Forums - Sony Discussion - Why Sony should stop pushing developers for 1080p games.

What do you think about this thread...

I agree with most (or all) of it. 49 25.00%
 
BOO!!! XBOT FANBOY ALERT!!! 110 56.12%
 
See results. 37 18.88%
 
Total:196

Edit: People aren't seeming to understand what I mean! If a game can hit 1080p, then don't downgrade it! But if your sacrificing other key visual elements in order for it to hit 1080p, I don't think its worth it

 

So recently, we've seen games come out on both systems. Xbox 900p, PS4 1080p. Whenever I go to the Digital Foundry comments section, its full of trolls saying things like "lunchbox720" or "Crapboxdone" or this was the stupidest and the worst "NoHDCableBox". But really the difference betweem 900p and 1080p is not that noticable. But the fanboy's will come and say; OHH, OHH 1080p HAS 40% MORE PIXELS, 40% MORE PIXELS!!!!!!!! Now I don't know about the average gamer, but I game on a 50 inch flatscreen (1080p TV) and I sit around 10-15 feet from the TV. The difference is unnoticable. But people could still argue its nice to have that extra resolution bump, and I won't disagree with them. But when you start sacrificing things like AF or push for a lower frame rate, then things start to get a bit ugly. I've seen games running at 900p on the XB1 and 1080p on the PS4 and the frame rate in MOST cases is better on XB1. But PS4 is 1080p, so that kinda makes sense, right? No, since the PS4 is more powerful, it shouldn't have problems like these. But then people can come with MORE excuses like; oh Micro$oft just pays off developers to make games run better on their system EXPOSED, or; oh developers favor XB1 to PS4 and try harder to make the same experience EXPOSED!!! No, its not true. The real world difference between PS4 and XB1 in terms of power is little. I remember during the 7th gen, people would argue which console was better. For example, sony had the cell proccessor. While Microsoft's console was easier to program for and had a better GPU. But also the PS3 Cell CPU could offload tasks from the GPU and thus make up the difference. Everyone had a fair argument, but now its turned into blatant trolling! Anyway back to my topic. Sony should accept that its console (neither is Microsoft's) powerful enough to run every game thrown at it at 1080p. Many should, but like I said having to sacrifice certain effects or frame rate just doesn't seem right, and also seems unnecessary.



Around the Network

No. They should push them to make the best they can, at 1080p. PS4 is far superior machine which is why they should push them to utilize it and not gymp PS4 games do to the other guy being weaker.



Blame teh third parties not Sony, they're not being forced to do anything, it's 100% their choice, it's not like first party games are having sub 30 fps performance issues.



I read it as "Please Sony, stop asking developers to put my console of choice to shame"



They will know Helgan belongs to Helghasts

More so the company's decision to forgo 1080p at their choosing for most of them. Personally, so long as a game is enjoyable, appearances don't matter for me; hence why I was drawn to Don't Starve and Resogun. Should a company be under Sony, the gameplay mechanics, A.I. difficulty and story should be the main priority first. Presentation is nice, but if a game doesn't utilize it well, the game becomes only something radiant to observe. Interaction is key, so that is the course of action the publishers take on developing games for either both or exclusively; especially when you want to further obtain recognition towards the product you are selling.



" It has never been about acknowledgement when you achieve something. When you are acknowledged, then and only then can you achieve something. Always have your friends first to achieve your goals later." - OnlyForDisplay

Around the Network

Sony's not doing that: higher res means bragging rights



super6646 said:

So recently, we've seen games come out on both systems. Xbox 900p, PS4 1080p. Whenever I go to the Digital Foundry comments section, its full of trolls saying things like "lunchbox720" or "Crapboxdone" or this was the stupidest and the worst "NoHDCableBox". But really the difference betweem 900p and 1080p is not that noticable. But the fanboy's will come and say; OHH, OHH 1080p HAS 40% MORE PIXELS, 40% MORE PIXELS!!!!!!!! Now I don't know about the average gamer, but I game on a 50 inch flatscreen (1080p TV) and I sit around 10-15 feet from the TV. The difference is unnoticable. But people could still argue its nice to have that extra resolution bump, and I won't disagree with them. But when you start sacrificing things like AF or push for a lower frame rate, then things start to get a bit ugly. I've seen games running at 900p on the XB1 and 1080p on the PS4 and the frame rate in MOST cases is better on XB1. But PS4 is 1080p, so that kinda makes sense, right? No, since the PS4 is more powerful, it shouldn't have problems like these. But then people can come with MORE excuses like; oh Micro$oft just pays off developers to make games run better on their system EXPOSED, or; oh developers favor XB1 to PS4 and try harder to make the same experience EXPOSED!!! No, its not true. The real world difference between PS4 and XB1 in terms of power is little. I remember during the 7th gen, people would argue which console was better. For example, sony had the cell proccessor. While Microsoft's console was easier to program for and had a better GPU. But also the PS3 Cell CPU could offload tasks from the GPU and thus make up the difference. Everyone had a fair argument, but now its turned into blatant trolling! Anyway back to my topic. Sony should accept that its console (neither is Microsoft's) powerful enough to run every game thrown at it at 1080p. Many should, but like I said having to sacrifice certain effects or frame rate just doesn't seem right, and also seems unnecessary.

Two things.

There is a difference between 900p and 1080p, a noticable one at that.

There is no mandate, request or pressure from Sony to publish a title at 1080p.

And lastly,

16x AF is perfectly doable with minimal performance impact for PS4 should the developer actually have it in mind while profiling and optimizing their engines render pipeline.

Now to get all Yahoo Answers on you.

Source: PS4 devkit and XBO devkit sat in my office.



OP called himself an Xbot...Okay then.

Anyway, no they shouldn't.

Also, this makes me miss toastboy a little.



Actually 1080p is not hard to achieve with the PS4. 1080p at 60fps on the other hand...



Tachikoma said:
super6646 said:

So recently, we've seen games come out on both systems. Xbox 900p, PS4 1080p. Whenever I go to the Digital Foundry comments section, its full of trolls saying things like "lunchbox720" or "Crapboxdone" or this was the stupidest and the worst "NoHDCableBox". But really the difference betweem 900p and 1080p is not that noticable. But the fanboy's will come and say; OHH, OHH 1080p HAS 40% MORE PIXELS, 40% MORE PIXELS!!!!!!!! Now I don't know about the average gamer, but I game on a 50 inch flatscreen (1080p TV) and I sit around 10-15 feet from the TV. The difference is unnoticable. But people could still argue its nice to have that extra resolution bump, and I won't disagree with them. But when you start sacrificing things like AF or push for a lower frame rate, then things start to get a bit ugly. I've seen games running at 900p on the XB1 and 1080p on the PS4 and the frame rate in MOST cases is better on XB1. But PS4 is 1080p, so that kinda makes sense, right? No, since the PS4 is more powerful, it shouldn't have problems like these. But then people can come with MORE excuses like; oh Micro$oft just pays off developers to make games run better on their system EXPOSED, or; oh developers favor XB1 to PS4 and try harder to make the same experience EXPOSED!!! No, its not true. The real world difference between PS4 and XB1 in terms of power is little. I remember during the 7th gen, people would argue which console was better. For example, sony had the cell proccessor. While Microsoft's console was easier to program for and had a better GPU. But also the PS3 Cell CPU could offload tasks from the GPU and thus make up the difference. Everyone had a fair argument, but now its turned into blatant trolling! Anyway back to my topic. Sony should accept that its console (neither is Microsoft's) powerful enough to run every game thrown at it at 1080p. Many should, but like I said having to sacrifice certain effects or frame rate just doesn't seem right, and also seems unnecessary.

Two things.

There is a difference between 900p and 1080p, a noticable one at that.

There is no mandate, request or pressure from Sony to publish a title at 1080p.

And lastly,

16x AF is perfectly doable with minimal performance impact for PS4 should the developer actually have it in mind while profiling and optimizing their engines render pipeline.

Now to get all Yahoo Answers on you.

Source: PS4 devkit and XBO devkit sat in my office.

You're mean. You just killed his thread!