Kinect To Blame For Xbox One Launch Titles Only Being 720p writes - "Despite most gamers being unable to tell the difference between 720p Xbox One games upscaled to 1080p and native 1080p games on the PS4, the Internet has exploded with rage over the subject. If you’re looking for a place to point your pitchforks, folks, look no further than that camera bar staring up at you from your entertainment center."

The story is too old to be commented.
mewhy321837d ago

It may not be totally to blame but combine the 10% from kinect with the reduced power of the GPU and the limited bandwith of the DDR3 and I think that you've got your answer plainly.

black0o1837d ago

10% doesn't get u from 720p to 1080p or 900p just saying

ProjectVulcan1836d ago (Edited 1836d ago )

"Despite most gamers being unable to tell the difference between 720p Xbox One games upscaled to 1080p and native 1080p games on the PS4"

Really? Are most people blind or does everyone really sit like 20 feet away from their tiny TVs?

Seriously, its so easy to tell the difference.

It isn't 10 percent difference going to make that up, for sure!

rambi801836d ago (Edited 1836d ago )

Its very easy to tell the difference. If a ps4 is connected to your tv, then its 1080.

If an X1 is connected, then its 720.

See? Easy. heh .

Edit:In a couple of weeks no-one will really care.

webeblazing1836d ago (Edited 1836d ago )

he is talking about the price to include it. if they made Kinect separate and made the xbone more powerful it maybe would of been on par with ps4.

@ Vulcan
I do agree some cant tell the difference but once you start to play at 1080p you can tell. the thing people seem to forget a lot of gamers are not going to care period.

have you ever try to explain resolution to someone. even frame rate they usually stop you at shuttering, and say ok whatever and keep on playing.

most gamers don't care as long as they can play and that's mainly with their friends.

ex. how many yrs gamers been paying for xbox live. now how many old ps3 gamers are going to buy ps+.

adorie1836d ago

I've been on this site for a very long time, lurked like crazy when I started visiting, and I'm going to be frank with my point, VulcanProject is pretty much always informative and correct in what he or she has to say when commenting on an article related to technology, specifically computer hardware/semiconductor stuff and I am a little saddened to see disagrees @ him/her, but in the end it's blind fanboyism and denial that is disagreeing with VuilcanProject.

darthv721836d ago

Seeing as i game on a 42" samsung plasma (native 720p)...i wont really notice the difference.

After i get the next gen systems i will probably get a tv that is better suited to support them. For now, this is what i use for ps3/360 and i really like the picture it produces.

JokesOnYou1836d ago

Yeah right and thats why other games are 1080p and yet a game that does nothing special, runs on a old engine, mediocore graphics, on 6 platforms, rushed to cash in, framrate issues on ps4 as noted in REVIEWS, and will surely be a launch game full of glitches is suppose to be the yardstick for a entire lifespan of a console. Logic and gaming history says Hell No.

XisThatKid1836d ago

By tomorrow this will be on the top of the site. 1080(p) degrees 3 pages of comments and counting even though almost no one replies to anything past page 2

Bigpappy1836d ago (Edited 1836d ago )

You guys are pretending to be DUMB just to sell you twisted logic and will not accept any answer other than the one you want to sell.

Of course 10% does not get you from 720p to 1080p. but it sure does get you from unstable frame 1080p to stable . Did you guys even read what the COD developer said? He said the game was running on Xbox One 1080p, but they could not resolve the frame rate issue due to a lack of resources. He never said anything about RAM bandwidth. There are plenty graphics cards out there that run games above 1080p. Please stop posting about tech you do not understand. It is annoying when people post stuff that make no sense whatsoever.

kreate1836d ago

I wonder if this means the xbox one is maxed out already.

if it does 720p when its a next generation console, its already maxed out.

one can argue things can be tweaked for better performance as time goes, but that's about it.

I do agree graphics and visuals isn't everything, but it is a 'next generation' console.

wonder how much better games would be 3 years later.

Statix1836d ago

Diehard Xbox fanboys are just pretending they have bad vision and can't tell the difference between 720p and 1080p so that they have a somewhat of an excuse for their system having worse graphics.

Army_of_Darkness1836d ago

We are going into 4k resolution people! Fan boys should open their damn eyes and see that 720p for next Gen is unacceptable!
Like seriously, do you really want to buy a next gen console that play games in 720p again for another 8 years when we barely see 720p tvs for sale these days??
Demand 1080p @30fps/ 60fps.

Ju1836d ago (Edited 1836d ago )

Yeah, we'll see about those framerate issues. If anything that's most likely a bug. It's one thing to have "frame rate issues" or "constantly low frame rate". One means you have enough bandwidth but run into saturation/stalls the other means you don't have enough throughput to begin with. Guess how you solve problem #2? You reduce bandwidth requirements by reducing resolution. Not much what you can do about that.

NatureOfLogic1836d ago

For those who think that MS can easily afford to take loses on the Xbox brand.........

With most in MS want Xbox to spin off I doubt they could easily take a loss like some seem to think. They can't just get rid of kinect to please fanboys with pretty sale numbers and take a loss. They're too invested in kinect. They have to make it work or Xbox is done.

nypifisel1836d ago

32mb big eSRAM does though^^

dcj05241836d ago

@bigpappy any game can run in 1080p. Thats like saying " I could BF4 in 1080p on my 8800GT but it only ran at 6FPS, but I could toatally do it!". See how stupid that sounds? The XBOX ONE wasn't powerful enough to run Call of Duty Ghost at 1080p 60fps. Its that simple. A resource issue means that they couldn't do everything they wanted on the hardware so they had to cut back and focus on what they think is important.

otherZinc1836d ago (Edited 1836d ago )



I said the same thing; its a port!
Forza 5 is made for Next Gen!
1080p "native" 60fps online & offline: that's Forza 5!

People are benchmarking a game that's optimised for last gen. Thats weak and means nothing. Now, there are frame rate issues, surprise?

minimur121836d ago

What HASN'T been blamed in regard to this 720p crap, The Cloud. Esram, kinect, the OS what next? The ps4?

TheDivine1836d ago

So COD being in 720 means the console isn't capable of 1080p?

Yes a higher res is better if graphics and a frame rate aren't sacrificed to achieve it but come on people, there's already Xbone games that run at 1080 and Ps4 games that run sub 1080. Some games ran better on ps3 and some on 360. Some had a higher res like 720 vs 540 and some had horrible frame rates on one and ran butter smooth on the other. It def tells that one system has more horsepower but doesn't mean the Xbone is stuck for 720 for every single game. Ryse is already 900p I believe and looks amazing considering its an upgraded port.

All this means is the ps4 will most likely have edge just like the original Xbox had or the ps3 had. I still loved the ps2 despite being weaker than both other systems and I loved the 360 despite being slightly weaker than the ps3. I loved the wii despite being sd and vastly weaker.

If you want res and fps build a rig. Then play in 1600p at 120 fps with much better effects. The difference between a good rig and a ps4 is massive when the difference between these systems is fairly close.

devwan1836d ago (Edited 1836d ago )

"Despite most gamers being unable to tell the difference"...


Might be harder to tell the difference in 720P 30fps YouTube videos, sure, but for real on actual hardware, not some half-arsed streams, it's night and day difference.

UltimateMaster1836d ago (Edited 1836d ago )

"10% doesn't get u from 720p to 1080p or 900p just saying"

Couldn't agree with you more. But it could push 900p 45 to 60fps instead of 30fps.

1080p 30fps? It could seem a bit far fetched, maybe around 20fps.

You got the COD guys telling everyone their games could have looked better if kinect wasn't part of the mix.

Either way, even if they had that 10% more CPU, they'd still have the inferior version of the game and that's not just resolution.

UltimateMaster1836d ago (Edited 1836d ago )

As far as Microsoft and Xbox is concerned, they aren't getting rid of the kinect. So the Xbox One's kinect are for girls that want to play Dance games or Zuma or some fitness games. Women are the only ones that dig the kinect, so that's where I think they'll concentrate their efforts and become a success.

Don't forget that the Xbox One in general is weaker than the PS4. They've made adjustment to the CPU/GPU by increasing it by 10%.
So saying they needed 10% is that they needed another 10% which is still much weaker than the PS4.

webeblazing1836d ago

Nobody's saying the 10% kinect use will give u 1080p people are saying their focus n attempt to make it apart of the console which cost. Sony have their camera separate so they can just react to demand because its a accessory to their console giving them more money to invest in better components

And I do agree with jokes who's surprised they always rush COD 4 quick buck, old engine etc.

dmeador1836d ago


You are just ignorant. Many other games already run in 1080 on the X1, and the only reason games look better as time goes on is from optimizing. A game using 100% of a systems power will look much worse then a game using 100% of a systems power made 2 years later.

So no, the PS4 and X1 aren't going to be "maxed out" with the first round of games.

dan-goes-forth1836d ago

Might create more bottleneck issue losing that 10%, like using the esram more

pixelsword1836d ago

"10% doesn't get u from 720p to 1080p or 900p just saying"

10% of 1080 would be 108; 1080-108 = 972

That sounds about right, round abouts, anyways.

DragonKnight1836d ago

@Jokes: So why does Forza 5 not have day/night cycles or weather effects?

Kleptic1836d ago (Edited 1836d ago )

pixelsword, what kind of math is that haha?

1920 x 1080 is 2,076,000 pixels

1600 x 900 is 1,440,000 pixels

1280 x 720 is 921,600 pixels

while you can't directly correlate floating performance numbers of specific hardware into tangible 'how many pixels do i get' types of descriptions...the gap between 720 and 900 is about 25%, and another 25% up to 1080...

Back in May, multiple sites using synthetic benchmarks between the xbox one and Ps4's confirmed specs...gave the PS4 a '50%' performance advantage overall...mostly in the gpu area...

in some games, such as CoD Ghosts...the ps4's gpu is natively rendering roughly 50% more pixels per frame than the xbox one...just sayin'...but i do agree that game looks like hot garbage...

lastly...I'm not buying any of this 'because of the OS footprint' stuff...the xbox's struggle with matching native resolutions that the ps4 is entirely because of the differences in gpus...The memory footprint that BF4 takes on PC at 1080/60fps with everything maxed around 2 to 3gigs of system memory...and its parked right at 2 gigs for the gpu's video memory...While thats the specific footprint, the gpu does need a lot of memory bandwidth as well (where ddr5 is far superior than ddr3 for these types of calculations)...

but...thats also the PC version running on Window's OS...who knows what kind of memory allocation directX needs for a game like BF4, its very likely that the consoles will require less...

The PC takes about 5 gigs of memory total to run maxed out at 1080...that is still well under what both consoles have to offer for gaming, rumored at least...and BOTH versions are still well under 1080 resolution, as well as have reduced everything else (marginally, anyway) in bf4...So how would kinects 10% hit to memory have any effect if they still have plenty left over?...its because the gpu is parked safely in the mid-range in terms of performance...a modern 1080/60fps game is not...

what has happened is the opposite of this current gen...the PS3 and 360 could do a LOT more with just a bit more memory...the xbox one and ps4 have memory left, right, up, and down...but down have the processing power to chew through the code enough to empty its huge reserves...where the current gen is memory bottlenecked...the next gen is cpu/gpu bottlenecked...sad, but true...

pixelsword1835d ago (Edited 1835d ago )

@ kleptic:

"what kind of math is that haha?"

Sorry to tell you this, but your math is wrong:

1080 * 1920 = 2,073,600

So yah. ;)

Secondly, 1080x1920 isn't a universal standard yet, which is why I used just the 1080 and 720; until all HD broadcasts worldwide use a set standard, there's no real reason to for me to because heck, 1080x1920 isn't even the max standard anymore seeing that there's 2560 x 1080, but it's still a 1080p televison, it just has a wider viewing area:

since the width is the variable, I just used the vertical numbers.

Kleptic1835d ago (Edited 1835d ago )

ha well i wasn't trying to come off as crazy (missed what the calculator spit out)...I was just trying to point out that a lot of pixels were left out if you just go by horizontal lines...

as if you're only going by vertical're going by less than 'half' of the effective pixel density for a given screen size...

so just to're right that a 10% hit to vertical lines results in 976 vertical lines...but that 10% can't be correlated with any form of processing power directly...if that makes any sense whatsoever haha.

Also, i wasn't really getting at display options...I was just talking about the confirmed native resolutions of a handful of upcoming next gen games...most console games are still rendered in a 16x9 format, regardless of additional display options well as the lack of standards there in...

pixelsword1834d ago


No worries. :)

+ Show (27) more repliesLast reply 1834d ago
come_bom1836d ago (Edited 1836d ago )

Kinect is going to cost Microsoft the next console generation, not because of the 720p/1080p crap we've seen in the last couple of days, but simply because of the excessively high price (500€).

Microsoft has two options if they want to stay competitive:
- release a much cheaper Kinectless X1 (cheaper then the PS4 because it's a less powerful console)
- or take a big hit and try to reach the PS4 price point with the Xbox One (with Kinect).

If the X1 sales are below expectations in 2014, i think Microsoft will release a Kinectless X1.

Bathyj1836d ago

I've been saying for a while, theres no doubt PS4 will have an early lead. It has higher demand, better word of mouth, and is launching in more countries. Its simple maths.

It will be very hard for Xbone to come from behind and price will only make it harder. Once MS sees that Sony owns Christmas, they will know what everyone else apparently knows already.

My point? Expect a Kinectless Xbone or at least a pricedrop by as early as March.

mhunterjr1836d ago

I think Microsoft has every intention of aggressively pricing the machine, but they don't HAVE to yet. Not while the demand is so high.

This is the first console gen ever where two makers were not taking a hit on every console sold. Microsoft will go back to that model if it appears they have to after a couple of months. But from the looks of things, demand will justify the price tag until after the spring. To ifs consumers, It might appear MS is being greedy, but from a simple economics POV, SONY is leaving money on the table

They will never release a Kinect free sku.

HammadTheBeast1836d ago

Or, make Kinect absolutely worth having.

Which is unlikely. Kinect games, barring the dance and exercise ones, are mediocre at best.

PsylentKiller1836d ago

The Kinect may be the one thing that keeps the XB1 competitive in regards to console sales. As far as multiple platform games, the controller and kinect features can help with sales. Basically, they need to do what the Wii did right and avoid what they did wrong (no gimmicks).

Bigpappy1836d ago

I can see them dropping the price if they end up with wiiU like numbers over the holidays. But there will be no Kinectless Xbox One. Kinect is not patched into the system, it is a huge part of what X1 is and developers are already designing their games with the expectation that everyone have Kinect. The UI and many of the unique features promised will not work properly without it.

DevilishSix1836d ago

I am holding out on a kinectless X1 SKU, if that doesn't happen I am going to wait for a nice price drop or buy a used X1. Either way I don't plan on ever plugging in the Kinect to X1. We got one for the 360. My wife has playyed some Zumba and my 7 year old has played some Kinectamals other than that it has been pretty much a none factor and unused uninteresting device in our house.

nukeitall1836d ago

I think it is completely opposite, as once the hardcore gamers initial buying dies off, the real appeal of the consoles to the masses comes out.

MS can appeal to the wifes, sisters and mothers to exercise with their fitness and group Skype with full skeletal tracking, heartbeat monitoring. Heck, Im looking forward to this myself.

Then there is the dad and kids that loves sports that will appeal to fantasy sports and the sports centric apps and TV going on while Skyping.

Then you have the gamer that is expecting a lag free experience on their multiplayer game. Where else are you going to get that, but on the biggest gaming cloud?

Point being, price is important, but when the features are real, accessible and differentiates you significantly from the competitor and it is appealing, consumers will pay more.

Just like many consumers paid significantly more for their iPhone over an Android due to the differentiating factors.

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 1836d ago
DeathOfTheFanBoy1836d ago

Well... whatever. I want Kinect, it will give some differentiation between consoles... who really wants 2 new consoles with the exact same specs?

Not me.

Bathyj1836d ago

I dont disagree with your reasoning, I just doubt they can make a must have game for Kinect. I mean, they havent yet despite all their efforts.

webeblazing1836d ago

great point this is why I always respected Nintendo

pyramidshead1836d ago

This is why I'm XB1 for only exclusives, multiplats and exclusives on PS4 this gen.

BitbyDeath1836d ago

Honest question, what can Kinect do that the PS4Eye can't?

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 1836d ago
BattleTorn1836d ago (Edited 1836d ago )

Not that people will be happy with me, but I'm gonna go ahead and say this could be the silverlining to the whole resolutiongate issue.

Cause at least if it's Kinect's (and OS) GPU consumption, MS could potentially lower it to enable developers to utilize more.

That's all just wishful thinking, of course :'(

bomboclaat_gamer1836d ago

so can anyone list any game for the ps4 that is 1080p 60fps?

AirHype1836d ago (Edited 1836d ago )

They relied much to heavily on the eSRAM. 32mb is all they could fit but it isn't enough to make up for 8gb of GDDR5 that the PS4 has.

Yes it's true that as the generation moves forward devs will be able to find more uses for it but if you look at the math, it just doesn't compete.

Cuzzo631836d ago

Wonder why they didnt consider these issues also

Oh yea. Political damage control

solar1836d ago

it is because the AMD API sold to both MS and Sony are not powerful enough. having to balance resolution and FPS should not be an option for next gen consoles. it should be a standard

GraveLord1836d ago

Even if you ignore the resources reserved for Kinect, the Kinect 2 R&D itself limited the budget they had for the XB1 APU.

Microsoft may have deep pockets but they didn't get there by splurging. They have a limit just like everyone else.

otherZinc1836d ago (Edited 1836d ago )

I'm looking forward to the functionality of Kinect.

Kinect is 100× better than Sony & Nintendos camera.

Forza 5 is plenty the reason of the power of the XBOX ONE. As it's the only "next generation game" that's ONLY on next gen consoles, that runs
1080p native" @ 60fps online AND offline.

No other game can make that claim.

AngelicIceDiamond1836d ago

"with the reduced power of the GPU"

You just made that up.

iGamerZero241836d ago

XB1 has no become a dick around console for me.......I'll buy one eventually for exclusives only.

+ Show (9) more repliesLast reply 1834d ago
Xwow20081837d ago (Edited 1837d ago )

So now its kinect fault for taking 10% of the gpu power LOL.

The kenict and the snap feature combined are what taking 10% of the gpu power and even if they freed those 10% it will not get cod or bf4 to 1080p.

MRMagoo1231836d ago

Exactly, these articles are becoming a joke now, every one knows the ps4 has more power but ppl keep grasping at things to make it seem like its not. 10% wont be any where near enough to get a game from 900p to 1080p let alone 720p to 1080p, the system is just weaker thats all there is to it.

I like how they also try to say hardly anyone can tell the difference between 1080p native and 1080p upscaled lol what a stupid comment, I guess the xbone version of ghosts looks like current gen because of something else then and not what rubin said.

Statix1836d ago

Xbox 360 has a good built-in scaler, and upscales all games to 1080p. I guess the 360 is just as good as the PS4 and Xbone then.

Philoctetes1836d ago

Kinect is indirectly responsible. Microsoft had to skimp on hardware to include Kinect and keep the price point to within $100 of Sony. Remove Kinect and Microsoft could have matched Sony on specs.

ruefrak1836d ago

If only it were that easy. Microsoft has already spent millions in r&d to get the kinect where it is today. They need to include it if they're ever going to get a return on their investment. The xbox one was designed around kinect and I highly doubt they will sell one without it.

kneon1836d ago

There is also the Hypervisor and multiple OSes sucking up extra resources.

grassyknoll1837d ago (Edited 1837d ago )

Not directly, but Kinect made MS go with DDR3 RAM & ESRAM, which took 6 CU's (of 18) off the die so the ESRAM would fit (both MS & Sony are using the same APU). Also ESRAM has to be programmed in software, which is very time consuming. This has lead to lower resolution games. Lastly, 10% of the GPU is taken by the OS's, which includes Kinect's.

Kayant1837d ago

This. MS knew they would have the gaming front so they capitalised on kinect and integrated it heavily into their OS (in terms of features). I will commend them because I think they have done a fantastic job on that front so it will offer a great experience to does who want it but it seems in the end gamers care more about games & their decisions has hurt XB1 on that front a little.

If kinect wasn't in the equation I feel MS might have had the more powerful system.

grassyknoll1837d ago

If Microsoft went with a different RAM set up, they would have had the same system as Sony (bar the compute focus, extra ROPS, hUMA & extra bus)

The differences are going to become more pronounced as MS are going to be reliant on tiling while PS4 developers will be able to programme to the metal. Xbox One is going to have beautiful games, but I think differences are going to be very pronounced, especially with Sony's first party games.

OrangePowerz1836d ago

MS could have had the more powerful system if they wouldn`t have Kinect and the focus on making a media box. All of that Snap, TV, skype while playing and so on with the 3 OS takes a lot away of resources that should be used for games.

mistertwoturbo1836d ago

And 768 shaders vs 1152 on the PS4.

stuna11836d ago (Edited 1836d ago )

All I get from everything that has happened, and everything that has been said ...... Microsoft has known all along that the Xbox1 was resource heavy, that the game were going to take the hit by it being resource heavy, and is why they have put all these NDA's in place to try to sell the fact!

All in all Microsoft has lied from the beginning! Even after all the so called changes they've made, they have never truly been honest with those who have been in their corner! The sad thing in all of this is....... They are still taking people for the ride and they don't even realize it.

Edit: To those thinking that Microsoft ever plans on taking that 10% back from Kinects! Keep dreaming! It's pretty obvious that it is needed, or why be so specific!?

CompadrePanchito1837d ago

Kinect is not to blame. Microsoft wanted to try a different approach to this generation. They want the Xbox one to be the main entertainment device for sports, apps ect.. They gave little attention to the graphics department and now dropping the ball

DigitalRaptor1836d ago (Edited 1836d ago )

Anyone who wants to disagree with your comment, everything they'll need to know:

Kinect influenced Microsoft's decision to focus on "broad entertainment play" rather than a deeply focused gaming console. The design of the console was tampered with by non-gamer execs like Mattrick, who don't care about the wants or needs of gamers. So Kinect is to blame, either directly or indirectly.