This sounds like a cool novel rendering technique. A parallel could be drawn to a video codec like on Blu-ray, which does not store 100% native 1080p images either, it stores a highly compressed version and motion vectors to reconstruct a 1080p image from multiple temporal frames. Are we going to say Blu-ray or any video for that matter is not true HD?  Do you want the Blu-ray box to say (compressed temporal-interpolated 1080p to be totally accurate) ?

This is not an storage problem, the analogy is invalid. Next thing we will read is that snes games interpolated with HQx4 filters and with black bars to fill the framebuffer are native 1080p games.

So basically they used a technique that allowed them to achieve native 1080p without it being what would traditionally be considered native 1080p. It's not 1080p upscaled from a lower resolution but it's not 1080p rendered in a single frame either. I'm assuming this was done because framerates higher than 30fps would not have been possible in Killzone's multiplayer if they went for true native 1080p. So they went for a more complex solution to achieve that resolution with higher framerates to make up for what they couldn't do with raw hardware power.

I would disagree with you but as an Xbox fan, considering how this generation has gone so far, I'd say you're probably an expert on the subject by now.

This sounds really complicated, and quite demanding actually...

Funny how they need to do some damage control now to (and because of) the same exact people who started shit about resolution... Now, the same people thinks that it is "okay" and not a big deal as it does not fit their agenda anymore :)

The game looks great and the majority of people do not care what is the native resolution or any other non-native tricks they are using to render it... I hope they (resolution drama queens out there) are going to feel a bit sad/uncomfortable now that even a Sony studio needs to waste precious time to do damage control over nothing...

It wasn't acceptable to a lot of Xbox fans until reality slapped them in the face that their platform was running games at lower native resolutions to maintain good framerate. Back when they thought their console could handle 1080p just fine and they thought they had more native 1080p games than PS4 all you heard was laughter from them. Turns out not even "cloud power" would help. How many threads ran about "secret sauce" that would push X1 ahead and how much denial was there over Call of Duty not being native 1080p? How many times did we hear insistence that Titanfall would run native 1080p until it was revealed that's not happening? How often do we keep hearing about how DirectX and new devkits are going to change it? Turns out it does matter. It's the pot calling the kettle black. It's a victim mentality that many in the Xbox fanbase have developed because reality sucks and they don't want to admit they were wrong.

Bit of an exhageration, but I'm not saying it is like native 1080p.  It's pretty clear it's equivalent to 1080i with a good deinterlacer, which can produce around 1080p quality for static or predictable motion, or would have 1080i blurriness in fast changing or flashing scenes.

It is 1080p just like the MP IS 60 FPS.  GG is just too honest.

For instance COD usually runs in the upper 40's, but they act like it's 60.  GG on the other hand tells the full truth and says that there may be dips.

At the end of the day it is 1080p.  If this isn't 1080p, then the PS3 doesn't have 7 cores (Hint: it does, but some fanboys argue otherwise on technicalities). 

I thought they were "sub-cores" , no?

"The PS3 has a general logic (PPE) PowerPC main controller and 7 SPE "sub-cores." These sub-cores are not general logic cores - unlike Core 2 Duo's "2" cores or 360's "3" cores... Therefore they cannot function independently without the main core "

Not being a fanboy either, just trying to understand the tech a bit.