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

Forums - Nintendo - Predict whether Xenoblade Chronicles X is 1080p, or 720p based on the latest video.

 

What will the native resolution of Xenoblade Chronicles X be?

1080p 30 21.13%
 
720p 112 78.87%
 
Total:142
curl-6 on 15 January 2015
Podings said:
curl-6 said:
Podings said:
I'm going to assume it will be 1080p, and something like 40/45fps most of the time.

The character and enemy rigging, the skin and rock shaders, and the level and character geometry all seem too conservative to me to warrant enforcing of 720p, particularly when only one camera is ever rendering at a time.

I only thing visually impressive about this game is the interesting environment and enemy designs. From a technical standpoint, of course, getting 1080p from the Wii U during full 3D is impressive too, but others have managed, and these guys have had a LOT of time with the system.

The sheer size of the world and hence the sheer quantity of assets being rendered precludes 1080p in my assessment.

I could very well be wrong. It's a little hard to gauge from the video, but the aliasing I'm seeing could really mean something more aching to 720p.
Which might be more their thing anyway, as it would be easier to ensure a stable 60fps.

720p/30fps would be my bet, in order to account for the huge open world.



Around the Network
Podings on 15 January 2015
curl-6 said:
Podings said:
curl-6 said:
Podings said:
I'm going to assume it will be 1080p, and something like 40/45fps most of the time.

The character and enemy rigging, the skin and rock shaders, and the level and character geometry all seem too conservative to me to warrant enforcing of 720p, particularly when only one camera is ever rendering at a time.

I only thing visually impressive about this game is the interesting environment and enemy designs. From a technical standpoint, of course, getting 1080p from the Wii U during full 3D is impressive too, but others have managed, and these guys have had a LOT of time with the system.

The sheer size of the world and hence the sheer quantity of assets being rendered precludes 1080p in my assessment.

I could very well be wrong. It's a little hard to gauge from the video, but the aliasing I'm seeing could really mean something more aching to 720p.
Which might be more their thing anyway, as it would be easier to ensure a stable 60fps.

720p/30fps would be my bet, in order to account for the huge open world.

I don't think the size of the world is going to have much bearing on the framerate in this regard. That would be the amount of game objects, and by far the most of this world is going to be completely static, so giant chunks of it can enter and exit memory as one object.



Locknuts on 15 January 2015

Aliasing says 720p.



Kerotan on 15 January 2015

720p and 30fps to me. The hardware is similar to the ps3 so I'm gonna go with its average for fps and res. If they get any higher for either then hats fucking off to the dev team. I doubt it though.



curl-6 on 15 January 2015
Podings said:

720p/30fps would be my bet, in order to account for the huge open world.

I don't think the size of the world is going to have much bearing on the framerate in this regard. That would be the amount of game objects, and by far the most of this world is going to be completely static, so giant chunks of it can enter and exit memory as one object.

Except the world is filled with foliage, characters, all kinds of different elements that you can't just render as a single entity. Big, detailed world = more assets to render = bigger processing load. There's a reason 60fps in an open world game is virtually unheard of on consoles.



Around the Network
Zekkyou on 15 January 2015

There's too much blur and aliasing for it to be 1080p. I'd put my money on 720p with a basic form of AA, but the latter might be due to the video compression. I shall sit here and dream that they'll somehow get it higher by launch though... Now that I've mostly abandoned my PS3 and 360, my tolerance for 720p is somewhat waning ^^;

I expect it'll be fine enough for most WiiU owners though.



Podings on 15 January 2015
curl-6 said:
Podings said:

720p/30fps would be my bet, in order to account for the huge open world.

I don't think the size of the world is going to have much bearing on the framerate in this regard. That would be the amount of game objects, and by far the most of this world is going to be completely static, so giant chunks of it can enter and exit memory as one object.

Except the world is filled with foliage, characters, all kinds of different elements that you can't just render as a single entity. Big, detailed world = more assets to render = bigger processing load. There's a reason 60fps in an open world game is virtually unheard of on consoles.

The foliage and other set dressing details seem to unload at a certain distance though, leaving just large chunks of relatively simplistic level geometry with normal maps of scalable quality and apparently no shadow generation.

When over world games rarely run 60fps on consoles it is also because many technical directors on productions that also feature crummy art direction (ie. GTA/Crysis/FarCry/Just Cause/Crackdown) don't have a clue about where to hack and slash to optimize.

I could just keep walking backwards in GTAV on 360 until the raytraced shadows from palmtrees started pixellating and miscalculating. Fade that shit out at a reasonable distance where nobody cares anyway, and spend the power on frames, people. 



ArchangelMadzz on 15 January 2015
Podings said:
curl-6 said:
Podings said:

720p/30fps would be my bet, in order to account for the huge open world.

I don't think the size of the world is going to have much bearing on the framerate in this regard. That would be the amount of game objects, and by far the most of this world is going to be completely static, so giant chunks of it can enter and exit memory as one object.

Except the world is filled with foliage, characters, all kinds of different elements that you can't just render as a single entity. Big, detailed world = more assets to render = bigger processing load. There's a reason 60fps in an open world game is virtually unheard of on consoles.

The foliage and other set dressing details seem to unload at a certain distance though, leaving just large chunks of relatively simplistic level geometry with normal maps of scalable quality and apparently no shadow generation.

When over world games rarely run 60fps on consoles it is also because many technical directors on productions that also feature crummy art direction (ie. GTA/Crysis/FarCry/Just Cause/Crackdown) don't have a clue about where to hack and slash to optimize.

I could just keep walking backwards in GTAV on 360 until the raytraced shadows from palmtrees started pixellating and miscalculating. Fade that shit out at a reasonable distance where nobody cares anyway, and spend the power on frames, people. 


GTA V has to be one of the most optimised games I can actually think of. That level of detail and visual quality in an open world game (Flying high in the sky on a clear day is unbelievable) on a 10 year old machine with 512mb of ram? Come on.



There's only 2 races: White and 'Political Agenda'
2 Genders: Male and 'Political Agenda'
2 Hairstyles for female characters: Long and 'Political Agenda'
2 Sexualities: Straight and 'Political Agenda'

Zekkyou on 15 January 2015
Podings said:

The foliage and other set dressing details seem to unload at a certain distance though, leaving just large chunks of relatively simplistic level geometry with normal maps of scalable quality and apparently no shadow generation.

When over world games rarely run 60fps on consoles it is also because many technical directors on productions that also feature crummy art direction (ie. GTA/Crysis/FarCry/Just Cause/Crackdown) don't have a clue about where to hack and slash to optimize.

I could just keep walking backwards in GTAV on 360 until the raytraced shadows from palmtrees started pixellating and miscalculating. Fade that shit out at a reasonable distance where nobody cares anyway, and spend the power on frames, people. 

Most open world titles are 30fps because the developers feel that the game benefits more from a more detailed/immersive world than it does from 60fps (and i often agree). It's understandable if you dislike that particular design trend, everyone has preferences, but it's silly to try and credit 30fps as being the inherent result of a lack of optimization. It can but, but it doesn't have to be.

On a side note, i really like FarCry's art style (particularly 4's) :p I'm a real softy for stylized realism.



curl-6 on 15 January 2015
Podings said:
curl-6 said:
Podings said:

720p/30fps would be my bet, in order to account for the huge open world.

I don't think the size of the world is going to have much bearing on the framerate in this regard. That would be the amount of game objects, and by far the most of this world is going to be completely static, so giant chunks of it can enter and exit memory as one object.

Except the world is filled with foliage, characters, all kinds of different elements that you can't just render as a single entity. Big, detailed world = more assets to render = bigger processing load. There's a reason 60fps in an open world game is virtually unheard of on consoles.

The foliage and other set dressing details seem to unload at a certain distance though, leaving just large chunks of relatively simplistic level geometry with normal maps of scalable quality and apparently no shadow generation.

When over world games rarely run 60fps on consoles it is also because many technical directors on productions that also feature crummy art direction (ie. GTA/Crysis/FarCry/Just Cause/Crackdown) don't have a clue about where to hack and slash to optimize.

I could just keep walking backwards in GTAV on 360 until the raytraced shadows from palmtrees started pixellating and miscalculating. Fade that shit out at a reasonable distance where nobody cares anyway, and spend the power on frames, people. 

Every game unloads assets at a certain distance, if everything was rendered always, PS4 would choke on open world PS3 games.

Monolith could have made XCX 60fps, but it would mean they'd have only half as much pixel fillrate per frame. A console is a closed box with a finite amount of rendering power, you have to pick your battles. Detail over framerate is the logical choice to make in a game like this, and a choice I personally agree with.