Games at completely different resolutions don't produce identical aliasing patterns.
Those aren't identical.
That's not proof.
Games at completely different resolutions don't produce identical aliasing patterns.
Those aren't identical.
That's not proof.
"the difference in visual quality is negligible" It isn't to me and the majority of gamers who seem to care about price/performance.
"multi-plat games look the same" No they don't.
""This is actually provably false." Texture data is the same on both versions. Sharpness/contrast/brightness filters and DF botching the HDMI black levels does not change that. I thought we were done with the "BF4 has sharper more vibrant textures" nonsense?
"Everyone who sees the comparisons says they notice the X1 version looks better" False. MOST people who saw BF4 at the footage recording event thought the PS4 version looked better. That includes long time BF vets like jackfrags.
You can say "it's not meaningful or important!" to yourself all you want, most people will walk right by you and buy the cheaper, more powerful system. Sorry.
.... They are practically identical, one is just slightly further into the video. it is clear due to the near identical aliasing patterns in all the images, that both of the games are running at 720P. Accept it as proof or not, it won't change that what it is.
If they were both different resolution and different aliasing techniques (say 2xSMAA and 0xAA) then we would be seeing patterns that didn't exist in one at all, and appeared completely in a another.
Non trolling XB fans are getting trolled? This is news to me man...
We'll see... so, no proof (check), and so far - all evidence points to the games looking the same (check).
Therefore, until we get more information - all the games look the same or negligibly different. No meaningful advantage in visual quality at all.
To argue otherwise is only to expose your bias.
They look the same because they are running at the same resolution.
And others seem to agree with me on that. The PS4 version is not running at 1080P. Its running at 720P. Atleast according to B3D.
http://beyond3d.com/showpost.php?p=1805244&postcount=3791
http://beyond3d.com/showpost.php?p=1805253&postcount=3792
http://beyond3d.com/showpost.php?p=1805270&postcount=3796
Like I said, we'll see - but all we have so far shows that they look identical... and if that is due to a faulty comparison methodology, that'll be exposed and fixed in time...
...but if this is indeed true, then all it does is further show how hardened the Sony zealots are... because they've claimed that COD looks better on PS4... and if it's true that they were both running at 720p in this comparison, then that's very sad for them...
In any case, as I've already stated, nothing shows a meaningful difference between PS4 and X1 in terms of visuals, and whether or not the media we have is truly representative of the differences between the X1 version and the PS4 version - the reviewers seem divided. It's not a clear victory for PS4 regardless... and that's all that matters.
Both consoles are going to have great looking multi platform games. The visual fidelity will be the same, even if the resolutions aren't. You're not missing out on anything as far as visuals are concerned for either console. Its going to come down to the surrounding features and benefits of every game that will tell the story ultimately and first party IP's, UI's etc. Not the Resolutions.Like I said, we'll see - but all we have so far shows that they look identical... and if that is due to a faulty comparison methodology, that'll be exposed and fixed in time...
...but if this is indeed true, then all it does is further show how hardened the Sony zealots are... because they've claimed that COD looks better on PS4... and if it's true that they were both running at 720p in this comparison, then that's very sad for them...
In any case, as I've already stated, nothing shows a meaningful difference between PS4 and X1 in terms of visuals, and whether or not the media we have is truly representative of the differences between the X1 version and the PS4 version - the reviewers seem divided. It's not a clear victory for PS4 regardless... and that's all that matters.
Is price/performance not the same thing as value/dollar? What other variable are you substituting "value" with?
"Are you a Sony zealot?" Are you or have you ever been a communist? I own a 360, I have a nice PC with a GTX 680, I game on a nice monitor. I can tell the difference between visual quality easier than someone at a demo station with poor lighting, bad view distance, and limited time to play. Sorry if that makes those differences significant to me.
"Chalk it up to PS4's poor scaling" PS4 has a good hardware scaler. Yes, the picture is "artificially sharpened" with a filter. You can do the same thing by raising the contrast or sharpness levels on your TV. The textures data itself is not larger or more well defined.
"Nope - not true. The majority of laymen who lay eyes on it like the X1 visuals better." Watch this video where jackfrags says he asked other people at the review event who all agreed with him that the PS4 version looked better.
"no proof (check), and so far - all evidence points to the games looking the same (check)." Wrong. You're ignoring and downplaying the evidence, that doesn't make it disappear.
IGN seems to think that the PS4 version has a shaper image and overall better image quality. So it appears its a faulty capture imo.
This video only helps to prove it WASN'T a faulty capture.
Watch the video you just posted. Those look so close, if they weren't labeled I guarantee no one would be able to tell.
This video only helps to prove MY point.
I would have agreed, until I saw the comparisons of COD.
A good anti-aliased/upscaled 720p can easily look comparable and virtually identical to an aliased 1080p, as the comparisons have so far shown, and as mentioned by those who've done direct comparisons between the two.
I've been saying for quite some time that difference between 720p and 1080p (native) is meaningful, but after seeing the proof in COD, I'm no longer convinced. It's just not that big a deal/difference.
Yes, it's just as good as any for that kind of a comparison, actually.
Wtf, the video is the same reso for both yet they speak of the differences :|
Yes, they SPEAK to the differences and claim that the PS4 version is noticeably sharper. That's great... but there are other sources saying they don't look meaningfully different, and from all the media we have - the latter is the much better supported position.
Don't judge these console on launch titles.
Consoles get judged by launch titles.
COD is now the graphic benchmark we're going to measure these consoles by?
Even further proof that going the PC route was a wise decision as these consoles are pathetically weak and MS & Sony better pray to god that Valve doesn't manage to get real nice deals from hardware manufacturers to get their hardware in living rooms so that a comparably powered SteamBox can be sold for the same or less cost. Because between a similarly powered console with Steam sales?
Yeah, MS and Sony are double f*cked.
No, it's not. In fact it's a terrible comparison.
For f*cks sake, watch totalbiscuits PC video (the one where he talks about not having used the "extra" setting at first). He shows off the HORRIBLE (even by XB360 standards) textures with some being even worse than PS2 (and that's no exaggeration at all).
But I get it, because that one game shows the XB1 being relatively similar to the PS4 it's "a good comparison".
Just exactly who do you think you're fooling here?
The resolution still doesnt have any effect on the reasons why people enjoy a gaming experience. Thats what Flynn is saying I think. To that end, he's right. Frame rates have an effect on how much you enjoy a game however.Wait till shots at the reso the game plays at are out, then we can talk differences, until then don't claim that theres no discerable difference.
Wait till shots at the reso the game plays at are out, then we can talk differences, until then don't claim that theres no discerable difference.
The resolution still doesnt have any effect on the reasons why people enjoy a gaming experience. Thats what Flynn is saying I think. To that end, he's right. Frame rates have an effect on how much you enjoy a game however.
Until we have full res/direct feed shots - YOU can't claim there IS a difference, because none of the media we have so far shows any meaningful difference at all...
...and until we have media which shows otherwise, I'm perfectly in a rational and defendable position to say there's currently no meaningful difference. Not only is that opinion shared by several sites who've seen/played both, but it's also supported by 100% of the media we've seen so far. They're apples to apples virtually identical. There's no meaningful difference at all.
...so until YOU can prove that to be false, I'm perfectly in right standing to claim they look the same.
My contention is that the resolution difference hasn't provably shown to be a meaningfully advantageous in any way, and most laymen wouldn't notice or care.
So yes, you're right, because I'd also contend that a noticeably better/more consistent frame rate is not only more visibly apparent than a discrepancy in resolution, but it's also something which directly and meaningfully impacts gameplay. Better frame=better gameplay. Better resolution does not impact gameplay, unless the differences are more pronounced than two HD resolutions.
Although some are pretty hardcore about the numbers in resolution they'd be wrong in thinking in the real world, that rez is going to be a selling point for Sony or Microsoft. There's simply to many other more important variables to consider when purchasing these consoles. Resolutions are very near the bottom of the totem pole.My contention is that the resolution difference hasn't provably shown to be a meaningfully advantageous in any way, and most laymen wouldn't notice or care.
So yes, you're right, because I'd also contend that a noticeably better/more consistent frame rate is not only more visibly apparent than a discrepancy in resolution, but it's also something which directly and meaningfully impacts gameplay. Better frame=better gameplay. Better resolution does not impact gameplay, unless the differences are more pronounced than two HD resolutions.
Yep, totally agreed, Mcmasters.
Also, here's a pic from the comparisons of COD:
https://imageshack.com/i/f5d2t3j
Same thing as BF4. The X1 has more noticeable aliasing (though neither is without aliasing), and the textures look sharper in the X1.
What's with the PS4 versions of these games? Even if it's just a 'sharpening' post processing effect, it definitely makes the image looks crisper in the X1's favor, and the PS4 one just ends up looking blurry in comparison... and ironically, that kind of a difference would be more noticeable and more pronounced than the resolution difference to most folk.
"that's what most people care about" You can repeat "no meaningful difference" and "price/performance doesn't matter" as long as you like, but the metrics say otherwise.
Badly compressed youtube videos and suspect screenshots (from the same videos, I think) don't even provide a decent comparison yet. Those comparison screenshots and videos look suspect and anything on youtube is highly compressed. Wait for the DF or Gamersyde 60 FPS near-raw footage.
The "sharper textures" was already dismissed in the BF4 footage comparison threads. Motion blur or a frame where a texture hadn't fully loaded is one of the reasons still shots aren't very good for comparisons. Also you can't see jaggies or mosaic patterns shifting/crawling across the screen in still shots.
You can also expect PS4 exclusives to look visually ahead, not just multiplats.
Can you show us screens not taken from the video which has both games running at the same resolution?.
Can you?
Your the one asserting they are the same, i am saying wait. You need to provide evidence not me.