interview with Digital Foundry. I don't know if that information was intentially given out or, was a slip up, either way it's quite telling of what to expect of the Xbox1 concerning games going forward.
Nekroo91  +   840d ago
1920x800 isnt 800p it actually as more pixels than ryse 900p.

the only reason that they use 1920x800 is to had black bars on top and bottom of the screen to create a cinematic effect like the movie industry
heliumhead2030  +   840d ago
You good sir are a winner today. You are uber correct AND the first comment? Awse

Developer Talent>Frame rate>Resolution on consoles
/kill debate
assdan  +   840d ago
Wait, is the order really 1920x800? I thought that was a typo because I've never seen that res before. We also can't say if it's the best looking game yet considering we've only seen prerendered footage.
KUV1977  +   840d ago
Actually, I agree about 800-lines The Order having more pixel than 900p Ryse - obviously. I have used the 800p in mistake when answering. However, the 800p only tells us it has 800 lines and they are progressive, which is still correct. 480p which is a standard comes in widths of 640 to 854 pixels and they are still all called 480p, because the horizontal resolution is not expressed via some formula in this way of referring to resolution - just as with 240p and 360p.

800p without being a standard says nothing whatsoever about the horizontal resolution which in this case remains 1920. The reason we all know that 1080p has 1920 columns is that it is a standard, defined in 16:9. Thus saying 800p gives the expression it should be in a lower horizontal resolution too, which is obviously not true for The Order. So I agree one should not use 800p in this context because it creates confusion but I would maintain it to be correct in the meaning 800 lines progressive.

So at best it is confusing but not wrong. The weirdest logic is the suggested 920p to reflect the actual pixel-count. That makes no sense whatsoever.

On another note: has Ryse's horizontal resolution even been announced? Maybe it is also rendered at 1920x900 pixel and is then upscaled, just like Gran Turismo was rendered in 1240x1080 and the upscaled to 1920x1080. All the news I remember only say 900p but many news sites have also claimed The Order in 800p, only that we knew then about the 2.40:1 ratio.

Anyway the meaning of my statement at the top was meant to say: Both titles look great, even though they are not rendered at 1080p for different reasons.

@assdan: the developers told us that in-game would look just like that. They also have released a couple of gameplay-screens for Edge (or was it GameInformer?) that really looked just like the reveal-trailer. I expect real gameplay at the VGAs.
#1.10 (Edited 840d ago ) | Agree(1) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply
Caffo01  +   840d ago
the order is not the best looking game on PS4, it's Infamous and it's 1080p.
#1.11 (Edited 840d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(2) | Report | Reply
Magicite  +   840d ago
Order is 1080p, get your facts right.
Juvam  +   839d ago
the best comment ever made.
ape007  +   840d ago
u simply can't have heavy duty nextgen games on nextgen engines running at both 60FPS and 1080p unless consoles cost 800$-900$

of course few games will do them like Forza 5 and deep down
#2 (Edited 840d ago ) | Agree(5) | Disagree(15) | Report | Reply
Godmars290  +   840d ago
In a year or two devs will understand both systems to do 60fps.
PersonMan  +   840d ago
The PS3 can do 60fps.

60fps isn't a big deal, but if you want more advanced graphics/lighting/physics, you're going to need to cut the framerate down.
DragonKnight  +   840d ago
Why is this such a huge deal to so many people? Geez, it's not important.
melemelnyc  +   840d ago
It's not important cause maybe your tv is only 720p. Just saying
DragonKnight  +   840d ago
My tv is 1080p and I still don't care. Any other reason you want to come up with?
melemelnyc  +   840d ago
Lol relax seem like i touch a nerve
#4.2 (Edited 840d ago ) | Agree(6) | Disagree(2) | Report | Reply
DragonKnight  +   840d ago
How do you figure? What part of my comment even appears to be angry?
Welcome2Die  +   840d ago
The PS3 has more 1080p games than the 360 does today.
The Xbone can barely manage a 1080p game on its new hardware so what does that say?
I know for a fact that PS4 will have the best looking games next gen and hopefully it leads the next gen in sales that way we dont have to compromise to the Xbone.
givemeshelter  +   840d ago
You cannot have both on these consoles. I have said this numerous times and got blasted for it on N4G.
Games that will be graphics and physics heavy will not be running at native 1080p@60 FPS. These consoles simply do not have the hardware inside to achieve this. In order for that resolution and frame rate, sacrifices to the games visuals and physics will have to be made.
#5 (Edited 840d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(10) | Report | Reply
stuna1  +   840d ago
You can have both, and do have both! More so on the PS4 than Xbox1, but that' s liable to change for both consoles as the generation progresses for the better. COD ghost, BF4 are titles pretty much confirmed to accomplish this already. Killzone SF multiplayer is 1080p, 60 FPS, the developers of Drive Club have already confirmed 1080p, at 30 FPS, but have went on record to say they are shooting for 60 FPS, which I'm pretty confident they will hit, with the delay of the game.
Mohlest   840d ago | Spam
joeymp  +   840d ago
There will be more 1080p games for PS4, doesn't look good for X1 however
HighResHero  +   840d ago
"You cannot have both on these consoles."

You CAN have 1080p native, decent physics, and 60fps with 8 cores, almost 8gb GDDR5, custom bus configuration, and new proprietary AMD technology.

Not to mention the device specificity and continued optimization.

Obviously there will be be trade offs here and there like you said (in some instances).

Can we talk about fun games now?
#8 (Edited 840d ago ) | Agree(5) | Disagree(1) | Report | Reply
PersonMan  +   840d ago
Yeah, you can have that with last-gen PC games, but not next gen console games.
ziggurcat  +   840d ago
Out of what we already know, it's PS4.
t3gamenews  +   840d ago
Last I heard the wiivu was lead & will have more 1080p 60fps games.
Just because ps4 & xbone are stronger consoles doesn't mean anything.
Hicken  +   840d ago
Last, I heard, the Wii I was only ahead by a couple- literally- odd games, despite being a year older, and with most of those games either brand new our not even out yet.

If you want to add the Wii I into the argument, at least acknowledge the age and library differences. Where were all these games at the Nintendo console's launch?
t3gamenews  +   839d ago
Last I heard most of the games on Wii u are ports still. But wit until they cut ps3 & 360 support. Start focusing on how they use the Wii u more efficiently right now those 2 consoles holding it back.
Belking  +   840d ago
so far its the xb1.
ThatCanadianGuy514  +   840d ago

Killer instinct
Power golf

Damn, pretty much every game is sub-1080p.

Meanwhile, i literally cannot think of a single 720p game on PS4.
#11.1 (Edited 840d ago ) | Agree(17) | Disagree(1) | Report | Reply
dcj0524  +   840d ago
Destiny? MGS V
True_Samurai  +   840d ago
BF4 and the COD wasnt confirmed 720p for x1 soooo yeah :3
#11.1.2 (Edited 840d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(5) | Report
ThatCanadianGuy514  +   840d ago
You're in for a rude awakening if you think COD or BF4 will be 1080p on the bone when they can't even get a meager game like power golf in 1080p, which is exclusive and built ground up for xbone.

Two games with no solid release dates and no confirmed resolution. What about them?
ziggurcat  +   840d ago
@ belking:

So far, it's just forza. Upscaled 1080p doesn't count . Nice try, though.
MadMen  +   840d ago
Lets Hope so

Anything Less would be uncivilized
The_Villager  +   840d ago
This question has already been answered:

Wii U.
Pancit_Canton  +   840d ago
With poor texture, static lighting,jaggies,poor A.I and much more. You can have your 1080p on Wii U.
jcnba28  +   840d ago
Wow talk about being delusional lol
#13.1.1 (Edited 840d ago ) | Agree(2) | Disagree(3) | Report
Sadist3  +   840d ago
Who cares. The real question is which one will have better games
TechMech2  +   840d ago
Why discuss this now? We have little knowledge about how the two consoles perform next to each other. Wouldn't it be more practical to discuss things when we actually know how the systems perform in the box?
TristanPR77  +   840d ago
What is funny here is how the xbox community generate so many excuses and suddenly the resolution is not important at all.

Come on, leave the hypocrisy aside, resolution is important and if it was the PS4 having this low resolution games the xbox community would be the first criticizing the PS4 and saying how important it is.

The xbone is having trouble to maintain 1080p resution, that is the truth, don't make any excuses, accept it and deal with it.
mhunterjr  +   840d ago
Nah, it's not that resolution isn't important. It's just that resolution doesn't tell the whole story. If a game is at 1080p, but had the graphical fidelity of ms pacman, then has there really been an accomplishment?

Obviously we should be grading visuals based on a combination of resolution, generate, geometry, and effects. Resolution isn't a God-value.
#16.1 (Edited 840d ago ) | Agree(1) | Disagree(2) | Report | Reply
Hicken  +   840d ago
But his point is that that's not the argument the Xbox crowd has been making. Up until now, it was all "1080p, 60fps. XB1 can do it, PS4 can't. Blah, blah, blah."

And now that tune's changed.

Check any Killzone article, or ANY article where, for example, Killzone and Ryse get compared. The Sony folks will always talk about just how much is going on in Killzone, so they obviously haven't forgotten it's not JUST resolution that's important.

So it must be some other group or groups.
mhunterjr  +   840d ago
I don't recall any argument, here, or anywhere else that xbox could graphically outperform ps4 on any consistent basis.

I do remember arguments comparing the graphics of two games, that are apples and oranges. One is third person with several dozens of characters on screen at once. The other is first person with amazingly detailed environments. There's simply no way to compare the demands of the two in an objective manor...

There's always been a consensus that killzone is visually impressive. However, there has been a faction that continues to pretend ryse isn't also impressive...
#16.1.2 (Edited 840d ago ) | Agree(1) | Disagree(0) | Report
PersonMan  +   840d ago
I think the console tradition will continue gravitating toward a 30fps target due to the graphics and physics getting more complex as the years go on. 60fps isn't necessary.
OmegaShen  +   840d ago
I say PS4, I mean look at 360. It couldn't do 1080p and it lie about doing it.

I mean most of the time my tv said it was running lower then 1080p (there is some titles that do). But when PS3 said it was 1080p, it was.
ForgivenZombie  +   840d ago
I think they both will have 1080p at some point, no big deal. If you have to have the best resolution, buy a pc. If you want to play a ton of good games, buy both consoles.
mhunterjr  +   840d ago
What matters is the combined result of graphical fidelity, resolution, and frame rate... you can't just count how many games a system has at 1080p and use it as some penis size metric.

The wii u has plenty of 1080p titles compared to ps4 and xb1, but it isn't the more powerful system. They games simply aren't nearly as gpu intensive.

As the console generation soldiers on, I'm pretty confident 1080p at at least 30fps will be considered baseline for either console, with 60fps the norm.

Sure the ps4 muscled its way to 1080p on COD ghosts. But it shouldn't have had to. let's face it, it's a crappy 10 year old engine that wasn't made to run on these consoles. Better engines will have better performance.
#20 (Edited 840d ago ) | Agree(1) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply
MasterCornholio  +   840d ago
"Sure the ps4 muscled its way to 1080p on COD ghosts. But it shouldn't have had to."

Nope it's just that the PS4 is easier to develop for than the Xbox One due to its ESRAM. This allows the developers to achieve 1080P a lot easier than on the Xbox One and if the hardware is even more powerful than the Xbox One developers can do more with it.

Nexus 7 2013
mhunterjr  +   840d ago
Then explain why battlefield 4, assassins creed, need for speed, Madden, and nba2k14 and ryse can achieve much higher fidelity visuals, better animations and better performance on xbox one, than COD.

I'll give you a hint... next gen engines. I'd buy your logic if ghosts wasn't the only launch game that looks exactly like the current gen version.
#20.1.1 (Edited 840d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report
McScroggz  +   840d ago
I'm firmly in the camp that art direction>graphic fidelity. Personally, I want my gaming experiences to be more polished and more varied more than I want better graphics. If this generation I can become accustomed to graphics a little bit better than The Last of Us but the gameplay is a lot more open and free (compared to most games mind you), I'd be a happy man.

Of course, I think the root of this question is which console is more powerful. That's a pretty easy answer.
#21 (Edited 840d ago ) | Agree(1) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply
InTheLab  +   840d ago
Is the author really suggesting that the WiiU more potential than the ps4 and Xb1?
pyramidshead  +   840d ago
Looks like it's going to be PS4 judging by the rumblings in the ether especially with multiplats. No reason why MS can't disclose their game resolutions when Sony have been quite out spoken about theirs with confidence and it's not like they're going to be 4K.
Killjoy3000  +   840d ago
Here's what I'm wondering. Once Sony's Worldwide Studios masters the hardware for the PS4, which will pretty much be by their second game, will they sacrifice 1080p to achieve a higher visual fidelity, or go with a higher framerate maybe? I can't see any first party games being strictly locked at 30 frames unless it's open world.
strickers  +   840d ago
I'm bored of resolution and framerate already. I don't care which 1 is better. All I care about is , which games look better. That is about many aspects of game tech.I've played consoles over PC for years and avoided most of this cack. If you really, really care, go and buy a PC and go to PC forums. This is just a waste of time.
PersonMan  +   840d ago
When has a console other than Nintendo ever been about 60fps?
NeoTribe  +   839d ago
Pretty obvious now that the ps4 is gonna outperform xbox in the graphics/resolution department. No need for a flamebait article.
#27 (Edited 839d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply

Add comment

You need to be registered to add comments. Register here or login
New stories

XCOM 2 First Impressions

33m ago - Waiting for XCOM 2 by playing Darkest Dungeon and XCOM: Enemy Unkown/Within was excruciating. The... | PC

ARK: Survival Evolved Early Access Review – GameSpew

38m ago - Geraint at GameSpew gives his thoughts on the Early Access release of ARK: Survival Evolved. | PC

Gran Turismo SPORT Beta Testing Begins early 2016

Now - Start tracking GTS with's release date alert service and be notified when the GTS beta launches. | Promoted post

Marvel Heroes 2016 War Machine Review | MMO-Play

3h ago - One of the newest additions to Marvel Heroes is War Machine. Col James Rhodes, Tony stark's best... | PC

The Infinite Possibilities of Albion Online | Hardcore Gamer

3h ago - People play a lot of Hearthstone; it’s a great game that’s easy to learn and hard to master, but... | PC

Popzara Podcast E.124 Steve Kamb Talks Nerd Fitness + Leveling Up Your Life

3h ago - The late, great Rodney Dangerfield once said that he and his wife went together like water and di... | Steve Kamb