Metro Redux will run at 1080p/60 FPS on PS4 and on Xbox One at 900p/60 FPS
Nothing new for the xbox juan then, its also coming to pc but both games are already on pc so I don't understand what they have done if not just for a rebadged version
Both games ran pretty bad on the last gen systems so this remaster is completely necessary. And also pathetic how X1 can't achieve parity. I guess the developers are pushing the PS4 and leaving the X1 behind.
This is false, the resolution for xb1 hasn't been announced yet. I'd be worried this will turn out to be another watchdogs fiasco. PS4 isn't 1080p. Just going to wait till we get official confirmation. Too many gaming sites assuming too much. Playstation blogs confirmed 1080p and 60 frames for Watchdogs too, look how that turned out! Just wait for confirmation nothing is certain until we hear from the devs. Thats been updated since There are reports that the Xbox One will be running at 900P. We decided to get in touch with DeepSilver’s PR agency again. The PR said that the last they heard is that it’s not final at all but that the PS4 was running at 1080p. I would wait on the 1080p confirmation if they got something like this wrong already.
@KNWS Both the playstation blog and 4A themselves have confirmed 1080/60fps for ps4 and 900p for xbone
At least the difference isn't as big as it was in launch where X1 games were 720p. By the end of this year I expect there to be no difference in resolution between the two versions as developers get more familiar. When DX12 and the cloud release however, I expect most X1 games to be 1080p 60fps no doubt.
@KNWS Yeah, the Playstation Blog got the resolution wrong for Watch Dogs, but the official resolution is still higher then the bones.
KNWS and George (truefan1, Axios and multiple other accounts) are SWEATING! haha. Listen to you two, desperation personified.
Lol at Xbox fanboys hoping the PS4 version is sub 1080p. @ KNWS, you know there's only two games that fail to achieve 1080p on PS4 right? Washdogs and BF4. I haven't played either one on my PS4. Every game I've played on my PS4 is native 1080p so far. I know some games will justify sub 1080p in the future but Watchdogs and BF4 graphics and gameplay don't justify the sub 1080p resolution they run at imo. Maybe an argument could be made for BF4 running at 60fps and being a launch title. But, Watchdog will be the lowest resolution/FPS combo to hit PS4 so far. I'll buy it once the price comes down. It's not worth $60 when other devs are clearly setting an early standard for themselves.
They are pushing both... The PS4 is just more powerful and has room for more. Nothing new here... This isn't a trend, it's standard for the majority.
Lmao at Georgenoob... I thought the cloud was already available? And at least it wasn't bad at launch? Um 792p still isn't awesome and watch_Dogs on the XBO runs at that, along with "The Biggest Exclusive of 2014" yeah I'm talking about Titan Fall... Keep making excuses... Direct X12 and Cloud power isn't going to make this situation change! Simply put. 1080p isn't the standard for Xbox One... It's more common on PS4. And we have another shining example of how much more powerful PS4 is over XBO.
Runs pretty bad on last gen! Did you even play them? 60 buck for just better frame rate and resulation.
Both consoles will get improvements throughout the generation, but those hardware differences aren't going away. When a multi plat comes out that's the same res/fps for both, that only confirms that the PS4 version was held back in the name of parity. There will always be differences if the consoles are both being pushed as much as possible.
yeah cuz you can tell the difference between 1080 and 900. I swear if gamers keep nitpicking these games the gaming industry is going down.
"Metro Redux on PS4 runs at 1080p/60 FPS" like watch dogs huh, everything will be 1080p 60 fps. even the games that highend PCs had a hard time ruining at ultra settings. a GTX-680 gets 57fps running metro last light at 1680x1050 (very high settings). http://www.techspot.com/rev...
@knws Read the bottom updates. It is confirmed: xbone 900p; PS4 1080p
@KNWS "Playstation blogs confirmed 1080p and 60 frames for Watchdogs too, look how that turned out!" That wasn't the playstation blog that was the store listing which has been wrong before see trails and Ultimate spiderman 2 720p errors. Also as mentioned the devs have outright confirmed it expect you're saying they are lying now.
@georgenoob Quote : "... no difference in resolution between the two versions as developers get more familiar." You said developers will get more familiar Xbone since Xbone's launch during November 2013. 6 months past. And what happen so far? @iagainsti120 ESRAM is a bottleneck in Xbone. NOT because bandwith, but because of HIS SIZE. Period! 32MB isn't enough for 1080p image with demanding graphics with decent AA, DOF, decent lightning, HBAO etc.. When you combine eSRAM's size, DDR3's slow bandwith, weaker GPU, WHAT YOU GETTING?
@ georgreenoob Assassin's cread was 900p on the bone and 1080p of the mighty PS4 and that was a launch title to remind those with short mermories which in essence completely negates ur arguement about the bone catching up to the ps4 in terms of resolution.
was ps3 "left behind" every time it got inferior versions of games? no it wasn't, did it mean devs were pushing 360 and ignoring ps3? nope. for the entire life of ps3 fanboys defended it to the death despite its flaws, and thats fair enough, everyone entitled to their opinion, i supported both ps3 and 360 last gen, this gen im only supporting X1 and Wii U, i couldnt give a toss how many pixels are on screen, im going for the best games.
PS guys have such short term memories. Not long ago when Watch Dogs was announced to be sub 1080p on PS4 (the day Sony got caught lying) resolution didn't matter anymore. hypocrisy shines.
MS fan boys just can't accept the TRUTH the FACT that the power difference between both systems is REAL it's not an opinion it's a proven smacking you right in the face FACT. STOP ARGUING OVER IT AND MOVE ON. Accept what your console is and please accept it your beloved MS did this to your console they gimped it and decided to abandon their hard core base for casuals and Kinect be mad at them but for God's sake stop acting like the difference isn't real and stop hoping the secret sauce will fix it.
"This is false, the resolution for xb1 hasn't been announced yet." Polygon, more than any other site, has been sympathetic toward Microsoft and they are stating 900p as well. http://www.polygon.com/2014...
@georgenoob, I would expect you to expect that;-) Lmao
Will the xbox juan break into smoke if applied 1080p lol i joke we like to joke
Lol thats why sony fanboys are a joke. You are talking about a edge you cant even see lmfao reeeeeeeaching. No one can tell me they can see 720p 1080p and tell them apart. Lmfao you only know because they tell you.(follower) but here you are everytime they post about res, like clock work. Lmfao those people posting gotta be like this is too easy. They are like drones, bots even oh the irony in that. If 1080p is ps4s claim to fame ill pass, because the wii u does 1080p 60fps pretty much standard. Smh that the most powerful console has nothing better going for it half a year later than the same thing that suckered them in at launch. Lmfao waiting on greatness.
Go play with your pos4
@fanboykilla *ahem ahem* http://cdn.dualshockers.com... http://cdn2.dualshockers.co... http://cdn.dualshockers.com... http://cdn2.dualshockers.co... http://cdn2.dualshockers.co... http://cdn.dualshockers.com... AND BEST EXAMPLE http://cdn.dualshockers.com... Stay free
@Fanboy I've been watching blu ray movies for a long time, and I can tell the difference between 720p on my moms little 32inch tv and 1080p on my 60inch. Either your TV is too small or you're just trying to defend a console, either way though, I can in FACT tell the difference. If there was no difference why would devs even try for 1080, hell if there was no difference then why does the X1 have such a hard time with it?
@fanboy why so mad? go see a doctor. go check your eyes.
"No one can tell me they can see 720p 1080p and tell them apart." Are you joking? I certainly can on my 42inch from 6ft away.
As an X1 owner Im glad to see games getting closer to what PS4 can do. Instead of 1080p vs 720p at the beginning, we are starting to see 1080p vs 900p or 900p vs 792p, etc. I know the X1 will never match the PS4's power, but it makes me happy that it's getting better :)
Lol...Xbox juan...that's wrong man but it's funny.
who f**in cares about the resolution, as long as you enjoy the game
im so sorry for the xbox1 owners...but they saw it coming. its their fault after all. they all could buy a PS4 instead
or every one could stop being immature fanboys and realize it up to the individual what console(s) they buy or if you want even buy both
@TAURUS thats the most stupid comment of the day, you all could bought 360's last gen when xbox had the best ports...why didnt you?
@NewZealander - Because the PS3's exclusives and first-party studios alone were worth the consoles weight in gold. The only permanent noteworthy AAA exclusives the 360 had were Halo and Gears. But those that played the PS3 basked in the glory of fresh AAA exclusives pouring out left and right that still hasn't stopped even with the onset of next-gen. And since these exclusives were being developed by developers who weren't under MS's parity clause and weren't lazy SOB's, the games looked FAR better than anything the 360 could ever dream of doing. However when it comes to the XB1, it has no advantages like the PS3 or 360 did. The XB1 lacks the exclusive advantage, it lacks the hardware advantage, it lacks the multiplat advantage, and it is harder to develop for. XB1 is all fail all the time. At least the PS3 had the hardware advantage and exclusive advantage, not to mention free online. XB1 has nothing aside from a dudebro shooter that gets boring in a few hours and looks like a last gen game, and two more dudebro shooters coming out in late 2015/2016. Unless somebody is really impatient to try out the exclusives available right now on the XB1, and have the money to spare, there is really no other reason to own one besides pure blind fanboy loyalism. Any true gamer would choose the PS4 first, and if they felt it was worth it, then the XB1.
1080p and 900p is very good. I just hope sony does not force 1080p at loss of pixel quality, just to have higher res. Many people forget screen res is not everything that makes "good graphics" Werid things are happening: PS4: http://cfa.gamer-network.ne... XO: http://cfa.gamer-network.ne... From recent wolfenstein game. Hope 1080/60 will not come at cost of blurry textures and bit worse AA (look at his cap/mouth/skin :O..the difference is pretty big)
" I just hope sony does not force 1080p at loss of pixel quality, just to have higher res" - Looooool yh quality pixels. Am sorry to disappoint you but XB1 doesn't have all it's *Quality* pixels in this scene. "This cut-scene segues directly into gameplay and appears to render at 1440x1080 on Xbox One and native 1080p on the other platforms. It appears to be an outlier though - everything else we've looked at thus far is 1080p." PS4 http://cfa.gamer-network.ne... XB1 http://cfa.gamer-network.ne... It's a texture streaming issues happens on all platforms. "The New Order shares the same rendering underpinnings as Rage, resulting in some noticeable texture pop-in. Each version exhibits its own range of issues at any given point - here we see PS4 resolving textures ahead of both PC and Xbox One. PC owners with SSDs are likely to enjoy the best experience (here we're testing on a standard hard drive)." Everything fine here - PS4 http://cfa.gamer-network.ne... PC http://cfa.gamer-network.ne... XB1 http://cfa.gamer-network.ne... "Hope 1080/60 will not come at cost of blurry textures and bit worse AA (look at his cap/mouth/skin :O..the difference is pretty big)" - Nice try but they both don't have AA. "Overall image quality also looks pretty close indeed between the two consoles: there's a base 1080p native rendering resolution (unfortunately short on anti-aliasing), parity in lighting and texture work and an identical feel to the way the game plays." http://www.eurogamer.net/ar...
@BallsEye that's texture streaming issues its even on the xbone look at the guys shoulder.
With the current world situation involving the country of Ukraine... everyone should support Metro and the developers.. They had to smuggle in the developer kits and they faced numerous hurdles during the original development of these games due to the harsh conditions of their country. These guys are extremely dedicated and make superior games.
Xbox Juan HAHAHAhAHHAAH good one.
I'm at work and can't check, but this version of Metro will include both games correct? OT: This news will definitely get folks all up in arms. IMO, regardless of what version you get, I think you will have a great experience. I got the PS+ version for the PS3 and it looked awesome on the that hardware, I can just imagine what the updates will look on the PS4. As a gamer, I'm just happy that everyone, regarless of camp or affiliation, will have an opportunity to experience this in glorious HD. Mayebe this is a preview of an announcement of a new Metro, perhaps open world like Fallout. Would be sweet.
You can get the Metro Redux at retail which has both Metro 2033 and last light, or buy each separately digital at $25. OT: Weak hardware is slowing the xbox one, its a shame. @below, the only game to reach the said resolution and fps is forza and some sports games, and forza took a downgrade to reach it, gamescom demo clearly looks different then E3 demos and Jimmy Fallon demo. that hardware is dragging it down.
Try weak developing. There already are multiple games running 1080p 60fps on the xbox one. Its just easier to blame the console.
@Shinymasonite None of which look anywhere near as good, graphically, as either Metro game. So how can this be an instance of weak developing? They can manage 1080p 60fps on PS4....so is it weak developing on that console too? And if i remember correctly, Forza 5 is the only retail game that runs at 1080p 60fps. PS4 will have these 2 games, and CoD Ghosts. It's easier to blame the console because that's exactly what is at fault.
@Lukas Along with Tomb Raider DE, MGS5:GZ and Wolfenstein!
I'm surprised 4A could get it to run at 1080p while at 60 FPS on xbox one. When it comes to optimization 4A is a premier developer right up there with CD Projekt RED.
"When it comes to optimisation 4A is a premier developer" they make great games but you clearly have not played the witcher 2 or the 2 metro games on pc. also it won't be 1080p 60fps on xbox juan
The Witcher 2 was made by CD Projekt RED, Last Light at least for me ran and looked much better then 2033.
Indeed, the Metro games are big in benchmarking circles because of their steep hardware demands and it's best not to talk about Witcher 2's uber sampling....
Lmao....I'm reading comments and you did it again...
Did you read the article correctly?
Any game that pushes the hardware is going to struggle to run at 1080p60 on Xbox One. The ESRAM being the reason why. There's only 32mb of it, and that creates a big bottleneck when you need more than just your framebuffer to have high bandwidth access to RAM. People have been saying this to the fanboys for months, spelling it out in laymans terms and citing all the technical details, but people will only believe what they allow themselves to believe. It doesn't help when Microsoft has been in the middle of a disinformation campaign that plays on the lack of technical knowledge its fanbase has by tossing around buzzwords that sound cool but mean very little in practice. Even now, as the games continue to roll out at sub 1080p resolutions, people refuse to accept it. It's dismissed as a lack of optimization, or that some promised secret sauce is going to come along someday and solve the issue. If you're draining a balloon full of water through a drinking straw, you may be able to squeeze the balloon and increase the flow rate, but there will come a point where that straw's width will prevent you from getting the water out any faster. Same applies to "secret sauce" like ESRAM optimization or DX12. When the other guys have a piece of inch wide PVC pipe for the water to flow through, and they too can squeeze the balloon to force water out faster, you'll never be the first to drain all the water. When the water equals pixels on screen... you can see why they have to make the screen smaller in order to get the pixels there on time. They'll make the screen smaller, or increase the amount of time each pixel has to make it to the screen by reducing the frame rate.
Great analogy, Frosty. Bubbles. ... Over to you MisterX.
Also the fact that the Xbox One has only 16 ROP's vs Playstation 4's 32 (Which is the golden standard for 1080p output) has to be taken into account ^^
Wow your pretty cool. Bubbles.
You already got "Well said" so +bubble for "Intelligent". It's too bad that if guys like george bother to read what you said they'll just go on repeating the same secret sauce mantras, but you're right.
Not to offend, but none of you have ever heard the water pipe analogy? Its pretty much the accepted standard analogy to describe bandwidth and throughput on anything electronic. I think the Xbox One will get to 1080p as a standard for the most part. However because of hardware differences Im fully expecting the PS4 to have the extra goodies, like higher draw distances and better aliasing.
@Markus, you need to consider that as time goes on, the demands these games will be placing on the hardware is also going to increase as developers figure out new ways to squeeze more power out of them. You are trying to perpetuate the myth that someday developers will be able to make the 32mb ESRAM bottleneck disappear, which isn't going to happen. 1080p will always be a struggle. Most developers are going to keep making games more complex as time goes on, and will be taking more advantage of features PS4 enjoys like the extra GPU compute capability, the extra render output pipelines, extra shader cores, higher bandwidth, etc... and Xbox One versions will be cutting resolution or framerate first before they start cutting lighting effects, physics, etc. in order to keep up. Those things are far more noticeable than a few pixels or frames per second. Even a game that doesn't exactly max out either system like Wofenstein had to have fewer lighting effects on the Xbox One version in order for both to hit 1080p. It's a matter of opinion, but I'd personally rather see a game run at lower res than have less lighting, physics, etc... Most devs seem to agree judging by the number that have chosen to axe framerate or resolution in favor of visual/physics parity in other areas.
Exactly. You are describing a bottleneck. it is the ESRam... or rather a combination of ESRam size and slower DDR3 Ram. Still, it should be noted that if the Xbox One was using GDDR5 in large quantities like the PS4, it would be able to 1080p much easier. The PS4 GPU is still more powerful, but the Xbox One's isn't so week like many think. This is the definition of a bottleneck.
Really it's the slow DDR3 that's the bottleneck, the esram's inclusion was intended to alleviate the problem. But it's insufficient, as you said, due to its 32mb size - it's not nearly as effective as the edram in the 360, for example.
@a08andan you are the only person that got this right. Not being able to hit 1080p has moreto do with the GPU than CPU. ESRAM also has almost nothing to do with the XBOX One not hitting 1080p. Again you will have to look at both gpu's to figure this out. Two very important gpu components the ROP's and TMU's. ROP or "Raster operations pipeline, is one of the final steps in the rendering process of modern 3D accelerator boards. The pixel pipelines take pixel and texel information and process it, via specific matrix and vector operations, into a final pixel or depth value. The ROPs perform the transactions between the relevant buffers in the local memory – this includes writing or reading values, as well as blending them together." TMU "A texture mapping unit (TMU) is a component in modern graphics processing units (GPUs), historically it is a separate physical processor. A TMU is able to rotate and resize a bitmap to be placed onto an arbitrary plane of a given 3D object as a texture. In modern graphics cards it is implemented as a discrete stage in a graphics pipeline, whereas when first introduced it was implemented as a separate processor, e.g. as seen on the Voodoo2 graphics card." Now the ps4 has a ROP count of 32 and XBO has 16. That is 2x the amount ROP's that the Xbox has. The TMU count on the ps4 is 72 and 48 on the XBOX One. This is 1.5x more than the Xbox. This is not even taking into consideration that the number of shader units in the PS4 is also 1.5x more than that of the xbox. (1152 vs. 768) But it still gets worse system memory in the PS4 runs at 176GB/sec and Xbox at 68.3GB/sec. Making the ram in the PS4 2.75x faster. GDDR5 in the PS4 is running at 5500MHz and the DDR3 in the XBO is running at 2133MHz. The ram in the Xbox is no different than the system ram found in a OC'ed desktop memory setup. This is how you end up below 1080p not the "It the ESRAM's fault for everything" argument I see so much here. That is my 2 cents. https://en.wikipedia.org/wi... https://en.wikipedia.org/wi... http://www.extremetech.com/... http://www.gamefaqs.com/boa...
I finally found an interview with AMD's Robert Hallock that i found to be very interesting. http://www.redgamingtech.co... This will make my last post make more sense.
iagainsti, you are correct in the fact that it is a combination of factors, and ESRAM is not solely responsible. However, ESRAM is also where the frame buffer resides (frame buffer needs enormous amounts of bandwidth for things like AA, etc). Since a 1080p frame takes up about 13mb, there isn't much room left over for other data to fit into there. So, it leaves a little more room in ESRAM to reduce resolution. The ROPS do play a big part in that as well. However, other things like the number of shader cores and such can be addressed by simply not designing multiplatform games to go beyond the capabilities of Xbox One's 12CU setup. Most multiplats cater to the lowest common denominator, so that isn't much of an issue.
@fr0sty While I agree with you i still do not see how the ESRAM causes a bottle neck in the graphics (yet). The Frame buffer size for a triple buffed image should be around 23.73MB. I arrived at this number using the formula on this web site http://www.pcguide.com/ref/... . And as far as anti aliasing is concerned it really depends what type is use for it to be taxing on the frame buffer (Spatial, Supersample, Multisample and Temoral) as some are more CPU dependent now. Now that I think about it. It seems like the Xbox One was built to be a 900p (or lower)machine or they just hate developers here is your 8.27MB for your high speed gpu calculations assuming you want to triple buffer your game.
Well said frosty, That's a platinum bubble you just received :D
@iagainsti, the reason being, developers need more high bandwidth RAM than just the frame buffer itself. So, when you have a triple buffered image hogging 23mb of 32mb, you only have 9mb left to play with. With lower resolution buffers, they take up less space and leave more room for other data. Again, not disputing that the other factors don't also play a role (especially the ROPs), but the main bottleneck we hear devs complain about is ESRAM and I feel that is the reason why. Well, that and the fact that the DDR3 is so slow it isn't of much use.