why would you want better graphics over gameplay. some people I will never understand.

http://www.pcgames.de/Call-of-Duty-Advanced-Warfare-PS4-258561/Videos/Video-Grafikvergleich-zwischen-PS4-und-Xbox-One-1141198/

You don't need a specific time you can see it anytime. Though if you didn't notice it before I don't know how you'll notice this time. How can you not see that half of your screen is black is beyond me though.

It seems a tiny bit better than the launch games though I give you that.

"Sad to see any developer focusing on something irrelevant to gameplay like resolution at the expense of something crucial to gameplay like frame rate. Especially a CoD developer. Maybe it can be fixed in a patch."

lol

What you is criticizing is exactly what Respawn did.

I think you are right in say that but it is for both and not cherry pick one game and not another.

That's awesome! Just show me the console version of Titanfall Respawn released that has a lower resolution and better frame rate than the Xbone version. Because I can show you a version of AW that Sledgehammer released with a lower resolution and better frame rate.

You're making me laugh with all of this. Instead of more nonsense about what you think I am doing, just answer this: would you rather Sledgehammer implemented the same technique on PS4 that they did on Xbone if it meant a dynamic resolution but a better frame rate? Would you rather GG just made the game 900p or something but as crisp and sharp as possible instead of faking native 1080p but blurring it all to hell?

The difference is in one situation Sledge sacrificed the resolution for a better frame rate, and in the other they held firm on the resolution and the result is a worse frame rate. That didn't happen with Respawn. Hope that helps, it should clear it up for you, but somehow I think it won't.

There is no gameplay difference apart from the help of better IQ in the PS4 version. Just because there are a couple of framerate drops nobody reduces the resolution, that would be idiotic. Dynamic framerate would have been used if the drops were frequent.

Keep up the fight though.

lol you are being hypocrite with you comments... don't you understand that?

Titanfall = Praise even with big framerate issues
CoD PS4 = Sad because it have dips on PS4 and devs needs to choose framerate over reolution

Titanfall issues is way bigger than CoD PS4.

You are cherry picking what you think for covinient for you.

And not... they need to optimize the game in 1080p... it is clear it is a lack of otmization on the version to run at solid 60fps... I will never accept drop in resolution to sub-1080p in my games.

I don't have two sides... you can read my comments in this thread.

lol just drop it you won't get anywhere... Respawn had absolutely no idea that the resolution they chose would sacrifice the FPS. They decided on the resolution from the get go and when the game finished and FPS was subpar they didn't bother lowering the resolution because they didn't have a different console version that has steady FPS with lower resulotion to compare it with. It was impossible for Respawn to drop the resulotion to get better FPS. Yep, that makes total sense. 

Like I said, it should have been crystal clear for you but I am not surprised you're still utterly confused and in tatters.

Nowhere did I ever say that every game with frame rate issues should have had a lower resolution so the issues would be lessened. I said developers should not put resolution above frame rate. That is what Sledge did in this game. Until you can show me a version of Titanfall that Respawn released on a console where they implemented something similar to AW, you're wrong, per usual.

I'll respond again when you can show me said version of the game. Until then, lulz. Entertaining.

lol Respawn did the same with Titanfall but it is fine for you.

Of course there is no Titanfall version like you are cherry picking because Respawn choose Resolution over framerate... it is too obivous to you don't see that.

PS. The Titanfall resolution was upped after the Alpha... they choose to up the resolution instead to optimize the framerate... the Alpha ran at 720p.

Of course there isn't. They released one game and it is the way it is. Thank you for finally admitting it.

Now, if we can move past the nonsense, please answer what I asked previously. In this situation, would you rather Sledge implement an at all times full HD resolution, even if it means the frame rate is not as good as the other version of the game, or would you rather see what the other version got with dynamic resolution but a solid frame rate as a result? Just curious to see if you'd actually prefer a prettier game to a better running game.