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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Watch Dogs: 900p PS4, 792p X1, both 30fps

walsufnir said:


I said this when the new gen was on horizon. We can't have 1080p60 *and* a significant increase on visual fidelity. Cross-gen games perhaps, Indies too, but not AAA games made for new gen.

I'd be fine with >=720p, good AA, *stable* fps and a decent increase in visual fidelity. We survived several gens of gaming with sub hd-resolutions and we will survive this gen easily with it.


I'm sure the games will be fine, I just figured 8-9 years of technology along would see us not worry about certain issues for a while. Oh well.



Around the Network
kowenicki said:
Imaginedvl said:
setsunatenshi said:


If you are being honest, we clearly have very distinct visual standards. At least concede that you would never pick the visual inferior version if you had the chance to get the better one, all other things being equal.

If you can admit that much I think we can leave it at that :)

Well yah if both platform had Xbox One controllers, Xbox Live and the ability to switch on my Skype/TV on the fly (all other things being equal); of course I would pick 900p over 792p :)
Pretty sure Kowenicki would do the same!


Yeah, but those factors are a deal breaker for me.  So the One it is.

Oh yah and we are on the same boat... Will never trade those perks for that difference in resolution.



jonathanalis said:
So, they waited 2 weeks to launch to confirm this, most ps4 owners that pre-ordered it to tell everybody his console is superior cos it would run in 1080p 60fps...

Meanwhile, MK8 is doing 1080(?) 60, and with stunning visuals on the weak wii U.


I dont get the joke.



Augen said:
walsufnir said:


I said this when the new gen was on horizon. We can't have 1080p60 *and* a significant increase on visual fidelity. Cross-gen games perhaps, Indies too, but not AAA games made for new gen.

I'd be fine with >=720p, good AA, *stable* fps and a decent increase in visual fidelity. We survived several gens of gaming with sub hd-resolutions and we will survive this gen easily with it.


I'm sure the games will be fine, I just figured 8-9 years of technology along would see us not worry about certain issues for a while. Oh well.


Devs could easily decide for 1080p60 or 1080p30 for every game but only with sacrifices.

Also, as I said in GAF currently people think every cycle in a console is spent for rendering images which is false. You also have game mechanics and it seems watch_dogs allows a lot of of interacting with the world which can eat up a good amount of cycles which are not available for rendering.



Imaginedvl said:
setsunatenshi said:
kowenicki said:

It is very marginally (not clearly) visually inferior.   The game is the same. 

Its not bad news unless you count pixels as you game.


If you are being honest, we clearly have very distinct visual standards. At least concede that you would never pick the visual inferior version if you had the chance to get the better one, all other things being equal.

If you can admit that much I think we can leave it at that :)

Well yah if both platform had Xbox One controllers, Xbox Live and the ability to switch on my Skype/TV on the fly (all other things being equal); of course I would pick 900p over 792p :)
Pretty sure Kowenicki would do the same!

fair enough and even though I don't feel remotely the same I can respect the preference for the 'side' perks you may have. but the discussion was based on one same game at very different resolutions. I might be spoiled, but I honestly can't understand how it's possible to not look at something like 1080p, 900p, 760p, 720p and not see a difference. If you don't have some blurry vision there's a distinct difference for the better, the higher resolution you'll get. It is NOT irrelevant, that's all i'm trying to say.



Around the Network

"Xbox One controllers, Xbox Live and the ability to switch on my Skype/TV on the fly"

uh..okay.
maybe you should spend more time with the DS4 and PSN.



setsunatenshi said:
jonathanalis said:
So, they waited 2 weeks to launch to confirm this, most ps4 owners that pre-ordered it to tell everybody his console is superior cos it would run in 1080p 60fps...

Meanwhile, MK8 is doing 1080(?) 60, and with stunning visuals on the weak wii U.


are you comparing Watch Dogs graphical demands to Mario Kart? did you even attempt to think before writing that?

everyone knows that W_D is way more graphical demanded than MK, but knows also that wii U is far weak than PS4/one.

Is not a surprise to see a high demand graphic game achieve 1080p on ps4, and its comom to see a 720p game on Wii U, even not high graphic demand game.

 

So, it is really an oddity.

 



kowenicki said:
Zekkyou said:

I remember the crap Sony pulled at E3 2005 with the target render trailers, but i have no recollection of them ever creating a fake playable demo and claiming it to be real. I might be wrong on that, but to the best of my knowledge they've never done that.

Eight days.  100% fake.

That wasn't playable though was it? An obvious target render sure (though a much more reasonable one than for Killzone 2, the Eight Days render was at least surpassed by actual games), but it's a playable demo i have no recollection of them faking. It's just those irritating target renders they used to be guilty of (which thankfully is a habit they've grown out of).



kowenicki said:
Porcupeth said:
"Xbox One controllers, Xbox Live and the ability to switch on my Skype/TV on the fly"

uh..okay.
maybe you should spend more time with the DS4 and PSN.


tried it... not my thing thanks.


Well at least you're aware you're being biased



Porcupeth said:
kowenicki said:
Porcupeth said:
"Xbox One controllers, Xbox Live and the ability to switch on my Skype/TV on the fly"

uh..okay.
maybe you should spend more time with the DS4 and PSN.


tried it... not my thing thanks.


Well at least you're aware you're being biased


There are only a few here who aren't...