Little Nightmares is getting a substantial boost to both resolution and frame rate on PS4 Pro when compared to the base PS4 version.
Have the collectors edition preordered roll on next Friday:)
what happened to Media Molecule's Dream game? is it released...completely forgot about it
No, it's not out yet. They're supposed to start a Beta this year, though.
Ye they announced it when it was little more than a concept. They are now trying to turn it into a game with gameplay.
Do u even follow gaming? No, Dreams has not released, but Mm has plenty of Twitch streams showcasing the game. It should release on PS4/Pro and PSVR at the end of the yr or in 2018.
Game looks really cool and it's awesome they doubled the framerate and increased the resolution.
Wow. Double the frames and at 1620p is impressive!
not for a non AAA
Thats ridiculous reasoning. Im not calling you out specifically but a lot here are saying the same thing. "Its not an AAA game it should be [email protected] Well its not an AAA team building it either and they might not have the money, time or even talent to do such a thing. Stop acting like game making is an exact science. Its not, its an art. There is no correct way and its up to devs to manage their capabilities and resources to what they can achieve. You have to work with what you got.
If I learned anything this generation, it's that gamers on the internet LOVE to be controlled by buzzwords and some sort of standard that they [don't] follow. Last I saw, there's more than enough trash "AAA" games on the shelf, and an indie game can be just as good looking as anything else. You don't make a game look "better" just because you're supposed to. That's how bad games get created.
So you are saying ori and the blind forest must be horrible then.
Boomtube1987 is hardcore trolling in this article. It's pretty blatant. They doubled the framerate and increased the resolution significantly, i'd say it's more than sufficient and it should be a huge improvement at 1620p and 60fps. If the original PS4 version ran at 60fps or if the Pro version ran at 30fps then i would agree that it should absolutely be native 4k, but they don't. It's up to each dev if they want to support an enhanced Pro version and this is not a developer with a CoD size team or unlimited resources so we should be thankful that they decided to do it. For a modest developer i'm very happy with double the framerate to 60fps and 1620p. I'd actually prefer to see more games go for 60fps and 1440 or 1600p rather than 4k/30fps.
Looking forward to this one
what a weird resolution, 1620p
Agreed, it's the first time I heard about it. I suppose they couldn't keep 1800P...
The Darksiders remaster ran at 1620p on ps4 pro. The Cod 4 remaster is also 1620p on pro.
As weird as 900p?
More like 792p for Titanfall
900p is not a weird resolution... well if you are used to gaming on PC lol. 792p was weird lol
1620p is actually less weird than 792p. When Titanfall on xbone was 792p it was a bit peculiar.
How is it less weird? It'd be like 810p. That's a strange resolution
Lets be real here, its Tyler so it would be less weird because its the PS4Pro. If PS was Scorpio and Scorpio had the specs as the Pro this place would be WW3 all over again just like the beginning of this generation with all the spec talk that kinda died away. Ive been watching from the side lines for awhile now and can easily see bs in most people who comment on most articles as if they don't have any games to play and how both sides move things around.
"The game will run at 1080P and 30 FPS on a regular PlayStation 4 console, while the native resolution will be bumped to 1620P (75% of 4K’s 2160P) on PS4 Pro where the frame rate will be close to 60FPS (70% of the time it will be stable at 60FPS, for the remaining 30% it will vary between 50 and 60FPS). " Actually article contains a little more info than the description does. So is 1620P the 900P of 4K gaming?
Maybe in just the way that it is a compromise. But can you actually see the difference from 1620p vs 2160p as pronounced as when it's 900p vs 1080p...no...no I cant. People really love to compare the 2 situations, but they are fundamentally different.
1620p is not 75% of 4k. Assuming the same aspect ratio, it is more like 58%.
What? 2160*0.75=1620. Of course this applies for both axis and not the overall pixelcount
I'd put it as comparable to titanfalls 788p as that's closer to the difference then 900p. And 60fps 70% of the time is terrible. Should have gone 1440/60 or 4k/30 then
Changing res would only help framerate if the gpu is the bottleneck and I'm sure its the CPU.
Titanfall was 792p on xbone, u should know that. Are u new to gaming? How many games that claim they are 60fps are actually "targeted 60fps" games? I'd say most. A locked 60fps 70% of the time and between 50 to 60fps the rest of the time is for all intensive purposes a 60fps game nowadays and it is by no means terrible.
There you have it... you've found the new "troll" thing to drop on the PRO. Go forth and spread the word... #JahovaswitnessOfGaming I do find 1620 to be a bit weird, why not the 1440? Well it's a higher number so... I guess it's better.
1440p is 2x 720p, and 1800p is 2x 900p, so both are related to established resolutions for games. Resolutions of 792p or 1620p are simply weird because they don't fit into any standard category. But yeah, I can't see any reason why 1620 wouldn't be better than 1440p, so why not do it if it's possible?