CRank: 5Score: 0

The difference visually is not a big deal. What every comparison like this always forgets to take into account is the gameplay difference. 60 FPS is more responsive smooth. 30 FPS inserts a lot of input lag.

1405d ago 1 agree0 disagreeView comment

Since ever? Framerate's category is performance, not graphics.

1439d ago 7 agree1 disagreeView comment

If you're already playing on PC why would you buy it for the 360 then?

1439d ago 7 agree3 disagreeView comment

Well, I'm a PS4 owner and I live for the redheads.

1460d ago 6 agree1 disagreeView comment


Technically it isn't wrong, but it isn't right either. In this specific case, the author of the article did not have access to art rendered at full 1080p, so the only way to visually display the difference was to cut the sides of the 2.35:1 image. On the other hand, it isn't necessarily true to say that 2.35:1 displays less vertically. It all depends on how it's shot.

But generally, assuming it's shot from the same place and...

1489d ago 2 agree0 disagreeView comment

If that were true then why wouldn't they just make it 900p? It would be 16:9 and it would actually even be lower res, so they could get better performance out of it.

Fact is, their resolution allows for a wider field of view without any stretching or squeezing, which makes for more interesting shots. It's the same reason it's used in a lot of movies. Indians specifically are big fans of the format and bollywood's standard is actually 2.35:1

1489d ago 1 agree1 disagreeView comment

That makes no sense. A lower resolution is never a design option, it's a compromise. They felt that a lower resolution with more post processing was preferable to keeping the game 1080p and with inferior effects, because the hardware was not capable of having both. A different Aspect ratio CAN BE a design choice however.

There is no reason to believe in this case that it is a compromise. Ready at dawn have mentioned several times that 24:10 was their preferred aspect rati...

1489d ago 2 agree2 disagreeView comment

@princejb134 streaming game content is not very hardware intensive, they should have absolutely no problem having it run on PS4. On the PS3 getting good performance might be a bit more tricky, hence the beta.

1505d ago 0 agree0 disagreeView comment

It's like Skyrim with Shaquilles.

1522d ago 0 agree0 disagreeView comment

It's not really an easy comparison. Battlefield has larger maps and vehicle combat, which makes it very different. If you like smaller maps and constant action, KZ3 is definitely better, BF4 has more wandering around getting to the action, but also feels more like an actual well... battle field.

As for the singleplayer, KZ3 is better, no contest there.
There's also the fact that BF4 is absolutely broken with bugs right now. But once it's fixed, I'd say...

1554d ago 0 agree0 disagreeView comment

According to Neogaf, it's just a really retarded spin on the numbers. Microsoft sold 909k in only 9 days of November, while the PS4 sold significantly more but in 16 days (Even tho they basically outsold the 9 days of the bone in a single day). Basically, Microsoft's spin is that the average number of consoles sold PER DAY on November is higher for the xbox.

Using Microsoft's retarded spin, if the PS4 had released in the last day of the month (and sold the same 1 ...

1555d ago 9 agree0 disagreeView comment

not really. Even if you make a total guess you have at least 25% chance of getting it right...

1561d ago 2 agree6 disagreeView comment

BF4 is the only good multiplayer shooter on the One. PS4 has 2 others in Killzone and Blacklight.

1571d ago 2 agree1 disagreeView comment

There's still xbones on my local Tesco and Morrisons (Greater Manchester area) so it's not sold out in the UK either.

1573d ago 0 agree1 disagreeView comment

60 FPS multiplayer, best graphics on the launch window, dedicated servers and according to previews, very balanced play. Seems like it should be the FPS of choice for multiplayer this year, possibly only outpaced by battlefield if you really like the vehicle combat.

1598d ago 3 agree0 disagreeView comment

why? It works with PS3 too...

1601d ago 1 agree1 disagreeView comment

@Septic, at the very least they now have a proper controller to play fighting games...

1601d ago 11 agree0 disagreeView comment

uh, then I guess Gran Turismo 5 was 1080p, since the resolution was 1280x1080

1602d ago 0 agree0 disagreeView comment

Ok, now this is a seriously amazing feature. I already have a vita, but this would take me over the edge to buy one if I didn't.

1602d ago 1 agree0 disagreeView comment

wrong. 800p is 1422x800.

The order is cinematic 1080p. A lot of "FULL HD" movies have the same type of resolution. Full 1920 horizontal but shorter vertical resolution for a more panoramic experience.

For example, the first edition Bluray version of The Dark Knight (2008) had the exact resolution of 1920x800, the same as this game. Later versions, titled IMAX Edition were full 1080p.

1603d ago 1 agree1 disagreeView comment