Which is marketing talk for "we couldn't get an acceptable FPS rate with 1080p".
I don't know why people keep saying this. Even the concept art is at that aspect ratio.
It's a design decision.
Which is marketing talk for "we couldn't get an acceptable FPS rate with 1080p".
Which is marketing talk for "we couldn't get an acceptable FPS rate with 1080p".
Maybe. I can imagine it being a decision though.Which is marketing talk for "we couldn't get an acceptable FPS rate with 1080p".
Nah. They have more than enough headroom anyway. The game is reported to currently run at 60fps, or close to anyway (average around 50fps). They're targeting 30fps so they have a lot of wiggle room for polish and added visual clarity.
No. You don't set your gaming resolution at concept stage for technical reasons.
I think calling it a 'filmic' effect is too vague. By nature, anything 16:10 or even 16:9 could be called that.
I think a more accurate description would be, they are really going for a Lawrence of Arabia -esque 'CinemaScope' effect; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CinemaScope
I think it's smart as it serves both the role of giving their visuals a more cinematic quality, as well as the obvious performance boost provided by the lower resolution without the problem of scaling artifacts. It will STILL turn some people off given the mandatory black bars, however, so it still represents a compromise.
I don't know why people keep saying this. Even the concept art is at that aspect ratio.
It's a design decision.
No I want to see it universally applied. Optional features always come of halfbaked.They ought to make it an option then, if there's no technical issues( like with GT PSP StuBurns mentioned). For many people the black bars are an issue no matter how you try to justify it.
That doesn't really make sense.They ought to make it an option then, if there's no technical issues( like with GT PSP StuBurns mentioned). For many people the black bars are an issue no matter how you try to justify it.
They ought to make it an option then, if there's no technical issues( like with GT PSP StuBurns mentioned). For many people the black bars are an issue no matter how you try to justify it.
Donkey Kong Country: Tropical Freeze: Most likely <1080p.
Indications here:
http://press.nintendo.com/articles.jsp?id=39287
Wind Waker HD = "beautiful HD 1080p graphics"
Donkey Kong Country: Tropical Freeze = "beautiful HD graphics"
Also, there are other hints of a <1080p resolution, like the fact that the E3 press images were not in 1080p for DKC:TF but were in 1080p for Wind Waker HD.
rbanke said:Why, because some people don't like it?
They ought to make it an option then, if there's no technical issues( like with GT PSP StuBurns mentioned). For many people the black bars are an issue no matter how you try to justify it.
What?
That all points to dktf being 720p
Eww, if the final game looks like that I'll seriously reconsider buying the game. That barely looks better than Infamous 1 or 2.
The image won't look sharp if the resolution does not match the resolution of your display. It will look like shit.
Which is marketing talk for "we couldn't get an acceptable FPS rate with 1080p".
No I want to see it universally applied. Optional features always come of halfbaked.
Eww, if the final game looks like that I'll seriously reconsider buying the game. That barely looks better than Infamous 1 or 2.
The image won't look sharp if the resolution does not match the resolution of your display. It will look like shit.
You must be used to poorly developed games. Some games support their optional features quite well.
The point isnt about Ryse looking amazing or looking meh, the point is Ryse would look even better at 1080p. And that's not even an opinion, its a fact.Wut? Is sweeping, blind statements your thing? Ryse looks amazing, even PS4 fans would agree. Credit should be given where its due. FYI Infamous looks even better.
The game hasn't even reached alpha. It's more than a year away from release. Logically, your argument has no basis at all.Which is marketing talk for "we couldn't get an acceptable FPS rate with 1080p".
What?
That all points to dktf being 720p
Then stick with PC?
No one is buying consoles for graphics but for exclusives, cost and convenience.
Which is marketing talk for "we couldn't get an acceptable FPS rate with 1080p".
They ought to make it an option then, if there's no technical issues( like with GT PSP StuBurns mentioned). For many people the black bars are an issue no matter how you try to justify it.
Can't believe a game like Killer Instinct gonna be 720p only, given the low graphics workload of 1vs1 fight games compared with other genres. Can be called laziness of the developers, or just a time-rushed game development for X1 launch?
Nah, in most cases, developers specifically said what resolution the game is running at.
Is The Order The only PS4 game thats sub HD?
It's not full HD but it's not sub HD. Resolution is 1:1 to a 1080p display.Is The Order The only PS4 game thats sub HD?
I suspect they are also widening the FOV by pulling back the camera ... not just adding letter boxing. So what they reduce in fillrate requirements, they increase in geometry, AI, etc.It's a combination of the two. It gives the game a cinematic feel, but it also greatly reduces the number of pixels needing to be processed (25% less).
I suspect they are also widening the FOV by pulling back the camera ... not just adding letter boxing. So what they reduce in fillrate requirements, they increase in geometry, AI, etc.
Obviously this is assuming they did it for gameplay reasons.
Then stick with PC?
No one is buying consoles for graphics but for exclusives, cost and convenience.
I should try running a performance test on one of the Dead Space games to see the performance difference between 16:9 and 2.40:1 since they actually implement 2.40:1 support perfectly.
Increasing FOV doesnt affect FPS in any meaningful way on PC, at least i havent noticed any visible difference in any game. Reducing resolution though, thats another story.
Of course, but only be a very small amount (unless you go for an insanely high, fish-eye FOV which is just ugly).Increasing FOV will increase the amount of visible elements and as such will affect the render time.
Increasing FOV will increase the amount of visible elements and as such will affect the render time.
1920x1080 cl_fov = 55 --- 31.9 fps
1920x1080 cl_fov = 70 --- 31.2 fps
1920x800 cl_fov = 55 --- 39.4 fps
1920x800p cl_fov = 70 --- 39.2 fps
Ryse does look amazing in the recently released footage. Unfortunately, that's not what the game's going to look like, because that stuff is native 1080p and Ryse is really 900p. Will anything besides resolution be downgraded when we actually see the game? There's no way to tell (though the included "This does not represent final game quality" warning is suggestive).Ryse looks amazing, even PS4 fans would agree. Credit should be given where its due.
Um, plenty of people are buying the new consoles for graphics.
A console is a bit overpriced for getting just 1-2 games because the developer/publisher is too much of an asshole to not port it to the PC.
Literally the only reason I ever use my consoles is because of this reason. Otherwise I play it on my PC where I can get good control schemes and graphics.
If Sony/MS wants to drag me away from my pc, they need to at least appeal to my interests.
But thats insubstantial in comparison to decreasing resolution.
Examples with quite advanced rendering info displayed from CE 3.5 SDK:
You can also notice that fov 70 in 1080p gives about the same horizontal visibility as fov 55 in 1920x800.
Sorry for chromatic aberration, but i've changed shading options before shots and forgot to set it up again to 0.5 [its 1.5 by default on every shading settings ;\]
===
@Liabe Brave
Crytek's games are always upgraded visually in comparison to earlier showings, not downgraded.