When did 1080p and 60fps become such an issue? And why the hell are players so angry about it?
Gamers just expect value for their hard earned purchases (or those who claim to purchase it themselves). If I buy more expensive hardware and can't get the full benefits from it which includes higher fidelity visuals then why did I upgrade in the first place? It's not as important as some make it but it still is a valid issue.
Were you the same way last gen when you spent more on your PS3 but were getting equality (or worse)?
It wasn't an issue for me last gen because I didn't make my own purchases when those consoles launched and during the ps2 / xbox era, these kind of discussions weren't as big as they are now. Basically, I didn't really care much because it never effected me financially.
Rephrase the queetion to "Should Xbox one.. ..matter"? The word SHOULD, it shouldn't matter much. However it DOES matter because it creates the buzz. Personally it is a top 3 driving force on the sales disparity. 1. Price 2. Brand 3. Specs (with resolution being main factor.)
This is a really silly question to be honest. Go to any Digital Foundry article from last gen comparing multiplatform releases and you shall find your answer. Those type of articles always garnered the most heat and comments from the community. And it wasn't about major disparities either. It was mostly about "patches of grass" and one game running at 640p while the other one running at 660p hence making it the "SUPERIOR" version as the Xbox guys would put it. And then, the review scores would also make sure to reflect that as the PS3 version of the same game would be scored lower. So, the question remains...does it really matter now? You better believe it does. Otherwise, what was all the fighting last gen all for?
@Cupid_Viper3 "And then, the review scores would also make sure to reflect that as the PS3 version of the same game would be scored lower. " APart from Bayonetta on PS3 which had crippling frame rate issues, which games had lower reviews on PS3? I can't think of any and its the second time I've read this on here.
It did happen septic septic....ill do a dig.... may of been gamespot or something but I remember some reviewers giving the nod to the 360 due to performance. . . In regards to the article , the very existence of digital foundry and lens of truth are testaments to performance being somewhat important. Erase them comparisons from my memory like inception then I'll play along with 'it doesn't matter'
yeah resolution matter.....unless you own an xbox one, in that case the owner will try to convince himself that 720p-900p look the same than a native 1080p resolution.
That's more to do with microsofts market share of the industry last gen and therefore getting the developers to prefer xbox over PS3 does that make the PS3 an inferior console no technically it's actually a lot better as were finding out now that's it's not held back by xbox parity at the end of the day we all know it's hard as nails to develop for PS3 but they've only just launched gran Turismo 6 PS3 is far from done and I dont just mean poor multiplatform ports. Look at the twilight years of PS2 God of war 1&2 arguably better than anything that launched on xbox 360. Even if PS3 is done it had some fantastic games and yeah there launch period was awful I bought one well over priced £425! For just the console and that was nearly 10 years ago, yet ps4 is only £350!? Bargain. And yeah PS3 had a barren patch with no games at all but most new consoles do nowadays tho. (Xbox 360 certainly did had to wait a month or 2 just for a new game dead or alive ;) xbox 360 and PS3 are on par much more than they were a few years ago. Like most things tho change happens and it seems ps4/Sony are replacing microsoft as the dominant company for this generation, great news in my opinion.
But... But... But... No-one cared about resolution 20 years ago! /s Stop living in the past people. Resolution matters
@xHeavYx - sure it does, just not as much as gameplay. Of course that is just my opinion, so take it for what it is. I would much rather have a great game running solidly, then a prettier game that is unoptimized and plays like garbage. Besides, it's not like we're talking about the difference between 480p and 1080p here..
@Neonridr Yes it bothered me but after the RROD happened 3 times to me on 3 different machines, my PS2 breaking, I was more than happy to pick up a 60GB PS3. Hell this gen I was going to go back to Xbox because I figured they would have learned from the RROD and multiplats would continue to look better on Microsoft's console this gen but we all know what has happened since and I went went with the PS4. Edit: This gen so I own 1 exclusive and the rest are cross gen multiplats. Last gen across all 3 consoles I own 11 exclusives but have over 200 multiplats so resolution matters to me. If I could get my PC to work as easy as my console I would game there as its more powerful.
@septic From IGN Skate Ps3 8.8 Xbox 360 9.0 Bioshock PS3 9.4 xbox 360 9.7 Mass Effect 2 PS3 9.5 Xbox 360 9.6 Now these numbers are fairly trivial but the point is, here are your games. There's more but I don't feel like looking for you. Last gen, several outlets from IGN to G4 would do this to games that were basically identical. G4 specifically would always recommend the 360 version even if the pS3 version was better (more content). Interestingly enough, they didn't do this for every game. Red Dead Redemption had a lower Resolution on PS3 than the 360 but that didn't seem to matter. The PS3 version launched with more content but that didn't matter either. @Neon Yes. Prior to understanding what the cell was, I was annoyed with my $600 console struggling to keep up with a $400 console. I expected 2013 visuals on the PS3 back in 2006 and I was irritated that it couldn't produce the best visuals early on. That gradually shifted to..."well Naughty Dog and Santa Monica can pump out the best looking games of the generation so why cant UBI, Rockstar, and other devs use the PS3 to it's full potential??". Of course I wasn't looking at the bigger picture of how much time and money it costs to use the ps3's power like a first party studio. Now, the stronger console is also the easier to work with so it's strange that devs are pushing parity when they've never done it in the past. Time and money are not really a factor any more unless it's about satisfying partners, which is what UBi is doing now.
@inTheLab Bioshock- Bioshock came out much later on the PS3 and was supposed to be a definitive version of the game. This is what IGN said about it: "However, old glitches that should've been fixed in the PS3 development hold this version back from being completely realized." Skate- got the SAME review on both platforms. 8.8 http://uk.ign.com/articles/... Mass Effect 2- your saves didn't carry over to the second game because there was initially no Mass Effect 1 remember? So that's why they scored it lower even though the review admits that the PS3 version ran better overall (because of the newer engine utilised). SO no convincing examples given at all.
This gen is suppose to be 1080p n 60 fps. That's all we want.
Games like GT5 or Wipeout HD looked great and ran at 1080p with rock-solid 60fps on PS3, demanding 1080p for PS4 games is the least we should do.
Neonridr, Last gen was frustrating in the beginning when developers were either lazy or unsuccessful in making multiplats up to par on PS3. But we never complained about the quality of our 1st party titles which are levels above the competition and the last 3 years of the gen had almost all mulitplats running equal or better on PS3. PS3 became the lead designed platform and resulted in better looking ports to the Xbox 360, than if the 360 was the lead system. Look at what RAGE, GTA V, Lords of Shadow, and Crysis 2 did for setting the highest standard for last gen multiplats.. It's because developers got the PS3 down and resulted in an all around better experience for all gamers.
Neonridr worst on PS3 what are you smoking there endless of PS3 exclusive that look and play better than 360 games lol
@Septic Man you just can't acknowledge that you might be wrong and possibly don't know everything? You linked IGN UK. IGN US which, let's face it, is the one that matters had them scored differently. I'm sure IGN Italy probably has them the same just like IGN Iraq and IGN Mozambique. Old glitches in the original should be fixed for a port proves the point of bias so thanks for that. That's fairly stupid to punish a port for...being a port. The saves not carrying over has nothing to do with the score of Mass Effect 2. It is a complete game and one that's not dependent on another game to be complete. There was also the motion comic work around which allowed you to shape the story as you see fit so...nice try.
So since the PS3 was a $500 bluray player in the time when most where $1000 it should have played games at a higher resolution than your 360 ? In other words your where proud of your 360 back then but now you don't care ? And how many of those $300 360s did you go through ? 2-3 ? Oooh that's right you didn't own a 360, you where just making a point, no I believe you, really.
@BloodBorn - GT5 wasn't quite a full 1080p, I believe they cropped a little off. @RedDevils - I was referring to multiplats, not exclusives. You can't compare exclusives to another system - hence why they are called exclusives. @quenomamen - I got a 360 in March of 2007 (they launched the November prior). Had one replaced due to RROD, then that console died many years later (around the time of Halo Reach). So I upgraded and got a newer slim model. Xbox Live gamertag is Neonridr if you want to look it up in case you think I am lying. Don't have an Xbox One, I have a PS4 now. Switched camps for this gen.
I find it ironic that people keep talking about getting their value and getting "the best game", yet the best game isn't because of the resolution. It is the best game because of the content and the experience that content provides. That means, NOT focusing on resolution, but allowing developers to focus on improving the content of their game. That will give you the best game!
@IntheLab "Man you just can't acknowledge that you might be wrong and possibly don't know everything?" Mate, firstly I asked you a legit question. You gave those responses. What was there for me to be wrong about? I never said that reviewers didn't score games lower. Its just that your examples were weak. "That's fairly stupid to punish a port for...being a port. " Yeah okay fine but that's not the point though is it? We're talking scoring differently on the face of it for multiplatform games. You've given 3 examples, 2 of which were not games that launched on the consoles simultaneously. With regard to Mass Effect 2: "There was also the motion comic work around which allowed you to shape the story as you see fit so...nice try." LMAO. Nice one. Motion comic work. Yeah that's really as good in shaping the story from Mass Effect 1! What was the resolution of the motion comic? Nice try indeed! "The saves not carrying over has nothing to do with the score of Mass Effect 2. " What?? The saves from the first game had a DIRECT IMPACT on the second game! In my save, Wrex was dead! Sigh...I try and have a proper discussion but you guys just don't know how to do it. I'll wait for someone to come up with a decent list as opposed to the angry naysayers just spamming disagree against me without having the ability to formulate a decent reply. http://replygif.net/i/1144....
@Neon Are you saying the PS3 was worse than the PS2??? That is a trollish comment.
@NikeJustDoesit - good god no, where would you get that idea? I was referring to the fact that you would have paid more for your PS3 than a 360 yet almost all the multiplat games looked better on the 360.
Ok septic, since you didn't acknowledge the examples given as worthy I'll just say that in many of the reviews the nod was given to the version they believed performed better. Some of those may have scored equally but the written reviews would, more often than not, highlight any disparities. That may seem superficial but that doesn't mean it didnt occur. When I get a bit of proper spare time I'll do a dig like I said earlier and pm ya. In regards to many of the responses saying it doesn't matter. ..... Cut the crap with those false dilemmas. Nobody is saying hit 1080p to the detriment of gameplay or anything else. Not once has that happened this gen for anyone to make that case leaving that argument null and void. I'm also going to stick my neck out and say I dont believe x1 owners would want 720p games under the guise of 'magical gameplay' We've all just flung down our papers on new bloody hardware so why wouldn't we expect more for the price we paid. Last thing I've got a ok pc to play games IF i wanted to but I PREFER CONSOLES fully well knowing I they cannot match performance of pcs but makes up for that in other ways.
Why buy 1080p tv? Also, better hardware doesn't mean just better res. it can be better fps, better effects, better AI, better graphics, more npcs... Everything. This damage control must stop
Why o why: "Ok septic, since you didn't acknowledge the examples given as worthy I'll just say that in many of the reviews the nod was given to the version they believed performed better." The same nod is often given in PS4 games now. Nothing really has changed, just the increased focus on resolution. In fact so much so that games are now being targeted towards a specific resolution to appease fans. It is detrimental to game development, because you are now stripping features out of other areas to improve an area that is almost inconsequential. "Some of those may have scored equally but the written reviews would, more often than not, highlight any disparities. That may seem superficial but that doesn't mean it didnt occur. When I get a bit of proper spare time I'll do a dig like I said earlier and pm ya." Yes it is superficial, and most people don't frankly care unless it is crippling like Bayonetta was on the PS3. That is the only example I remember so in general I expect this to be few and far between then and now. "Last thing I've got a ok pc to play games IF i wanted to but I PREFER CONSOLES fully well knowing I they cannot match performance of pcs but makes up for that in other ways." but then you say this: "I'm also going to stick my neck out and say I dont believe x1 owners would want 720p games under the guise of 'magical gameplay'" That is kind of contradicting to me. In one you are saying performance isn't important as other factors make up for it, yet somehow you have an issue with 720p games? Fact of the matter is, resolution is one of the least important factors to game enjoyment. In fact, stable frame rate is ahead of this, which is almost opposite in terms of performance balance between the two. It is well known among developers that game mechanics, artwork, storytelling, and score is far more important to a game enjoyment. So a passing mention unless it direly affects the game, I dont it matters in a review. GameNameFame: "Why buy 1080p tv?" Because the vast majority of large screen TVs are 1080p. In fact, I don't remember seeing a 720p in last few years unless you are looking at 32" and smaller. "Also, better hardware doesn't mean just better res. it can be better fps, better effects, better AI, better graphics, more npcs... Everything." I agree, but it should be as a package. Better effects, fps or even graphics is NOT that important. Better AI, better NPCS, better game mechanics, more stuff to do and so on.
Not contridicting at all...all you have to do is look at any secret sauce article..any hardware improving article and you'll see a bag of guys happy with the idea of an improvements. Are you suggesting that none of them want 1080p to match their tv screens as well as other background features or that the only reason they want it is because 'x' are putting those most heinous thoughts into their minds....lets forget the dorito pope and friends claiming 1080 60fps should be the standard for the next gen last gen. Many of us just have higher expectations. I think x1 fans would feel cheated if their brand new console was stuck at 720p... what do you think? When I mention pc and that I'm happy with what consoles bring I'm comparing 2 different hardwares with different benefits....ease of use, same accross the board, plug n play, price etc thats what makes up for performance differences. Consoles are similar so we compare class with class not BMW's to Bentley's. Gameplay is paramount but resolution matters just like other graphical or back end features from fps, aa to ai. I want the best bang for my buck so from the beginning of gaming times..Nothing Has Changed
@Why oh Why - I agree with what you are saying in principal. I mean I want the whole package too. But if a game comes out at 900p but is able to have a heck of a lot more effects and on screen characters, I would sooner have that than a stripped down 1080p version. Ever look at Infamous and wonder if it was only 900p could they have actually had a more bustling city? I mean Watch Dogs was a pretty lousy game for the most part, but at least there were people walking around.. And besides, if you think that all first party games coming from Sony will be 1080p/60fps you are going to be upset down the road. Take TLOU on PS3 which only came out last year. GOTY, awards across the board... and it was only 720p. The reviews nowhere said "We wish this game could have been 1080p". It looked fantastic, but it was a fun game to play. There has to be a happy balance, you can't always expect every game to push the hardware to the limit and beyond. And sometimes devs would rather focus on things like AI, physics, game world size, on screen characters, etc, etc rather than what resolution is being output to the screen. 900p upconverted by your system to 1080p at a distance of 10+ feet wherever you do your gaming is a damn near impossibility to differentiate. Unless you sit like 4 feet from your TV. Pixels at that distance away become so small, they lump together and cannot be discerned by your eye as individuals anymore. But as developers learn the ins and outs of these systems, 1080p/60fps *could* become the standard. Only time will tell.
Resolution matters, but not at the expense of trashing someone with a console that you feel is "inferior" to the one you prefer to play. Give it a rest. And if it didn't matter, there wouldn't be an article EXACTLY like this one a few times per week while console owners go at each others throats over pixels.
To some people yes, to most people no and that's, ok. To each his own.
Your spot on. SO far this new gen I have bought the following games. MarioU, Windwaker HD, Mario 3D World, Pikmin 3, Mario Kart 8, Forza 5, Titanfall, Horizon 2, KI season 1n2 and DKTF and not one of them I got because they were 1080p or because the graphics were the best game I have ever seen but because these are the games I like to play. I still have a dreamcast, Gamecube and Amiga32 and the games I have on them are still as fun today as they were when I played them when I was young. For me gaming is about having fun and even pong is still a fun game and if ou have pong in black and white of 4K it will still be just as fun no matter which version you get. Yes 3rd party games look better on the PS4 3rd party games looked better on the 360 and 1st xbox but the difference is really not worth people getting mad about unless you are going to play the games side by side and freeze the game all the time to compare the small details as when your playing most games your not stopping and looking at the detail in the walls or sky ect you should be emerged in the game.
You should expect a lot more than just visuals with your purchase though. What's the point of next gen if all we are getting are the same type of games with a better sheen of gloss over them. Where's the better AI, the no loading screens, bigger worlds, multiple choice that actually effects outcomes and endings, huge universes, huge multiplayer games and options. Are you just going to settle for 1080p as the benchmark of next gen only?
I never said it was the only or even the main aspect of a next gen console but it's definitely one of the more obvious ones so why shouldn't it matter?
Exactaly,sod 1080p if it means i gotta play acu in an empty city....next gen for me is about better physics/ai/enviroment interaction...but the fanboys only seem to care about rez. Leave them to it there the minority anyway so who cares.....ubisoft dont and acu will be the biggest selling ac yet and will probably sell more on ps4 than x1. even with that laughable hashtag...what was it #no parity ps4 or something lmao...tbh it will be good not to have idiots like them in the game anyway...so yeah hashtag away guys all you want but if your that pissed,then you do care for AC and will just stfu a buy it.
everyone really likes to misconstrue the argument. Everyone is putting gameplay first that's a given. BUT X1 should not hold PS4 back because of parity (whether its resolution or something else doesn't matter) and if you're paying $400 for a system and most of the games don't play as well on it as the other $400 system then that's a tie-breaker. Exclusives matter to some and others like third parties. The latter group will be going with PS4 as sales have shown and deserve to be rewarded for making the smarter purchase with the better looking games it can obviously handle as has been shown numerous times.
You're hilarious. Why do all the Xbox fans say "let's not talk about graphics" in a graphics article? The gameplay differences will come, as they always do. They won't just not occur because graphics are being talked about. In that note, why do you guys always act like graphics aren't important when comparing two versions of the same game. They have the same gameplay. It's so weird that you all try to downplay graphics by treating them like that's all others talk about. But if you really don't care, I shouldn't see you in any more graphics articles, right? Wanna bet that won't last?
@Spotie "Why do all the Xbox fans say "let's not talk about graphics" in a graphics article?" I never said let's not talk about graphics what I said is people should expect more than just graphics. You Sony fans seem to just focus ONLY on graphics. How has that worked out so far with games that have been less than mediocre like Knack, BF4, CoD, Driveclub, Killzone and more... all with stunning graphics, but lacking in gameplay, broken online or a huge glitch/bug fest. "act like graphics aren't important when comparing two versions of the same game." Because the differences are so minimal it's equally hilarious seeing people compare deeper blacks and puffier clouds, or more/less shadows. Is this the extent of the differences in graphics between the two consoles? So yes, when we are comparing just that it really isn't important. And Driveclub should have taught you just how unimportant graphics are when a game is shipped with less features, a broken online and plain gameplay. Of course you refuse to acknowledge this as you go around defending that game instead of seeing it as it is. "But if you really don't care, I shouldn't see you in any more graphics articles, right?" Hey..smart guy...look at the title of the article... "Does Xbox One and PS4 game resolution really matter?" It's LITERALLY asking us do we care about resolution. And you being the reading comprehension master want us to not talk about it, a question given to us for discussion.
why do people care that people care about resolution and framerate ? there should be an option for people like that such as 480p and 5-15 fps because they care about gameplay. fools that say that don't realise framerate effect gameplay.
1080p is Sonys advantage. Thats all. The rest is all the rabid fanboys.
1080p isn't the only difference we've seen, so no. OT - Yes it matters. Is it the only thing that matters? No. Anyone who thinks this is a new discussion is either a new gamer or wasn't paying attention last generation. Did PS3's often lesser multi plats ruin my gaming? No, but it was one of the main reasons PS3 lost market share so it did matter.
I couldn't really give a crap about resolution...as long as the graphics are awesome that's all I really care about...
I have a question for you.. which console was better.. the PS2 or Dreamcast? Rather, which do you prefer? Think before contradicting ...
@Applejack Great attitude , didn't care as I didn't pay for anything before, now I have to pay it's a big issue. Tbh most people will not notice the resolution difference at all, if devs/face off's said nothing about resolution most people would be blissfully unaware.
I understand the points of view from both sides. While actually playing a game, I don't remember ever saying to myself, "man this 900p is killing the experience." Then again, it's a new gen. We want to see big improvements from last gen. But we're technically not even a full year into this gen. It'll get better
No. I don't really care. As long as my games look good, that's all that matters. Games are about graphics, gameplay, and story. Resolution should be thought about last. There's a lot of games that are going to suffer because some people want it at 1080p. Gamers today are making it more than what it is. Like making a game 1080p will give you more graphic fx, or AA. If you don't play a game because it's not 1080p, then you don't need to be playing games.
"Games are about graphics, gameplay, and story. Resolution should be thought about last." Resolution is an important part of "graphics" though. Higher Resolution = better graphics (assuming all else is equal).
@Angeljuice Resolution is not apart of graphics because it doesn't affect the graphics in any way. Doesn't alter the amounts of polygons on character models or the environment. Doesn't increase anti-aliasing on objuects in the game. Or any other effects. Image quality is very different from graphics quality. Which is why there are games at lower res that look better than games at a higher res. Resolution is not an important part of graphics simply because it's not what makes the graphics up. But I hope that all PS4 games reach 1080p this gen. Cause when games get a lot more demanding, the system will suffer for it.
"B, B, But there's no difference" " B, B, But you couldn't even tell if devs didn't tell you" "B, B, But you need to be sitting 1cm away from a 1000" screen to see the difference" I'll bet 9/10 of those people bought a 1080p TV instead of a 720p TV and have a 1080p phone with a 5" screen. Salesmen see Xbox apologists coming Customer - I'd like to buy that 50" 1080p TV for £800 please. Salesman - Oh sorry sir, we have none left, we have the same TV just that it is only 720p, you can have that for £800 too.
I played all last gen on an HD screen with an Xbox 360, but we never had the HD cable for it. So it was kind of pixelated compared to HD, but still looked good. I had a blast playing games like that. A fun game is a fun game, and YES graphics CAN make the experience of the game even that much more enjoyable but they don't make the game.
Yes it should. Simply because resolution improves graphical fidelity. If the system can support it, then allow it to. Simple as that. However, should one platform hold that over the other as a crowning achievement? No, absolutely not.
Doesn't bother me, but I can see why people would rather get the better running version of the game if they cost the same price. For me I divide franchises to the system I believe they belong to.
And it begins again….the same article re-skinned for the same damage control. A bigger noise was made over much smaller differences last-gen when 360 had better multiplats for several years, but now we can't talk about it because the sensitive ones can give it but can't take it. Lens of Truth was okay last-gen, but now the professionals at Digital Foundry aren't. Let's break this argument down…. It matters differently to different people, which should go without saying, but I can appreciate those people that aren't disingenuous about the differences between resolutions and performance. A seasoned gamer should be able to see the difference between a resolution of 900p against 1080p because heck, PC gamers have made the claim a thousand times over before this argument even involved XB1 vs. PS4. If you can't tell the difference then you must be a casual gamer, no less. It's that simple: http://i.minus.com/iW998p1o... This "debate" isn't going away, so the fact that people use the facts of a factual analysis how they please shouldn't annoy or confuse anyone. As games become more and more complex as developers scrap last-gen consoles to leverage their games towards next-gen hardware specific technology, the differences will become more apparent, so it's time this all just became accepted and then those that have the strength to, should just move on, rather than get frustrated that one faction is rubbing established facts in the faces of another faction.
They all seemed to notice last gen when there was slightly more blades of grass in red dead redemption or when the ps3 version of COD was 10p less res or 3 to 2 frames lower, but this gen it seems no one can see a difference between 720p and 1080p or 900p and 1080p which is a hell of a gap compared to last gen.
@Digital " A bigger noise was made over much smaller differences last-gen " Nonsense. NO WAY was a bigger noise made over those differences last gen. #resolutiongate was more prominent than any argument last-gen. It was in NO WAY SHAPE OR FORM as big an issue as it is now (mostly because of the rise of social media as well). " Lens of Truth was okay last-gen, but now the professionals at Digital Foundry aren't. " That's hilarious because a lot of the comments on here were along the lines of "Lol Lens of Truth is biased". "just move on, rather than get frustrated that one faction is rubbing established facts in the faces of another faction." It can be quite frustrating when looking at the sheer hypocrisy of the faction using 'established facts' compared to their behaviour last-gen. Most people acknowledge that resolution matters. But the issue has been MASSIVELY blown out of proportion because of that faction that will obviously leverage that advantage over the other and continue to leverage whatever little advantage it can. Resolution matters. People need to deal with it and move on. Not keep bringing it up in order to desperately reconcile with the fact that their console of choice is struggling to reach the kind of resolutions the more powerful console is NOR should it be at the forefront of gaming topics all the time in the way it is now to further fanboyish agendas. Alas, debates regarding resolution are here to stay until the end of this gen and beyond, judging by how gaming communities behave.
***"It can be quite frustrating when looking at the sheer hypocrisy of the faction using 'established facts' compared to their behaviour last-gen."*** Or it can be quite frustrating looking at the sheer hypocrisy at ones self, dismissing 'established facts' now where as before they embraced them last gen without any problems. And now that the shoe is on the other foot they want everyone to get over it/move on.
@Outside "And now that the shoe is on the other foot they want everyone to get over it/move on." Yes Outside the hypocrisy is definitely strong. Last gen we saw the main focus on exclusives only as multiplats were always dismissed and never counted when arguing which console was better. Now not only is it a major factor today but I have seen them included in some commenters when making lists on how many games the PS4 has. That was an absolute Hell No last gen. I also love how when PC fans celebrated their 1080p they were [email protected]* near ran out the article with people saying that resolution doesn't matter and calling them PC elitist. No it's the hottest topic and ok to talk about solely, because a console of choice can now achieve this with their games.
Every generation there is a debate that is used as a hot topic for examples hardware sales, now resolution and which console offers what to its gamers. With that being said yes gamers will notice the disparity but exactly what disparity is it resolution or the actual games. I think edge wise resolution so far goes to PS4 but when it comes to pushing the envelope on games Xbox One has done more, examples are Titanfall, Forza Motorsport 5, Forza Horizon and soon to be released Halo MCC. All are are showing Xbox strength were it matters games. You probably ask yourself how? Drivatars, cloud compute for enemy AI, ability to render two different graphics engine, stable servers etc. So yes there will be a disparity but it depends on which team you want to be a part of. Me personally, it comes down to the games that push the envelope of modern technology.
Keep telling yourself that, you'll believe it eventually.
Still not decided which console to buy with my Xmas bonus lol
60fps is a must, I was playing PS2 games that were 60fps yesterday.. It's embarrassing that most games nowadays are 30fps.
It always mattered... depending on your platform of choice, that is. "LOL, Ghostbusters looks ridiculous on PS3" "Harumph, FFXIII still looks good on 360"
oh gawd!!!!!!!! Every f'n week. Give it a rest. These "articles" should fail after the 10th one.
"I would be very surprised if anyone on any game or any movie or anything else, can spot the difference between 720 and 1080p. Even side by side I’d be very surprised," Lol if Thompson really thinks that he should be fired and leave the videogames industry..
So i've done a bit of reading up about this, mainly because I already own a PS4 and I will have my Xbox One by the end of next week. So i took the time to read all articles that properly compare games that appear on both Xbox One and PS4. As far as multiplat games go i will always buy the better version, even if they only have minor differences. The problem is not just about resolutions, in many cases its not just about a lower res but there are other things too like less foliage, lower frames rates, inferior quality shadows, screen tearing etc.
"lower frames rates" That's the most important difference in my opinion. Just look at the difference between Alien Isolation on PS4 and Alien Isolation on Xbox One for example.
Simple answer... Does the Game play well? If so, that's all that matters. Couldn't care less about resolution because I dint compare the details of a game, I just play it
You know what, I pick consoles based on what reports we get from developers. If it's easier or better to program than the other, I'll support it. I cant see the benefit of owning both nor can I afford to waste money on owning both. Last gen it was the Xbox clearly. The 1st few EA games came out and they were far superior and had no glitches. This continued all the way through, anyone remember Fallout on PS3 vs Xbox. I heard chuggy and glitchy on PS3 and I had 1 game stopper on Xbox the entire time. Skyrim the same for many people with no probs on Xbox. This gen seems to be PS4 (sony) that wanted developers to put input into the console so I bought it. I don't care, I just want games that the developers do the best on. PS4 pre and post release have indicated this is the better platform. They listened to the developer hang ups and changed accordingly. Numbers helped this decision... Sorry but 4 digits (1000+p) vs 3 digits (900+p) sounds better to me. This coupled with the developer input and feedback sounds like Sony was going to win this one for me. I took a gamble and I haven't been disappointed so far. So yes, the numbers do matter for the normal people like me. To the hardcore or high tech maybe not but a little bit of research can lead a simple belief like mine to pick a side. In reality, bigger numbers means better product.. Even if it is or isn't the case in tech terms. I'm not angry about it so to speak, I love Halo more than the normal gamer by far, and will be extremely disappointed to miss out on this gen Halo games, but I wouldn't have jumped ship this gen if the consoles were the same specs. I feel Microsoft was being lazy with those numbers when they could have done so much more.