Microsoft: eSRAM Being Too Small For 1080p Output Is "Clearly Not The Case"
So his excuse is Forza, the game that was severely downgraded, and Kinect Sports Rivals... Nevermind all the other games that struggled with performance and had to run in 720p or 900p. I don't mind some games not being 60fps, depending on the genre, but I will not accept any next gen games that aren't 1080p.
If you care so much about resolution that you would be willing to forego any gaming experience that doesn't present itself in native 1080p, then perhaps you are barking up the wrong tree in looking to consoles for your gaming solution.
I have a gaming PC as well. I'm just sick and tired of the PS3/360 gens blurry image and poor pixel clarity due to the games not running in native res. Image clarity is more important to me than anything else graphically.
Each console only has been out a few months Xbox will get to 1080p @ 60fps they just have to get used to the hardware the eSRAM held them back so they could not get it out the gate but they will get there and right now I do not think it matters but when VR becomes more of a thing I think resolution will make a difference will lower resolution mean easier motion sickness if that is true that is the only major downfall of the resolution difference.
Of course if you lower the graphics enough you can get games running in 1080p. There are 1080p games available on the last gen machines. Problem for MS is, will what the expectations of the current generation run in 1080p on the XboxOne? There will definitely be games on the XboxOne that run in 1080p, just like Forza, but I think few people who know what they are talking about think those games will stack up to PS4 games graphically. Also as a side note, shame on the gaming media for not calling out the discrepancies of the E3 build to the release build of Forza. It's a significant difference.
Clearly not the case, unless you are playing Titanfall, COD, BF4, Ryse,Assassin's Creed, Killer Instinct, Thief, Dead Rising 3. Good news is they were able to get LocoCycle at 1080p.
If we examine the 'issue' of 1080p it stems a lot from the idea Xbox One is supposed to be a 'next gen' console from the 360 and PS3 owners out there. Therefore they do expect an upgrade from the native resolution of their old home consoles. You could point to the fact 1280 x 720 is now an average smartphone resolution, and tablets have increasing resolutions that people also game on. Reasoning here is that if you are going to spend north of £400 on a dedicated games console, it should be outperforming other 'lesser' mobile platforms in every way, including resolution. What is also unfortunate (or Microsoft's own doing if you prefer) is that PS4 is faster, and much better equipped to manage 1080p native resolutions. It is completely natural to compare the two consoles I'm afraid, they ARE in competition with each other. When you buy most products, you would compare rival solutions as well. Microsoft are going to have to stop this sort of response. They have to shift their focus from the resolution and graphics debate because they will always find themselves on the losing side against a more powerful machine. The smart way is to focus on their own system and it's strengths, and it's games. They have to try and explain why they believe their machine is worth what it is and why it should be chosen over PS4 for the average consumer.
What resolution is Titanfall? Oh right. LOL
It is just going to keep getting worse Mr Harrison: http://www.neogaf.com/forum...
@thunderbear couldn't agree more. With few exceptions the game coverage Media skew their articles, reviews and video coverage to their own personal bias, what company paid them and the overall opinion of the staff where they work. I think for us to take this coverage serious IGN/Gamespot/whoever needs to post criteria points for how they review games and hardware. Once posted stick to that mission statement. The flavor of the month review style is unintelligent and worthless..
1080p is not the be-all-end-all. And the arguement that "this game should be 1080p. or bust" is silly because there are a ton of other things to take into account (texture quality, assets on screen, physics, etc). Arguing from that standpoint is a strawman. BUT the reason why 1080p had become such a hot-button issue is because the cheaper console is pulling off 1080p and higher framerate with nearly all of its multiplats, while the more expensive console is struggling to do so. THAT is why it's an issue. The limitation of eSRAM is well-documented and it certainly holds the X1 back. Will talented devs be able to work around it? Sure. Will talented devs be able to work around it to the point where the X1 version matches or exceeds the PS4 version? No, not likely.
Well the more expensive console has Kinect which forces the price up. And with 10% of X1 power was use for Kinect on top of ESRAM. Plus the overall weaker specs. MS could pull off 1080p much easier if the specs were like PS4's while doing things like reserved power for Kinect and ESRAM they would still have enough power to do 1080p. This tug of war of word over PR with MS and its console is wearing very thin. I just want the games. Is that so hard to ask?
thank you^^ (thanking is needed when people make sense) too much beating around the bush...the true words are straight to the point and clear.. so tired of pr bs.
@True_Samurai this is true but the same can be said for x1 with games languishing under 30fps,deadrising less than 24fps, Tombraider drops below 25fps which is far more noticeable
@true samurai TR dipped to as low as 18 fps on xbox 1 .Ryse ran at 18 fps at 900p. Not to mention even COD ran at 720p on xbox one along with many other titles. Knack ran at 1080p. There are like 6 xbox one titles which run at 720p only . Bf4 ran at 60 fps 900p on ps4 and 720p 50 fps on xb1. cod after the patch runs at 30fps on xb1
@truesamurai Blame AMD.
@True_Samarai The order is not 800p. It's a 1080p game in a letterbox. 1920x800 (what you call 800p) is basically 1080p in a letter box.
@True_Samurai Actually it is as powerful as people claim, because it is more powerful than the X1, with much proof of the fact. Is there a valid argument to prove otherwise? Most games run well above 30 fps at 1080p also.
@dedicatedtogamers: Well said. 1080p at the cost of, say, good anti-aliasing is not something everyone would want. ESRAM is holding back the One in general but it isn't preventing 1080p...it just makes it harder to achieve without sacrifice elsewhere. Your's is the best post in this thread.
Devs may get xb1 games to 1080p, but I actually think that is unlikely. As PS4 tech improves it will become harder to get XB1 games to 1080p and have all the same bells and whistles as the PS4 version. This likely means xb1 games will keep the lower res in order to retain parity in other elements. After all the upscaler on the xb1 is pretty good. There is a reason MS is looking to further improve their upscaling tech.
@Irishguy95 Kinect is forced upon is the major problem. What if you had to buy a TV and it cost more cause it came with a blu ray player. But you could find another TV that performs better and doesn't have the blu ray player that you don't want or need and is alot cheaper, but gives you the option to buy a blu ray player if you want and use it on the TV. It's simple consumer logic, which would you buy?
The point is not as much as can the Xbox One do 1080p as much as why can't it do this now? Even the PS4 will sacrifice things like resolution (perhaps) in the future to achieve better fidelity in other areas, what's alarming is that the Xbox One already have to do this. It speaks to great lengths of just how far behind the Xbox One is. The ESRAM is too small for 1080 it's just maths, as a frame buffer any engine using deferred rendering won't be able to put through 1080p with any sizeable pixels (i.e graphical quality)
@Utalkin2me totally agree but you forgot to add something. The manufacture of the TV with the Blu-Ray player bought up Dream Works, 20th Century Fox and Orion Pictures. The only way to watch movies made by the aforementioned studios is to buy the low res TV with the Blu-Ray player.
I agree. 1080p output should be standard for X1/PS4 games. What's unacceptable (don't matter if you're a Microsoft or Sony fanboy) is that a less expensive console is more powerful then the more expensive console, and multiplat games look better on the cheaper console.
The more expensive console is more expensive because of a $149 add on. It has nothing to do with the internal spes as to why it's more expensive. You guys use the same argument over and over and over again and always fail to mention that the kinect is $150 if you needed to buy a replacement.
I think people forget the X1 is $100 more due to the Kinect camera being mandatory in the console. Without it, it would probably be the same or possibly even less then the PS4. You're paying more for the kinect, not specs. I don't have standards for games like you do, my only standard is fun. Sure 1080p looks nice, no doubt, but Ryse looks beautiful and is 900p. Their is much more than resolution when it comes to graphics, we all know that. Also, remember last gen, how poor the multiplats were on the PS3? They got better and were basically the same by the end of the generation when developers became familiar with the PS3s specs. Same is happening here, developers are not taking advantage of eSRAM, but they will over time. eSRAM is not going to make the X1 a more powerful system, PS4 will always hold that advantage, but the esram will help bring things up to where a lot of us are expecting/hoping for.
If the PS4 had a device of the same quality as Kinect boxed in it would be the same price. It's a REALLY stupid argument. It's like comparing 2 PC's then asking why the one that was bundled with a monitor is more expensive yet weaker. One of the low points of Sony fanboys this gen = Stupidity Edit - "Sony were going too"...and...they didn't. The PS eye is **** compared to kinect DK, so your argument is invalid. And even at that, Sony didn't want to take a loss. It's no different that MS including kinect as part of the X1. MS don't want to take a loss on Kinect. So no, they aren't giving it out for free. Saying Sony 'would have' is just stupid. They didn't. They didn't because it's a stupid business decision. Why aren't you moaning about Sony not giving the camera for free? Whats better is that you have the option whether you want the camera or not on PS4. But please don't try and say it's 400 quid versus 500 for a weaker console. The fact is you ARE paying for kinect when you buy an X1. The extra 100+ is NOT for the console itself. Again, it's the ****est argument i've heard in a while.
"If the PS4 had a device of the same quality as Kinect boxxed in it would be the same price. It's a REALLY stupid argument." BZZZZT Wrong. Sony were going to release the PS4 at $400 regardless of the camera or not. The only reason they didn't release it with the camera is because they didn't want to take the bigger hit by including it.
You do know it comes with a kinect? Of course you do.
@irishguy The fact that you as a consumer are FORCED to spend the extra $100 on the camera is a prime example of why ms is anti-consumer. "Kinect voice commands?" Let me do it through the headset... is another example.
@DragonKnight "Sony were going to release the PS4 at $400 regardless of the camera or not. The only reason they didn't release it with the camera is because they didn't want to take the bigger hit by including it." It doesn't matter what they were GOING to do. Sony didn't do it, and MS did. Doesn't change the FACT that there's more hardware included with an Xbox One than with a PS4, and that's the reason for the price difference.
I'd rather have 720p with good AA than 1080p with crappy AA, if it came to that.
The people replying to you are idiots Even if the Kinect wasn't included with the console and it was $400, the X1 would STILL be weaker than the PS4 AND its price wouldn't be justified because it costs as much as the more powerful console Its like a 50' 3DTV costing as much as a 50' 3D SMART TV. Regardless of if the former comes with a Bluray player for an extra price, the latter is still the better TV
I believe "come_bom" is right. Next Gen should be about 1080p. We have 1080p games on PS3/xbox360 already. When a $200 or less console can almost do what a $500 console can't is a shame. True next gen is 1080P, people defending all the sub games on Xbox One need to relook at the big picture. You paid $500 for a souped up Xbox360 with better TV watching capabilities. Microsoft was banking on TV watching as the new thing because of their success with apps on Xbox 360. They totally miscalculated the response to 1080p gaming. Now I own both consoles so I am not a fan boy. All the people that have come over to see both consoles all have said that the Xbox One does not look as good as PS4 as I also say. Games are still fun on Xbox One, just not quite next gen looking!
Yes it is more expensive because of Kinect, but does that really justify it? They could've included a coffee table with the PS4 for an additional $100, but would that make it worth it? No, because I don't need or want a coffee table. The Kinect camera is the SOLE reason that their console is more expensive and gimped on performance. I'm sorry, but it's the truth. I don't care which console or games you like better but you can't deny this. At least they should show you real reasons in games that it's worth the sacrifice. They keep pushing night vision, asteroids, rocket science and IR burst that can sense your heartbeat, but they've yet to show anything worth $100 and weaker multiplats yet. If they're gonna sell it they need to SELL it with stuff you can do, not PR jargon. I mean no offence to anyone who likes the X1 or Kinect, I just think they should start at least making the damn thing worth it for the people that are defending it so damn hard.. @pete007 And what percentage of that do you get? It's funny that these console wars have turned financial now too. You do realise that the money they're making is straight out of our wallets right? Not all the ways they make it are something to brag about either..
The EsRAM isn't what keeps the xb1 from having 1080p titles. It's the bottle neck that forces 1080p titles to sacrifice on other graphical areas. Even the WiiU CAN output at 1080p, but at what cost.
But you know that any 720p movie looks better than any 1080p game?
lol I'm curious to where you really got that from? All Blu-ray movies run at 1080p/24fps to get the best of your TV's movie viewing experience.
You could see it in trailers or tv series which are 720p, just want to say that resolution does not determine the graphic quality. So any game even at 1080p can't match the real world graphics in 720p. SO it is possible to make a 720p game that looks better that a 1080p it all really depends on texture, light quality, model quality, effects etc. not the resolution. But of course still ps4 is more powerful, so in any combination it could be better that xone.
I like how you the in 'depending on the genre'. Gotta keep towing the company line since'The Order' is not 60fps. Had it been, I'm sure The Order would be held up as another graphical achievement.
Your not a true gamer your more of a techy then
Your not a true gamer more of a techy then
http://jolamble.com/wordpre... That's all i'm reading at the minute. If you want revolutionary graphics in terms of quality, consoles are not the way to go, that's fact. if you want to get the shiny shiny shiny graphics, style over substance bollocks that you all seem to care about, get a PC and automatically win your "pride" (lol) back. I do NOT own a gaming PC, no where near actually. I own both next gen consoles and they're both graphically challenged compared to computers. It comes down to: The xbox one being confusing for developers when using it, that's all. it could run just the same amount of 1080p 60fps games as PS4 but as the developers say: "It's a pain in the ass." IN A FEW MONTHS, IT WILL BE CRACKED AND WILL BE RUNNING AT THE SHINY SHINY SHINY LEVEL, just as the ps4 already does. Don't argue, don't bicker its a draw!
Please don't bring PC into the comparison. It will always be unfair, we're comparing consoles only. My best analogy would be we've decided to compare say 2 $60000 sports cars on specs and you decide to come in and say well Ferrari's beat both. Yeah no kidding sherlocke, but, that is NOT what we're looking to compare.
That's why the arguments are bollocks and pointless.
Then why participate in a conversation you consider bollocks and pointless?
"it could run just the same amount of 1080p 60fps games as PS4" Sorry, but no. XB1 GPU is even a few steps below the PS4's. Not the mention DDR3 (XB1) vs GDDR5 (PS4) RAM. The bottom line is, XB1 will never be able to perform at the same level as the PS4, EVER. Inferior hardware will always be inferior hardware, no amount of anything can change that (aside from upgrading the hardware). With two identical games running on each console pushed to the peak of each consoles ability, the PS4 will ALWAYS win. Kind of like how 1+1 will always = 2.
I love how Phil Harrisson is now all a sudden,"a liar." But when he was working at Sony? Right.
eSRAM Being Too Small For 1080p Output Is "Clearly Not The Case" Clearly???.? So what is the problem phil And I'll ask you the same question. What is the problem then blaze? We've all seen the forza downgrade/difference between the jimmy fallon and the retail version. What the ef happened there? Can't blame ps fanboys for the bait n switch nor should you deflect about us believing this guy is being deceptive... the irony is forza is the proof of the struggles faced....
All PR people are liars in some way or form. And, most people who are in the eye of the public for a company are PR people. It's all about not really answering the question. The question isn't really if XBO can do 1080p. It's why it struggles to do it in comparison to its direct competitor. But, the answer is "Look at Forza and this other game" and then wiping their hands as if that solves everything. Sony has done similar things in the past and both will continue to do them going forward. It's like trying to get a straight answer out of a politician. Not gonna happen.
@cgoodno you like to see things that aren't there. Clearly. The question was, "esram on xbox one too small for 1080p output any thoughts on this?" and he answered with an appropriate answer. "No, we obviously have games out right now doing 1080p" with given examples. If the question was, "why does Xbox One struggle to output 1080p 60fps in comparison to PS4 as far as multi platform games go?", then maybe he would've answered that too.
You could at least get the name right...
No, Blaze929, the question was exactly: "@MrPhilHarrison recent interview with Rebellion Games states esram on xbox one too small for 1080p output any thoughts on this?" Note how it's specific to Rebellion Games and what they consider it for their own games. It's not just a "general" statement. It's specific to their games which is what Rebellion Games was talking about. If they say eSRAM is not enough for them to put their game out in 1080p, the answer isn't "Look at Forza". You can't compare two incomparable games to one another like that. He's side stepping the real question with a fluff answer.
Well said, cgoodno... Why not compare multiplatform games? Why does it always have to be, look at Forza 5 for the resolution and Ryse for the graphics? Why can't both of those 2 things be in one game? Because the Xbox One has to sacrifice to achieve those two things more than the PS4. Every time I see a blind person eat PR, I lose faith in humanity's ability to understand/point out simple and obvious lies and misdirection.
Adding more Cars in Forza 5 wouldn't effect its performance, it would still be 1080p 60fps.
I think he means more cars on the track at once. Meaning, more things happening at once and of which to keep track. Not more car options for you to drive.
I feel like MS messed up with making a derivative of the 7790, they should have went with 48-64MB for the ESram. Along with keeping the 14 cu's instead of 12.
Having more eSRAM won't solve the issue if the bottle neck is still there. That's their problem now. Not how much eSRAM, but getting things in and out of it fast enough.
regarding the CU's it's called Yield and that's why they have 12. Same as the PS4 starting with 20 and now has 18.
With more ESRAM MS would have got even less CU... The ESRAM takes lots of space on the chip, increase area and your yield will go DOWN making your price go UP. No ESRAM gives the most CUs for the same price... Having a fast memory on chip is not a bad idea, the problem is that SONY had a better idea. Lets guess what you got to do to fully utilize the ESRAM. 1. Render to the ESRAM (framebuffers) 2. Put models and compressed textures that is used in every frame in ESRAM (think arms and gun in a FPS, can always be rendered at best quality) 3. Retrieve textures rendered more than once on demand to the ESRAM 4. Load next such texture in background while using the first (built in "DMA" that does this). 5. Textures used only once gives less gain to preload. As you will use the data faster than it is loaded. The GPU will soon need to wait for textures. What this boils down to is - if your game is not heavily reusing models and textures - your practical memory bandwidth approaches not the sum of your bandwidths but your minimum... With the PS4 data can be used at full speed as soon as it has been read from disk. I think RPGs of 2014 (DAI, Witcher 3) will be the first real test of console hardware...
exactly 1080p should be the standard. i think dice would of got 1080p on ps4 with BF4 if EA didnt rush them and force to release an unfinished game. but 1080p standard and 60fps would be prefered
That can be said for most launch games. COD wouldn't be 720P on the X1, if the team wasn't rushed to make launch and wasn't spread too thin between 5 different versions and wasn't using incomplete xbox drivers.
Driving games CAN and always WILL be able to look better than other games. There is less going on and they can "trick" things into looking better because of the pace or speed you are moving at. Forza is a damn good series though, but won't ever prove a Consoles power. I mean Forza 2 STILL looks good.
No The Order for you?
Ps4 should see an even greater amount of games running 1080/60, and their memory set up surely allows for that. But do not be surprised when more demanding games down the line begin to run on lower resolutions, even on ps4. Battlefield already needed to run at 900.
I much prefer 60fps over 1080p. Smoother gameplay over sharper graphics anyday.
PS3 not being able to do 1080p due to RAM and GPU limitations is clearly not the case. I mean, Fl0w runs at 1080p. So does fl0wer. Pixeljunk monsters does too!