Xenostar said: walsufnir said: Xenostar said: So you dont think first party devs on the whole squeeze more out of consoles, Naughty Dog, Stanta Monica and new Halo guys would disagree, if studios dedicated to one console cant get more out of a game than devs having to balance multiple platforms, something is wrong.  Apologies Crytek arent MS dev, but they are working exclusivley on XBox One with Ryse and there also a very talented developer, it should be very worrying that they are sub 1080 and sub 60 frames In which way worrying? Image quality is not only dependant on resolution. I am worried about Driveclub's 30 fps but this of course a design decision (but still I want to play it). Obviously these technical issues dont effect gamplay, but we were promised 1080p last gen to not get it this gen is rediculously disapointing, if its not about graphics at all and all about gameplay why release a new console especially at the cost of these things.  If both these new consoles are majority sub 1080p, sorry i will be going back to PC gaming on the whole. Right now i still have hope for PS4 but XBone hope is fading fast.  For the money im spending i want high resolution and stable framerates, not another gen of compromises.

 

Go back to PC. I told everyone before spec-release: If you want much better graphics and 1080p and 60 fps and decent AA you won't get it on next-gen consoles.

orniletter said: Voltarenking said: orniletter said:   The reason people are so "upset" and bashing on Ryse/Microsoft is cause of all those damn Promises. Would they have said "Yeah its a launch game and we are still learning the hardware - 900p will be probably realistic but we will be able to push it to 1080p with upscaling" NO one would complain except haters. But they promised heaven on earth.And right now being honest would help them more than that even if they accept there games won't run on that level they want to directly on launch Oh, you are right ! I remember the Gaf leaker saying that XBone games will look worse and worse over the next few months (when we are nearing launch)...and that seems to be the case ! ...I just hate this attitude from some of the Sony guys that act like the PS4 is powerful enough to render God´s face in real time in 400 bajillion p... ...I´m not a MS-guy btw...like at all

Im not the gaf people or the internet.Im not even on the same train as some people here.
I just know a lot of people that are thinking the same like me cause i work parttime in retail,mostly with games.
If it would be possible i would say directly screw consoles and give me everything for PC so i can play the stuff with Ultra Max Godlike Settings if i want to invest in such hardware.
Im more the guy "Damn i want the best value for my money" without getting punched in the face for betting on the false horse.

walsufnir said: Xenostar said: walsufnir said: Xenostar said: So you dont think first party devs on the whole squeeze more out of consoles, Naughty Dog, Stanta Monica and new Halo guys would disagree, if studios dedicated to one console cant get more out of a game than devs having to balance multiple platforms, something is wrong.  Apologies Crytek arent MS dev, but they are working exclusivley on XBox One with Ryse and there also a very talented developer, it should be very worrying that they are sub 1080 and sub 60 frames In which way worrying? Image quality is not only dependant on resolution. I am worried about Driveclub's 30 fps but this of course a design decision (but still I want to play it). Obviously these technical issues dont effect gamplay, but we were promised 1080p last gen to not get it this gen is rediculously disapointing, if its not about graphics at all and all about gameplay why release a new console especially at the cost of these things.  If both these new consoles are majority sub 1080p, sorry i will be going back to PC gaming on the whole. Right now i still have hope for PS4 but XBone hope is fading fast.  For the money im spending i want high resolution and stable framerates, not another gen of compromises.    Go back to PC. I told everyone before spec-release: If you want much better graphics and 1080p and 60 fps and decent AA you won't get it on next-gen consoles.

Ill wait for PS4 show cases first, i do prefer console gaming, i do have a beasty PC already i just dont like to game in the other room, other than for Skyrim of course :D

This thread should be closed, I can see users are getting worked up. That or reword the OP.

Xenostar said: walsufnir said: Xenostar said: walsufnir said: Xenostar said: So you dont think first party devs on the whole squeeze more out of consoles, Naughty Dog, Stanta Monica and new Halo guys would disagree, if studios dedicated to one console cant get more out of a game than devs having to balance multiple platforms, something is wrong.  Apologies Crytek arent MS dev, but they are working exclusivley on XBox One with Ryse and there also a very talented developer, it should be very worrying that they are sub 1080 and sub 60 frames In which way worrying? Image quality is not only dependant on resolution. I am worried about Driveclub's 30 fps but this of course a design decision (but still I want to play it). Obviously these technical issues dont effect gamplay, but we were promised 1080p last gen to not get it this gen is rediculously disapointing, if its not about graphics at all and all about gameplay why release a new console especially at the cost of these things.  If both these new consoles are majority sub 1080p, sorry i will be going back to PC gaming on the whole. Right now i still have hope for PS4 but XBone hope is fading fast.  For the money im spending i want high resolution and stable framerates, not another gen of compromises.    Go back to PC. I told everyone before spec-release: If you want much better graphics and 1080p and 60 fps and decent AA you won't get it on next-gen consoles. Ill wait for PS4 show cases first, i do prefer console gaming, i do have a beasty PC already i just dont like to game in the other room, other than for Skyrim of course :D

I also prefer console gaming a lot :D And I do think PS4 is more powerful than Xbone but the constant shitting on Xbone is ridiculous. No matter what game renders which resolution which is only worth for console wars the IQ has much more variables than the resolution.

ironmanDX said: Azerth said: froza 5 is native 1080p at 60frams It is. It's weird that Crytek couldn't get Ryse to do the same. Forza 5 looks just as incredible, if not more so. It must have been during the time they started to convert the game to a "core" title and choosing the controller as the main input device. Must have just ran out of time.

I wouldn't have thought a racing game is as demanding as a game with many high quality characters with lots of animations within the same location (not seen many videos of Ryse so I don't know what number of characters we are talking about - but if it's a lot then that's a lot of work). But there are more tricks you can do in a racing game - cars out of sight, reducing graphic quality/physics etc. 

"Microsoft has revealed that Xbox One launch title Ryse is not running at native 1080p.

Aaron Greenberg, chief of staff for the Devices and Studios Group, tweeted that the game will actually be running at "900p". Greenberg confirmed 1080p rendering for showpiece title Forza Motorsport 5, but it's already known that Killer Instinct - somewhat surprisingly - has targeted an internal 720p rendering resolution.

While some might be disappointed that some of the firm's first party exclusives aren't running at full HD, the situation is somewhat reminiscent of the Xbox 360 launch, where key titles like Project Gotham Racing 3 and Perfect Dark Zero failed to hit the native 720p target that Microsoft mandated in its own technical requirements.

In the case of Xbox One, the system's graphical performance level has been something of a moving target since near-final silicon shipped to developers - clock-speeds on the CPU and GPU have increased, while the software-side driver has seen considerable revision. Bearing in mind that games take upwards of two years to develop, decisions on rendering resolutions must surely have been taken prior to the console's hardware spec being set in stone.

Developer sources have also suggested that the 32MB of ESRAM - the fast scratchpad memory for high-speed graphics processing - may favour lower resolution render targets. This is a topic we hope to return to soon with some hard data from on-the-record sources.

So what does the reduction to resolution actually mean for image quality? It's a topic we recently covered in our article on how Xbox One games can compete with PS4, using Crysis 3 - one of the most visually rich of PC titles - as our test-bed. Coincidentally, this game hails from the same developer as Ryse and is based on the same underlying CryEngine technology. For the purposes of this test, we've assumed that "900p" sees the same level of scaling on the x-axis too, giving us a 1600x900 framebuffer.

While we'd clearly prefer 1080p as a target resolution, it's safe to say that the reduction in quality isn't quite as impactful as you might expect in these shots - surprising bearing in mind that we're looking at a one-third drop in overall resolution. In motion, larger, upscaled pixels may be more noticeable but persistent on-screen elements - like the HUD - are likely to be rendered at native 1080p.

The takeaway from our testing with the detail-rich Crysis 3 was that the situation isn't as much of an issue as it is on current-gen console, where sub-720p imagery can look really grim, particularly in concert with post-process anti-aliasing. Clearly though, final judgement on multi-platform next-gen titles that employ different resolutions will be reserved for our hands-on comparisons with final retail code.

Upscaling has come a long way since the current-gen consoles launched in 2005/2006, and we can imagine that developers of both Xbox One and to a lesser extent PS4 titles will employ sub-native framebuffers to hit their performance targets, especially in first-gen games. Given the choice between a consistent gameplay experience at 900p or 1080p with a frame-rate hit, we'd take the smoother performance every time."

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-ryse-runs-at-900p

The rest of the pixels are in the cloud, waiting for you to download.

It's a shame that people are complaining so much, it's early days yet and it will take time for devs to get the handle on these new consoles. There is no guarantee that the PS4 will not have similar problems with certain games.

What I would say though is that I would be less worried about Ryse being 900p considering the work it is doing and more concerned about Killer Instinct. 720p for a game like that is more worrying. But again these are 3rd parties, so would expect better from 1st parties and improvements from 3rd parties in the future.

since i don't plan on getting ryse or forza once i am buying a xbox one (which will be, if it ever happens, very late because i will get a wii u first), i am not really caring that much for the resolution of these games.

but the order not running in 1080p? boo! well i suggest i should wait for gameplay material but the fact that there are still games coming out that won't deliver full hd is not so cool.