Should 900p and 60fps be the base line now instead 1080p?

[Solid-Stark]

sergiodaly said:

Solid-Stark said:
I don't think base PS4 is powerful enough to do 900p60 across most titles. Not without significantly lowering game detail to a point of blandness.

720p60 would be possible.

IMO Sony should have made standards since the beginning.

Base PS4: 720p60; 1080p30

PS4 Pro: 1080p60; 1440pC30;

@bold   what? BF4 and SW Battlefront are 900p 60fps and don't tell me the detail is lowered and bland...

edit: also, U4 MP is 900p 60fps and that is far from the adjectives you used...

See my other post, and Pemalite's on page 2.

ehh I'd have to disagree with you there. First, you mention BF1 and SWB MP. These can stick to 900p60 (and not constant mind you) because it's a restrictive map. Pay atention to draw distance, textures, detail across the map, or the environment outside the map. Pretty bland for a reason. But what about the campaign (BF1)? Dynamic resolutions that go below 900p in order to push more detail. Again for a reason.

Heck I can bring up my own example too. Titanfall 2 looks great but then look at the "barriers" of the map. Or the textures at a distance (anistropic filtering). Thats why it can target 60fps; the lowered details are all around. And similarly to BF1, campaign has dynamic resolution below 900p to target higher details. 

Unchated 4 is on a similar boat. The detail in MP looks great sure (better than the others mentioned imo), but the resolution is noticeable and the textures suffer compared to the campaign. Personaly I'd have the campaign's IQ over the MP. And don't forget the new Survival mode, 900p30 mind you.

Just because some games do it in MP doesn't mean they can design the whole game around the same performance. SP components will always draw more out of the hardware and it's up to design to showcase what you can do with limited resources.