Top
380°

Why The 'Resolutiongate' Snobs Are Wrong About Call Of Duty: Ghosts

"There’s a lot of noise on the internet about what has been dubbed ‘resolutiongate’ – the news that Call of Duty: Ghosts will run at a native 1080p on PS4 and at a native 720p on Xbox One.

Around all that chatter, there’s also a lot of snobbishness about the idea that people might care that Call of Duty: Ghosts “only” runs at 720p on the Xbox One.

However, in suggesting that those who are concerned about the possible visual discrepancies between the PS4 and Xbox One are slack-jawed idiots obsessed by the idea of MORE GRAPHICS and the exponential growth of meaningless numbers, these snobs are completely missing the point. "

Read Full Story >>
nowgamer.com
The story is too old to be commented.
mewhy321447d ago

Wow. People that want the most for their money are now snobs?????? Ummmmmmm. I don't think so.

Mikelarry1447d ago (Edited 1447d ago )

God forbid me wanting more from a machine that I paid 500 dollars for when a cheaper console does it with ease

Eonjay1447d ago (Edited 1447d ago )

How DARE not pay more and get less. We should be happy Microsoft bumped up the specs to get up to 720p. They didn't have to even do that. You will take what they give you and you will not complain. STFU and give them your money because I said less is better!

If you want more for your money that makes you a snob, not an intelligent consumer.

cleft51447d ago (Edited 1447d ago )

It's funny that aome people don't get that the major issue wasn't so much the resolution of CoD:Ghost and BF4, but how the situation was incredibly poorly handled. People complaints was related to not being giving important facts that would allow them to make an informed decision. This is less about resolution and more about being upfront with your potential consumers.

GameNameFame1447d ago (Edited 1447d ago )

How do you justify weaker graphics?

It is not some obscure numbers. It is number of pixels you SEE. So you directly see the difference.

Hardware has big power difference. I am so sorry people should be informed about this.

Only fanboys will try facts and information from spreading.

gaffyh1447d ago

The thing that I don't get is why some people can't understand that the argument is about the graphics alone, saying "but it's the games that matter" is true, but the point is, the argument is not about the gameplay. IT'S ABOUT THE GRAPHICS.

Adam Sessler came out with something similar to this today, he even made sure not to ever mention 720p in his wording and it was really obvious. He went on to basically say "it's the gameplay that matters".

Yes you idiots, the gameplay does matter, but nobody is talking about gameplay in this argument! If the gameplay is exactly the same, i.e. pretty much every multiplat, then of course the graphics matter! What about graphics that improve immersion such as increased draw distance, better lighting, particle effects, do these not matter? Why do we ever upgrade consoles, PCs or anything???

Because we want something better. Am I right in saying that this is the first time the weaker console is more expensive than the more powerful console at launch? That in itself is mind-boggling and shows how stupid some people are to defend the Xbone's weaker hardware. You should be complaining as much as possible and you might get MS to drop the price or Kinect (you're welcome again for the DRM reversal).

Septic1447d ago

Sigh......can you guys at least read the article first?

morganfell1447d ago

What a defense article. Was this written by Sessler's mother? Just remember something nowgamer, when your cheap website is going under from lack of hits do not bother writing an article about why 1080p matters. Do not write that article when your site, already an anachronism, is dust and do not bother to write it tomorrow. You have made your choice and it is far too late to try and state you were offering point/counterpoint. Nowgamer...soon to be thengamer. Reap the whirlwind thengamer...reap it.

@septic below,

No we are not reading the article first. If they wanted it read then they should have published a more sensible title that wasn't wrapped in flamebait and set on fire with fanboy gasoline.

PockyKing1447d ago

Or, Morganfell, maybe if you read the title then read the article you'd understand why the article is titled that way. There's a reason behind it, and the only reason it's a flamebait title is because people only read the title and not the content behind it.

You know how these crappy fanboy discussions start? It's because the first poster of a comment doesn't read the article and then posts a comment acting all offended by what the author has written.

morganfell1447d ago (Edited 1447d ago )

No, they start by hit hungry sites run by adolescents possessing an ill-conceived sense of humor (or none really) or else they intentionally title an article to generate controversy. Titles designed to create rancor are no substitute at all for decent, insightful journalism the like of which such sites are completely devoid. You do not get to throw rocks at the public and then later state you were only attempting to improve their reflexes.

johndoe112111447d ago

You guy's should probably have read the article first.

johndoe112111447d ago

@morganfell

Dude calm down. I know you probably don't want to hear this but he's right. There is a reason that the headline of the article is written that way.

You have to read the article before criticizing it. It is a very very good article and the author is very much in support of showing how the 720p/1080p debacle should not be trivialized.

I know emotions can run high sometimes but when we don't read articles and then make completely wrong assumptions based on the headline it ruins the credibility of our opinions.

I understand your view on the flame bait headlines issue but this is actually a good headline for the tone of the article. Please, read the article and you will understand.

miyamoto1447d ago (Edited 1447d ago )

As an Informed Purchaser

... I say let us gamers get the console we rightfully deserve, fair enough?

morganfell1447d ago

You are the one misreading something john. There isn't any emotion in my comments, rather simple cold detached fact. I am no more emotional about swatting this absurd article from Nowgamer than I am crushing a common house fly. If Nowgamer wants their articles read then they have to cease the use of hit inducing infantile titles.

One of the 10 rules of journalism is to understand your target demographic. An ability which Nowgamer woefully lacks.

PockyKing1444d ago

Haha Morganfell,

You kind of contradicted yourself there with the target market talk. If they got you to comment on the article and you're calling it flamebait, then I think they hit their mark.

+ Show (10) more repliesLast reply 1444d ago
Thehyph1447d ago

The author is on the same page as you.
The title is click bait.

Mr_cheese1447d ago

I hate click bait. If an article is good enough, people will read it, if not, take the hint. N4G is full of this stuff these days..

TI_211447d ago

If I read that right he actually calls the ones snobs who claim that resolution doesn't matter.

But yeah pretty "good" click bait. They got me, so I'm glad adblock was on.

WolfLeBlack1447d ago (Edited 1447d ago )

You didn't actually read the article in question, did you?

It is designed to attract clicks, though. Still.

The author specifically says that those paying £80 more for their console have every right to be concerned, especially about what Ghosts running at 720p may mean for the long-term future of the console.

Don't leap to a conclusion, read the article in question, even if it is pretty much saying what most of us were thinking: it's not about Ghosts running at the lower resolution now, it's what this might mean for the console in the long-term if one of the biggest developers in the world are having problems.

Of course it's early in the lifecycle, so development hitches are standard stuff as everyone works out the best ways of getting things done, but it's still a genuine worry.

mightyhokie1447d ago

its not 'early in the lifecycle'...the lifecycle hasn't happened yet.

I do remember Sony fanboys clambering at how much more powerful and everything the ps3 was and how it would blow the 360 out of the water graphically. that never happened. They are very comparable. the same thing is going to happen with the X1 and PS4. and look at the games now for the ps3 and 360 compared to what they looked like 8 years ago. in a year both consoles will be playing games at 1080p and the developers will be more comfortable with all that tech.

anyway, not trying to start a fight. however the consoles have not even been released yet and already people are claiming one is better than the other. I think it will come down to 'do you want to control your entertainment through your X1 and pay $100 more for that' or 'not'. both systems look freaking incredible to me. I'm getting the X1 because my family uses the 360 to watch 90% of our non-gaming entertainment through the 360. the ability to use my voice to search my cable box, netflix, toys r us app, the snap ability, etc, is appealing to me and my family.

i have a PS3 and 360 I use my 360 for 90% of my gaming needs. Its just a personal preference. I've played some great games on my PS3 (Uncharted series, inFamous, and Last of Us), but I find myself gaming on my Xbox almost all the time. So for that reason I'm going with the X1. But I'm not going to bash the PS4 and certainly will not be calling a 'winner' when neither console is available yet. Silly.

Freedomland1447d ago

@mightyhokie

I got it, you are not a gamer and you don't have a clue what is going on in the game world, seek your entertainment box and be happy and thank you for this novelish comment.

johndoe112111447d ago

@mightyhokie

"I do remember Sony fanboys clambering at how much more powerful and everything the ps3 was and how it would blow the 360 out of the water graphically. that never happened"

Show me one game, just one, on the xbox 360 that is of better graphical quality than uncharted 3 and TLoU. Just one.

Death1447d ago

You are correct. People do want the most for their money. If you define "most" as a native resolution increase, then the PS4 is for you. If you define "most" as ease of access to your friends and new ways to interact with your content and devices, the Xbox One is probably what you are looking for.

If you want to compare both consoles, you need to accept Kinect is part of the Xbox experience. That is what justifies the additional $100. For $399 you are not interacting with your content and devices the same way. You are getting the same gaming experience we've had for well over a decade. Maybe that is all you are looking for, nothing wrong with that. To dismiss the additional features and benefits Kinect brings to the Xbox One though is inaccurate at best. With the PS4 you get more resolution, but the trade off you are missing can not be duplicated out of the box.

moparful991447d ago

Except with the Ps4 I get the "privilege" of choosing to buy the camera which is essentially the exact same thing and is $40 cheaper than the overhead cost with XboxOne.. I've never seen a fanbase so complacent with having their choices subplanted by Microsoft's desire to push their "vision" on everyone.. I might be a boat rocker here but I reserve the right to choose which gimmicks I wish to participate in..

Death1447d ago

How is it you feel the two are so similar? The two devices really can't be anymore different. Unless you play in a well lit room, the PSEye won't even know you are there. Not to mention by having the priviledge of buying one or not, the chances of actually being developed for is slim to none. Look at online gaming on the PS2 when you had "choice" between broadband and dial up. It has taken years for Sony to get where they are today because of their reliance on choice. Kinect is the most successful addon in gaming and was a failure due to the low attach rate. By incorporating Kinect 2.0 into the Xbox One, the features are part of the core experience. Having one with every console insures a much better chance at being used by developers. They are now limited by their creativity instead of base economics.

You do choose the gimmicks to participate in. Your gimmick is PS4 from the sounds of it. My gimmick for the near future is Xbox One untill I get around ot picking up a PS4. I don't mind paying an extra $100 to see how Kinect can change the way we game.

We view complacence differently. I see being complacent as being afraid to try something new. Sony has always been slow to innovate. They cater to those that want to play it safe. The choice for dial-up, the choice for an HDD, the choice to pay for online. They choose to stay a generation behind. I want to see what the next gen can bring. Maybe it's because the older I get the less generations I really have to participate.

starchild1447d ago (Edited 1447d ago )

Different people have different needs and preferences. Why is this so hard for some people to understand?

Some people will prefer to game on a PC, others on a PS4, still others on an XB1 or Wii U. All of these devices have their own features and games that make them distinct.

It's similar to the way some people prefer Apple and the iOS environment while others prefer Android. Neither way is wrong (even though a few nutjobs on either side will tell you otherwise) it's simply a matter of preference.

I absolutely abhor this attitude that we must all march in lockstep and have the same preferences.

Drekken1447d ago

Honestly you have got to be one of the most full of s**t posters on this site. The PS3 network isnt THAT bad. The PS4 will only be better with cross platform party chat.

You bring up Kinect like PS4 doesn't have a camera... and to that I say: Who cares?

I am convinced you are a shill too. How many of you can there be?

Freedomland1447d ago

@Death

Do you really think that that X1 is a 400$ machine? i don't think so.

I can sum up your long meaningless, fanboyish rhetoric:

Better and vastly improved gaming experience vs some kind of social interactive experience.

Choice is yours

Death1447d ago (Edited 1447d ago )

Do I think it is a $400 machine? That is kind of subjective isn't it? I pre-ordered one so I'd imagine I feel it is a $500 machine. I also bought an Alienware PC and paid way too much money for it because it had active cooling vents and a bunch of lights. Then I bought a 7950 that I oc'd to a 7970 which cost more than either console alone. Even worse I bought a launch 60gig PS3 for $600.

I guess what I am saying is if you think $400 is a lot of money I'm probably not the best person to ask.

@Drekken,

You obviously don't care that the PS4 doesn't have the capabilities that the Xbox One has with the included Kinect. That's ok, you don't need to be upset about it. The PS4 meets your needs, the console found it's target audience in your case. As for who cares about Kinect, that would be the people that were happy with the first outing and also the people that pre-ordered an Xbox One partly due to it.

The Playstation Network is not that bad. It has come around quite a bit in the last decade. Party chat was introduced in 2008 and 5 years later Sony will have it on their newest console. Sony has slowly made progress and will now be able to justify charging for the service. Since 2008 I have enjoyed the ability to access my friends in games, movies, while browsing the dash, etc. It's a nice feature to have and one of the benefits Live subscribers have enjoyed. Definately look forward to this feature on the PS4.

I'm a shill because my opinion is different than yours? Ok.

Nachoman321446d ago

Death you kind of sound like a MS spokesperson... is that you Major Nelson?

You know I truly believe Kinect is just a fad, yes it has interesting ideas and will definitely be used for purposes outside of gaming but in the end, gamers don't really care about kinect.( Kind of like how we no longer care for Wii controllers, Siri and 3D) Hence it would have been nice to have that choice when purchasing my system, especially when the peripehral has such a huge impact on he price of the console.

Even Crytek dropped it's Kinect exclusivity for the standard controller layout. So it's certainly not THAT game changing.

Now... what really bothers me with this article and others like it, is the way the media is downplaying the issue at hand.

Back when the PS3 launched ( and for several years after) The media was all over Sony for it's consoles high price point and inferior muliplatform versions. Adam Sessler did not miss an opportunity to bash the PS3 for those reasons on X-Play. And now he's indirectly defending the Xbox by saying : you know graphics aren't everything, what counts is the subtleties like AI. Well, Stupid ( Adams Sessler , not you Death) how do you think these "subtleties" will be attained, with pixie dust?
And for the record, Sony have been taking way more chances with it's game genres than MS. Just to name a few subtleties : Journey, Heavy Rain, Ico, Shadow of the Colossus, The Uncharted series, The last of us, Last guardian, Beyond Two Souls ( well the last one is kinda shitty).

I really feel like the game industry is biased, and it pretty much explains why there are so many Sony Defenders. Playstation is a great console and deserves way more love than it gets.

Death1446d ago

Using AI as an example, that is something that is done on the CPU side of the equation. Microsoft choose to make the CPU stronger with their DDR3 ram. The more linear processing CPU likes DDR3 which makes sense since it was designed for it. The downside obviously being the GPU not having access to GDDR5 which is graphics ram by definition. Sony opted to go heavier on the graphics side by forcing the CPU to use GDDR5. They offload some CPU functions to the GPU to compensate. Going back to AI, we see what Turn 10 is doing with Forza. They actually upload AI from your friends list to your machine through the Azure servers they have access to. It's a more intelligent AI that can learn as you play.

And no, I am not Larry. It's been years since I have even had contact with him. He's actually a pretty good guy when you meet him. You have to understand he works in marketing. There is only so much he can say since he represents the company and has to stay within certain guidelines. I would think without restrictions he would be a better asset, but everyone answers to someone.

+ Show (5) more repliesLast reply 1446d ago
Dehnus1447d ago

That is his opinion and he is allowed to have it. I tend to agree if he means that comparing spec sheets and counting pixels really is getting out of hand. Compare games and play what you like.

Sony Ponies love Sony Games.
Microsoft Xbots love Halo and shooters.
Nintendoids love Nintendo games :).

We all have our "kinks" lets just be honest about that and just get what we like. You want the PS4 all the more power to you ;). But also respect the Xbot and other Sony Ponies :).

scott1821447d ago

"Snobs", "slack-jawed idiots", "meaningless numbers". This guy sounds angry about something.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 1444d ago
Majin-vegeta1447d ago

So you enjoy getting ripped off??Gotcha

Elit3Nick1447d ago

you don't represent everyone else in the gaming community, your logic would be sound if someone was only going to play multiplatform games, but people will buy the Xbox one because their friends will be on there too, for the exclusives, because they feel xbox live is the best for online, or the extra features that it will offer, such as kinect integration, which we are already seeing in AAA multiplats like BF4 and NFS, and the tv and media integration.

mightyhokie1447d ago

Nick, there is no need arguing with these people. Their minds are made up. X1 sucks and is a brick and people who buy it are mentally handicapped and probably worship the devil. That is the mentality of a fanboy. Same thing with Xbox fanboys. What is wrong with people? Can't you just say 'i like Sony better for x, y, z reasons, but enjoy your xbox'? no, they have to say 'you are stupid if you buy a xbox/ps4'. i don't get it. its frustrating. I wish there was a mature site dealing with games. I stopped going to VG247 because of these people. sigh...

jriquelme_paraguay1447d ago

Its funny.... when the multiplat games on ps3 where a little inferior than the 360 version, Xbox fans Party...
And now... no body cares... hmmm...

Elit3Nick1447d ago

I hardly saw anyone make a big deal about it, the most common thing I saw was people complaining that the xbox was holding the ps3 back or that the devs are horrible.

Hicken1447d ago

If you didn't see it, that's because you weren't looking.

theWB271447d ago (Edited 1447d ago )

LOL at people using COD as a benchmark for anything. It's a crappy developed game.
6GB Needed for the PC version. For what?
Reports of framerate drops on the PS4. For what?
Framerate drops on PS360 also...for what? It's been released how many times on current gen to still have problems.

To sum up how pathetically optimized this game is...they touted how awesome their new sound engine http://www.charlieintel.com... is for next gen and how the new systems could take advantage of it. In the same interview stated they got that new sound engine to run on 8 year hardware.

BF does more on every front while still managing to look better on the X1. People will still run with this despite all the evidence pointing to the devs than anything.

There are far too many better looking games releasing for the X1 to use COD as damning evidence.

PC issues- http://n4g.com/news/1387007...

Majin-vegeta1447d ago

Which makes this even funnier out of all the games it could run at 1080 COD isn't one of them.

theWB271447d ago

Of course that's how you see it vegeta. Most objective people would see this as a dev problem. COD runs like crap on all platforms...PS4 is 1080p but numerous outlets report framerate drops in both singleplayer and multiplayer.
http://www.joystiq.com/2013...
"A key pillar of the Call of Duty experience has always been rock-solid 60 frames per seconds gameplay. On Xbox 360, Ghosts maintains this mandate. The PlayStation 4 version, however, has noticeable technical issues, sometimes slowing to a crawl, particularly during set-piece moments with multiple effects. One specific moment I was able to replicate multiple times on PS4 was a campaign scene that ran smoothly on Xbox 360 and PS3, while the game chugged On PlayStation 4. These frame rate hitches happen throughout the campaign on PS4 and, in a series known for its Hollywood-inspired bombast, it detracted from the experience."
http://gearnuke.com/call-du...
Joystiq, IGN, EDGE, GiantBomb all report these technical issues. Is that just as laughable?

Xsilver1447d ago (Edited 1447d ago )

@WB27 here's the thing aren't those reviewers not using the PS4 retail version and those issues can be fixed through patch what that big of deal really.

mhunterjr1447d ago

Right, but that speaks more to the crappiness of the games programming than the power of the xb1. COD: GHOSTS runs like crap on all platforms, even high end PCs, despite it being visually unimpressive.

Elit3Nick1447d ago

not just the 6gb minimum, but also that a gts 450 ti or an HD 5870 is the minimum graphics cards needed.

Hicken1447d ago

Call of Duty isn't a benchmark, but a baseline.

It's not very graphically intensive or anything, so you'd expect it would be easy to achieve the 1080p, 60fps numbers.

Apparently not.

Battlefield, by the way, DOES NOT look better on XB1. Unless you mean better than Call of Duty on the same console. Because it is most assuredly not superior to the PS4 version.

theWB271447d ago

I think it's pretty obvious I was comparing BF to COD on the X1. The only reason any other device was brought into the equation was to show COD runs like crap on every platform it's releasing on.

"It's not very graphically intensive or anything, so you'd expect it would be easy to achieve the 1080p, 60fps numbers."

You'd think, with your arrgogance, you'd know that no matter how powerful a platform is if it isn't coded or optimized it will run and look like crap. Hence the comparison of of BF doing a helluva lot more than COD..but still looks better at the same resolution and framerate.

Hicken1447d ago

"You'd think, with your arrgogance, you'd know that no matter how powerful a platform is if it isn't coded or optimized it will run and look like crap. Hence the comparison of of BF doing a helluva lot more than COD..but still looks better at the same resolution and framerate."

Wow. Okay. So the game is poorly optimized overall, but that the XB1 version is still inferior to the PS4 version is due to that poor optimization? Call of Duty has never been known for the greatest of graphics, or the best optimization around; what makes you think the PS4 version is significantly more optimized than its XB1 counterpart?

Somehow, it seems to make more sense to you to compare two different games than the same game on two different platforms. Not sure I get WHY- I mean, using real logic, rather than the fanboy crap you subscribe to- but for some reason, you think that.

You can't even seem to make your own argument without making mine for me. And yet I bet you can't even tell the difference.

theWB271447d ago

I can guarantee if you read correctly I didn't say the X1 is inferior to the PS4 because of this problem. I said it was 720p on a last gen game because it was coded and optimized poorly.

Then to drive that point home.. I stated how crappy it was on even more powerful hardware like PC and PS4. Then to drive that point home further, I stated how the X1 runs a more intensive game, BETTER.

What exactly are you arguing? If you get off your PS4 complex you'd see that nothing you're saying applies to what I posted.

I even stated the PS4 has framerate problems...why? Look Hicken...it's all there. Why is COD still having problems on CURRENT GEN?

I'm questioning why COD is such a poorly coded game. With that...especially since they stated it was running at 1080p at one point on the X1...most people would know that this game is BS and isn't indicative of any consoles power.

Reading comprehension 101. The reason I didn't compare COD on the X1 to COD on the PS4 is because it's not representative of what the PS4 can do also. It's not representative of what PC can do.

So why not compare a game that pushes the hardware more on each platform and is a direct competitor in BF. It runs better than COD...does more than COD and looks better across the board.

If you still find fault in what I'm saying then you simply want to find a reason to argue...I'd welcome a PM if you still find fault, cause I honestly don't see how you can have one if I'm praising the PS4 in the same argument...WHY IS MORE POWERFUL HARDWARE NOT RUNNING THIS GAME COMPETENTLY???!!!

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 1447d ago
ruefrak1447d ago

what resolutiongate is indicative of is that developers want things to be as easy as possible. Microsoft says the power of the cloud is going to help improve their graphics, but that's just one more hurdle for these guys to jump over. They don't want to deal with esram so god knows they don't want to have to deal with writing to the cloud as well