By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
 

?

1080p 158 30.80%
 
60fps 289 56.34%
 
Results 65 12.67%
 
Total:512
Dr.EisDrachenJaeger said:
JoeTheBro said:
Dr.EisDrachenJaeger said:

I dont know what Sony is on, but that piece of tech is just asking for a "virtual boy"

And lol lips sealed.

My ass bro. My rear arse..


I'm not saying or meaning to hint Sony is making a vr headset. I wouldn't dare break an nda on something as big as a potential hardware announcement. I am posting the article because it's exactly what he was talking about. Nothing more.

 

Are you just upset at me because you're not an insider like you act?

Why would I be upset about NASA?
I dont work for Sony.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aPutfGcuqak


NASA is unrelated to the eye tracking.

You don't work with Nintendo either.



Around the Network
JoeTheBro said:
Dr.EisDrachenJaeger said:
JoeTheBro said:
Dr.EisDrachenJaeger said:

I dont know what Sony is on, but that piece of tech is just asking for a "virtual boy"

And lol lips sealed.

My ass bro. My rear arse..


I'm not saying or meaning to hint Sony is making a vr headset. I wouldn't dare break an nda on something as big as a potential hardware announcement. I am posting the article because it's exactly what he was talking about. Nothing more.

 

Are you just upset at me because you're not an insider like you act?

Why would I be upset about NASA?
I dont work for Sony.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aPutfGcuqak


NASA is unrelated to the eye tracking.

You don't work with Nintendo either.

I work in a studio mate.



Dr.EisDrachenJaeger said:

I work in a studio mate.


secretaries dont count



Max King of the Wild said:
Dr.EisDrachenJaeger said:

I work in a studio mate.


secretaries dont count

Secretaries dont know Ruby.



It depends on the game. The biggest thing is if i notice drops. Other besides that 1080 all the way. Lucky we are close to having the best of both worlds at launch, it will only get better from here out.



Around the Network

Outside of fighting games, 1080p easily.



4 ≈ One

Dr.EisDrachenJaeger said:
kupomogli said:

As long as framerate is 30fps with no frame drops then I'm fine with it.

I'd rather a game be 720p with better graphics than worse graphics but able to push 1080p.

So if 720/30 can get us better looking games, I'd take that over 1080/30, 720/60, and 1080/60. 


Sometimes I wonder why people rationalize things this way?

Imo  I consider particle effects to be dumb as hell, but you do know that a 1080p image will always be cleaner. No jaggies is always good.  And they're are a variety of effects you can maintain in 1080p at that res.

Long as you dont have shitty ground textures, and is clean/pretty to look at you're good.(Having good character models is also important) You dont need any more than that. Its better for meshing and interacting with the environemnt as well.

Graphics cards can only move data so fast.  You could move four times the amount of data in a 720p/30fps game than you can in a 1080p/60fps game, making it potentially four times better looking.  Well, not exactly four times because you'd have to take away from the degradation you receive losing 1080p.  The game might also be designed to reduce screen size, so removing 1080p resolution might zoom everything in by two, it'll look the same aside from everything being zoomed in(which I actually don't like in games.)



Depends what they want to do. Dead Rising 3 could run at 1080p and 60FPS if they cut out half the Zombies on screen. Sometimes having none of it isnt a bad thing.

I would choose Framerate over resolution because anything higher then 720p is sharp enough.



JoeTheBro said:
SvennoJ said:

You can ease the rendering load if you have reliable pupil tracking, the human eye only sees sharp in a 6 degree field of view, the rest of your 120 degree visual field is peripheral vision which is more sensitive to motion and flicker but has very poor resolution. So if you render in the highest resolution in a 10 degree field of view with 60fps, and render the rest in low resolution with 240fps, you probably get pretty far in tricking the brain that's it's close to real life. (Assuming the pupil tracking doesn't have significant lag...)

My lips are sealed, but I can post links all I want.

http://www.playstationlifestyle.net/2013/11/14/playstations-rd-magic-lab-teases-eye-tracking-on-ps4-partners-with-nasa-for-ps4-content/

To come back to the gaze tracking, if it can work without noticeable lag, rendering 2 x 720p can net you the illusion of full 4K resolution.
Render 1 big picture in 1280x720, upscale it x 3 to 3840x2160. Render a detailed rectangle where you are currently looking, also at 1280x720 and put that at 1:1 pixel mapping on top of the upscaled image in the right place. Add some nice blending around the edges and the eye should not be able to tell the difference as long as you sit close enough to have a 30 degree field of view of the display. Which would be sitting at 1.6 times the diagonal screen size, for example max 8ft from a 60" 4k display, or 3ft from a 24" 4K monitor.

That's still 11% less pixels to render then 1080p (although it involves some upscaling and blending) With eye tracking 4K doesn't have to cost anything over 1080p rendering.

Scale it back to 1080p displays, take 2 640p images to create 1080p60 at the same cost as full 1080p30. And it shouldn't mattter if you sit upto 2.5 x diagonal away from the display. (9 ft from a 42" 1080p screen)

It will look weird to onlookers though, but such a 4k illusion mode is in reach with current consoles.



Gameplay "feel" depends much more on fps than on resolution so to me this is a no-brainer.