Spencer going on giant bombs show today.
Always a great interview
Is that interview up anywhere?
The Xbox Onesie
- Thread starter TAVIS206
- Start date
Is that interview up anywhere?
Anthem and Metro already show that though. They look better than anything I've seen this gen, practically next gen. A game doesn't have to be exclusive to qualify as gorgeous.
Nice to see other noticing this game! It's been on my list since it was announced with Below (2 years ago?)
You take that back. I want this game so much. Hopefully, we'll hear something sooner. Was hoping they would mention Below while at E3, but their focused on that other game. They have mentioned they are still working on it in Twitter.
Sooooo... between you and Mr Galvatron, we have empirical Proof that all Aussies are on Drugs?
I only need the drugs to taste colour! I swear!Sooooo... between you and Mr Galvatron, we have empirical Proof that all Aussies are on Drugs?
...and to fall asleep.
...and I am rather partial to a shot of a adrenaline to the heart to wake me up.
...oh, and to get hungry. And socially function. And to stop the pink Christina Aguilera Monsters.
That Galvatron dude reminds me of a surfer troll from an early 2000's indie rock cover band.
That is already a stunning game. The potential with X1X update boggles the miind.
So, in summary; Looks fantastic, solid performahce, but still plenty of minor things for people to exaggerate and cry about. Oh! Best not forget the checkerboard rendering.
Ah, youtube comments. People still think MS said every game would be 4k/60fps. Talk about only seeing what you want.
This game is looking amazing. Visually and conceptually. Me WANT!
I wouldn't count checkerboarding for a game a year and a half out as a sign of anything really. The native resolution of Battlefield 1 and Battlefront 2 should give indication of where Frostbite will be on X1X at 60fps.
It's MS's fault, they need to drop the "4K no compromises" stuff because that makes it sound like it's all native and it's not. Yeah they say in interviews that they aren't mandating native 4K but the marketing which is what everyone sees says something that sort of contradicts that. That's not a knock on some games not actually going for native 4K, I've been saying the whole time they'd be better off using CB and trying to bump up other things instead of straight up resolution increases.
They already(smartly) changed there tune with that and E3 had XB X games running below 4K.
They stopped the misleading in that regard.
They stopped the misleading in that regard.
There is no lie there. I wonder how you feel about Sony's constant use of 4k in their messaging?
In relation the CONSOLE versions of these games, there is indeed, no compromise @4k. It actually ups the ante. Not only does it not compromise the base experience, it improves it with Higher fidelity assets. The only thing it's not doing is 4k/60fps at PC ultra settings, which is only an expectation for fanboys because they want an impossible standard and thus a guaranteed reason to scoff and cry foul. MS has been very up front, and in some cases, underselling, imo.
It's definitely not looking to be running with Xbox One/PS4 level assets. They haven't had to cut anything to acheive 4k. Any time it's not hitting 4k would be when they are adding features beyond the base consoles, which makes sense. There is no logical argument against this without inserting conditions not touted by MS.
Sony was guilty of it too and I've said that, although now they mostly qualify it with "dynamic 4K" and a lot of their marketing material mentions near 4K etc so at least they aren't saying no compromises when there are some. We already have games like AC Origins using CB and variable resolutions which are 2 methods of compromise, that anthem trailer was CB as well. Saying "4k no compromises" implies that it's native 4K. I'm not knocking the use of those methods at all, it's smart and I'm sure most devs will use that method and they should but it's the marketing line I don't like and it wasn't right when Sony just said 4K either.
Last edited:
Pro is mainly 1440p+ and looks almost identical to the PC version running true 4K.
1800p + on X will be even better but not a large noticeable bit better unless they add HDR as its missing on the Pro and PC.
Depends on how you read it, i suppose. "Dynamic 4k" could easily by interpreted by a casual as just a flashy way to say "really cool 4k". Only enthusiasts understand that "dynamic" means variable resolution, and I strongly doubt Sony is unaware of that. When you say "dynamic", especially in Marketing, is usually to sexy it up, not denote that it isn't constant. Like you, though, I don't care.
"No compromise" can also be interpreted in the context of not removing or lessening. I'm fine with the messaging because in every instance so far, there are improvements to the base experience, thus removing the expectation of native 4k. I mean s***, not only does Forza 7 run Native 4k@ 60fps, but it does it by substantially out-performing Forza 6.
If we got a base Xbox One version, at 4k, but needing features/assets stripped to achieve it, then I will say that they were misleading.
Yeah... I actually don't see that much difference, except for the grass.
Shows gears 4 enhancements.I hope more updated titles release similar comparisons like this
I guess it's not the best quality, and motion would help to spot the difference.
Unrelated to this post, I have no issue at all with CB. I'd much rather they use a lower resolution if it ensures a smoother experience, with more pretty stuff happening.
If you don't take "no compromises" as meaning native 4K then yeah you wouldn't think it's misleading, of course not all games will be 4K no matter what method they use, they may come out up-scaled to 4K but not every game on the console is going to be 4K either way. That has to be a tricky thing to navigate for consoles like these that aren't really meant to be new gen machines, they have to market it to be a big thing to sell it so they walk the line, most tech companies do this so it's not MS being evil or anything like that.
Of course Spencer keeps saying the Pro isn't competition to the One x but instead the One s because it's not a true 4K machine, let's forget that we have seen a few native 4K games on the Pro or the fact that it's much closer in power to the One X than the One S but devs will be using the same methods to reach "4K" on both consoles, one will get better results but they are going to be doing a lot of the same things.
That's one thing I hope they add in the Witcher 3, the game is already beautiful but HDR will probably make a big improvement along with higher resolutions.
I know a lot of us keep comparing the Pro to the X1X but people who are coming from the base X1s are going to get a big jump and I'm sure they'll love the hell out of the games that take advantage of the X1X's power in any real way.
and? I actually played both.. We know you haven't and I purchased the PS4 Pro version as it wasn't a major difference when I played both.
Softer of course its upscaling a non native image to a a native image.
It happens all the time with say 4 example 900p vs 1080p as 900p looks like a softer 1080p or 1080p looks like a sharper 900p. Nothing major and do you really think a 1800p image upscaled to 4K is going to net significant over a 1440p upscaled to 4K LOL?
Yeah HDR needs to be implemented more with the X as Sony is dropping the ball in this regard with the Pro.
I really don't have much problem with the term "4k" mainly because it's the mode you'd have to have your TV in to view it. You will only be able to access them at resolution on a 4k TV. So for marketing purposes, "4k" is appropriate. I've never been one to get overly nit-picky about resolution anyway. I think it will be amaze-balls either way. I've said it before- anything above 1080p is friggin' dessert, and given how upgrades are being integrated onto games @ 4k, I don't think we will see any games running at 1080p on the One X. Never say never, though, I guess.