Top
220°

Battalion 1944 Dev On The Ongoing FPS/Resolution Debate Between PS4 And Xbox One: “It’s Frustrating”

One of the big things that has marked this generation of console gaming is the eternal quest for that elusive 1080p- it's this generation's version of 'blast processing,' a gimmick that ultimately amounts to nothing.

Read Full Story >>
gamingbolt.com
Oculus Quest Giveaway! Click Here to Enter
The story is too old to be commented.
Herbalistic1283d ago (Edited 1282d ago )

I feel the majority of gamers already know Xbox One problems come from Microsoft trying to build an all in one media box with motion control/voice..I've heard all about the DX12[API] and Pix[ESRAM] tool but none of that is going to change what the hardware could output..DX12 is going to help performance more on the PC side of hardware.

I have an old GTX570 and would love if some so called secret sauce could make it perform on the levels of current GPUs on the market.That's just wishful thinking and not based on the reality of what is possible / limits of hardware..The hardcore Xbox guys need to come down to reality and accept that PS4 will always offer better performance over Xbox One due to the hardware inside each box..Its really the fault of stupid podcast like BGST running around promoting DX12 as some magic bullet that would improve the hardware inside of Xbox One and make it somehow a super performance beast.

Phil Spencer:
"“On the DX12 question, I was asked early on by people if DX12 is gonna dramatically change the graphics capabilities of Xbox One and I said it wouldn’t. I’m not trying to rain on anybody’s parade, but the CPU, GPU and memory that are on Xbox One don’t change when you go to DX12. DX12 makes it easier to do some of the things that Xbox One’s good at, which will be nice and you’ll see improvement in games that use DX12, but people ask me if it’s gonna be dramatic and I think I answered no at the time and I’ll say the same thing.”

: http://wccftech.com/phil-sp...

That wasn't enough because some took it as Phil was lying & trying to downplay the improvements Dx12 would offer on the Xbox console.

DivoJones1282d ago

Well it really comes down to the specs of the hardware they chose to go with. It looks like the GPU is faster on the PS4 (capable of 1.8 teraflops instead of 1.3 on XB1) and they did go with DDR5 RAM while Xbox stuck with DDR3. The GPU disparity itself lends itself to why PS4 games are more likely to be stable at 1080p and Xbox tends to end up at 900p. Even freeing up the memory/processing of Kinect AND DX12 won't compensate for the GPU bus speed limitations compared to PS4. Neither console is using 'high-end' hardware that the other isn't, there's a reason these consoles are cheap. Hell I just spent more on my GTX 980 than either console.
(citing my spec source here: ( http://www.techradar.com/ne...
TL:DR - PS4 does render a higher resolution more consistently, and realistically you probably won't notice.
But if you search for resolution difference between 900p and 1080p, you'll have a hard time seeing the difference. That's the argument and the frustration from the argument.. there's less to see when it's 900p. Is it a deal-breaker? No. ( http://wccftech.com/ps4-108... Comparisons between resolutions.

donthate1282d ago

@DivonJones:

The difference in the grand scheme of things are so minor and as the next wave of mid-cycle upgrades comes, it will be even less. The resolution discussion will be moot, and we will focus on something else.

That said, a minor correction, it is GDDR5 and DDR3. The Xbox One GPU is slower than the PS4, but it has a faster CPU. Thus sometimes resolution doesn't tell the entire tale, i.e. in CPU bound games the Xbox excels. Again, in the grand scheme it is negligible, but there for flame wars.

TheCommentator1282d ago (Edited 1282d ago )

I can agree with most of what you said but the problem is not only, as you put it, "the hardcore Xbox guys" that think that the XB1 will be more powerful than the PS4. Matter of fact I don't really even see them anymore, not around here anyways.

What I do still see are some ignorant PS4 guys posting here, thinking that any comment about DX12 making it easier to do the things XB1 is good at means we think that DX12 is turning the XB1 into a PS4-crushing supercomputer. The same people seem to think that the moment that DX12 launched it would magically make games look better, in spite of the fact that there is evidence that patching DX12 into DX11 PC games isn't efficient (where DX12 is supposed to make a big difference), in spite of the fact that devs haven't been working with the toolset for long enough to make a game engine that supports it natively (which is where the efficiency of DX12 comes from), and in spite of the fact that the WDDM 2.0 kernel was needed to allow the XB1 GPU to communicate directly to any CPU core (which adds efficiency beyond just that of DX12) and allow for FL12.1 features to be enabled.

The truth falls somewhere in between both extremes, and the first native DX12 game we'll be able to compare to a PS4 game is going to be Deus Ex, not Battlefront (patched) as others here may try to lead us to believe. I would assume that Gears 4 and Forza Horizon 3 will be native DX12 also, given their release window, but maybe we'll find out at E3? I'm more interested to see how much the gap closes (or doesn't) when Deus Ex can finally be benchmarked. Everyone knows there will still be an advantage on PS4, but I personally believe that difference will be smaller compared to previous comparisons between platfroms.

RegorL1282d ago

Battlefront was not patched

"Star Wars Battlefront on XB1 uses DX12 on XB1 ever since launch"

https://twitter.com/repi/st...

Majin-vegeta1283d ago

Finally someone who tells it like it is.

Bobafret1282d ago

Seriously, what's to debate anymore? I think both sides are growing bored of the arguments.

donthate1282d ago

Yup, and by mid-cycle upgrade... the difference will be even less. It is already marginal, and soon there wont be much to talk about.

jmc88881282d ago (Edited 1282d ago )

Except 1080p is a real standard, a native resolution, and going below that is DEFINITELY a tangible downgrade.

To call it the same as blast processing is dumb as all hell.

It makes a difference, because there is a tangible difference.

To say that being below 1080p is a 'gimmick', is just bad rationalization.

You can say TO SOME it doesn't mean alot. You can say you might prefer FPS to resolution.

But to say that it simply doesn't matter, is a gimmick, and not tangible is either pure ignorance or lying. Or just being dumb as a bag of dog excrement.

The answer to nuanced question isn't to downplay the question with sophistry.

Jesus what a 1st grade dunce cap argument.

The developer in this is pretty stupid. He's basically saying he doesn't like being stuck between a rock and a hard place. That's understandable.

It's clear they want a certain level of graphics and framerate, but that he gets hated on for not having the resolution up to standards. That IS THE FAULT OF HARDWARE... or bad coding. Or both.

It can also be planning. Some engines are easy to hit 1080p on the consoles or at least one. If they chose to go with one that didn't, maybe because of cost, that's still a decision they made.

It's important to match native resolution and keep a level of graphics and framerate. If you can't you will be called on it from some that accurately state it is inferior. Because it IS.

But 1080p is NOT HARD TO HIT. Jesus, people on PC were gaming 1600x1200 around the turn of the century. That would be 4:3 1200p.

Overall to ignore all this and claim that 1080p doesn't matter is simply a fool talking out of their butt. The 'tradeoff' isn't one where it is impossible to meet this with tech out there. It's that their combined choices with that of relatively weak hardware (which is what 1.3 and 1.8 TFlops WAS at launch) create a situation where they had to make many more tradeoffs THEN THEIR CUSTOMERS WANTED.

Customers KNOW 1080p/60 with decent graphics isn't hard to do. But it also shows you that Sony and especially Microsoft made it much harder on these guys. Instead of directing it at themselves or them, they blame 1080p.

If you want to solve the problem, first you have to KNOW WHAT THE PROBLEM IS. Blaming 1080p won't get you anywhere, because a real, native standard (one that is basically already been passed by) isn't what caused you to have bad performance or give you a razor thin power margin to accomplish your goals.

It's like when the AZ elections idiot decreased the number of voting locations by 2/3rd's in Phoenix, and then blamed the voters for showing up as the reasons the lines were long.

Seriously people, learn to think. This dev certainly does need to learn how to. It's not the standard, it's all the decisions that made it hard to reach.

donthate1282d ago

JM:

You completely missed the point. Any game can be made to run at 1080p at 60fps, or even 4k at 60fps. The point is you have to lower the graphics and FX to do that. Is it worth the trade off is the developers job.

Focusing on tangible differences, resolution beyond 720p has the least impact compared to stable frame rate, good game, and even artistic direction. Focusing on resolution is stupid!

dcbronco1282d ago

JM you're looking at the whole argument from your standpoint. You might be able to recognize the difference between 1080 and 900p. I would bet I could. But many, if not most, can't. I've seen first hand people with HD at home and a brand new higher end TV watch standard definition. Again and again. Here's something you probably know that most probably won't, most of the cable boxes on the market after 1080p broadcasting started weren't even capable of 1080p. So will watching a 1080 signal on a 1080 TV the majority never realized they weren't getting 1080p. You can't view this debate through your eyes. For most people this is a non-issue. Including most that say it is because they are only complaining as part of a crowd. Placed in a room with several TVs and various sources most would be dead if their life depended on picking five out of five 1080p signals. It's no different than people jumping on the uncompressed sound argument last generation. That they listened to on their TV speakers or some $300 system in a box. Audiophiles care about uncompressed sound because they have a $600 amp for each speaker and the speaker cost $1600 each. The vast majority are just sold on hype.

hardcorehenry1282d ago

At the beginning of this gen I bought a bunch of multiplats on my PS4 because of the power difference and its supposed benifits. Ultimately many of those games went more ignored than they should have. Some I ended up trading in to EB rebuying for my Xbox.

I learned the hard way that some minor difference in power means nothing to me. All the byching and moaning amounts to people who are dissatisfied with what they have. There is very little perceptible difference.

hiawa231282d ago

I agree, I started this gen doing the same, buying multiplats on the PS4 but when smarten up, played both copies of the games, that minute difference did not make the games better to me so I went back to buying on X1. If 1080/60 is the target this gen then it seems Sony &MS are smart to release enhanced versions of their consoles, so I am looking forward to the Neo, and whateva MS calls the refreshed X1.

hardcorehenry1282d ago

agree, I'm excited to see the new hardware too.

Show all comments (16)