Xbox One Developer Explains 1080P Difficulties

Kassen said:
So the Dreamcast was the most powerful of its time in 1998.
Playstation 2 was the most powerful of its time in 2000 (releasing +1 years after Dreamcast. That's a long time, right?)
The Gamecube was the most powerful of its time in 2001.
And the Xbox was the most powerful of its time in late 2001.

So why did the PS2 win? You kept on going on about "the most powerful of its time," but then why can't you explain the logic behind this? Why do you keep dodging this question? The PS2 was clearly the weaker console for five out of the six years of the generation. Do you give up because you cannot explain this phenomenon?
Click to expand...


I give up because I feel I have explained it and you aren't getting it. Instead you nit pick the small things I say instead of looking at the big picture I am trying to paint.

The ps2 won because when it came out it was stronger than the DC and it had developer support. It had dev support because it sold well and it sold well because people bought into the hype and believed in sony from the psx days. It obviously wasn't just system power that decided the outcome but it did play a part which is what I've been saying this whole time.

No body gave a damn about the gamecube just like no one cared about the n64. There was also no way Microsoft first console was going to uproot sony's brand loyalty. Power was important in beating the dreamcast which allowed the ps2 to sell and garner the support and player base needed to dominate gc/xb. I definitely remember all the hype in ps2 graphics back then and I definitely remember that being part of the reason why people bought ps2's when it released.

If you don't understand what i'm trying to say after that then you never will. Good day sir.
 
Hissatsu Graphics is only of much effect when the hardware is 10-16x more powerful than anything before it (aka generational leaps), but graphics has little effect when you have one console being only 2x more powerful. Hence why releasing to the market first shouldn't be synonymous with "the PS4 is selling more because of graphics" as you so strongly insist. I can guarantee you the original Xbox didn't automatically start selling better than the PS2 just because it released with "the most powerful hardware of its time," and so that further throws your logic out the window. In fact, it wasn't until May of 2004 that the original Xbox ever outsold the PS2 in any given month, and that was only due to the price drop of the Xbox down to $150. You can say what you want about graphics having any real effect on who wins a console generation, but it is clearly wrong as it always has been.
 
Last edited:
I think most of the complaining comes from the fact that MS is a software company and they have a history of releasing powerful hardware that is simple for developers to use. Now it seems like they went the opposite direction and no one can figure out why. There is no damn excuse for the X1 not putting out 1080p games just as consistently as the PS4. Fact is, MS dropped the ball. And given the amount of s*** they put into the box it's obvious (as I stated before) the system was designed around focus groups and managerial staff instead of gamers. I'm still going to buy a Xbox One but now I'll know how all those early PS3 fanboys felt when everyone pointed out how third party games looked like crap compared to the 360.
 
Kassen said:
Hissatsu Graphics is only of much effect when the hardware is 10-16x more powerful than anything before it (aka generational leaps), but graphics has little effect when you have one console being only 2x more powerful. Hence why releasing to the market first shouldn't be synonymous with "the PS4 is selling more because of graphics" as you so strongly insist. I can guarantee you the Xbox didn't automatically start selling better than the PS2 just because it released with "the most powerful hardware of its time," and so that further throws your logic out the window. In fact, it wasn't until May of 2004 that the original Xbox ever outsold the PS2 in any given month, and that was only due to the price drop of the Xbox down to $150. You can say what you want about graphics having any real effect on who wins the console generation, but it is clearly wrong as it always has been.
Click to expand...


And I think graphics do typically play a role in how well a system sells. You can tell me I'm wrong all you want but it's not going to change anything. I'm obviously not stating that graphics outright win generations so I don't know why you keep acting like that's what I'm saying.

I firmly believe the xbox wouldn't have sold nearly as well as it did without the hardware advantage. You obviously think otherwise, tell me then, why exactly did the xbox sell as well as it did? and obviously it didn't do better than ps2 but it definitely did pretty good considering it was Microsofts first try in the console market.

You honestly believe it would have did just as well if it came out with hardware equal to ps2? lol.
 
Bodhi said:
There is no damn excuse for the X1 not putting out 1080p games just as consistently as the PS4..
Click to expand...

There's no excuse for either of these consoles to not output @1080p/60fps 100% of the time.

Now, let me clarify that a bit. When I say that I mean with graphical fidelity along the lines of Battlefield 4 @ medium-high settings with 2xMSAA. This is something I could do with my 3 year old PC (note, my GPU is a little newer than that) so there's no reason they shouldn't have made that the goal with these new consoles. This is why I've skipped the new-gen consoles at launch. I'll wait until the PS4 has a decent stable of games I want to play that are 100% exclusive (read: 5-6 1st party titles) before I jump on that bandwagon. By then the PS4 should have seen at least it's first price drop.
 
I can say I jumped on the Xbox bandwagon specifically because of it's power and the fact that they were aiming for something similar to the PC that was easy to program for. I knew that meant great looking games. In fact, I think it is directly related to how amazing Halo looked when people first saw it.

Yeah, this generation of consoles has moved me back to my PC as my primary gaming system. I'll need to eventually get an X1 to keep the kids happy.
 
Hissatsu said:
And I think graphics do typically play a role in how well a system sells. You can tell me I'm wrong all you want but it's not going to change anything. I'm obviously not stating that graphics outright win generations so I don't know why you keep acting like that's what I'm saying.

I firmly believe the xbox wouldn't have sold nearly as well as it did without the hardware advantage. You obviously think otherwise, tell me then, why exactly did the xbox sell as well as it did? and obviously it didn't do better than ps2 but it definitely did pretty good considering it was Microsofts first try in the console market.

You honestly believe it would have did just as well if it came out with hardware equal to ps2? lol.
Click to expand...

And I don't understand what you mean by "as well as it did." The Xbox did not sell well at all. It only sold 24 million units sold by May of 2006 whilst the PS2 reached over 100 million units shipped by November of 2005. Obviously the better graphics didn't have too much of an effect on sales for the original Xbox.

And also, I never said nor implied you were saying graphics were the only factor; all I said was that graphics has little significant effect. And also just point out, you were in fact the one to say graphics was the big reason for the Xbox One's lacking sales.
 
Last edited:
Bodhi said:
I can say I jumped on the Xbox bandwagon specifically because of it's power and the fact that they were aiming for something similar to the PC that was easy to program for. I knew that meant great looking games. In fact, I think it is directly related to how amazing Halo looked when people first saw it.

Yeah, this generation of consoles has moved me back to my PC as my primary gaming system. I'll need to eventually get an X1 to keep the kids happy.
Click to expand...


Thank you! I know a lot of people jumped on the bandwagon for the same reasons.
 
Kvally said:
No, seriously...we want to know if you were done insulting members and trolling this entire forum. I called you out on it. I am surprised you haven't been banned here yet. I mean, seriously, Plainview never saw this from you?:

UPDATED:

Doesn't change the fact that you are a fanboy. I'll keep saying it to. If I get banned for calling a fanboy a fanboy then so be it. You are what you are. All you do is defend Microsoft non stop like you work the for the company. Even in this thread you try to call me out for being a sony fanboy when in the same post I treated sony just as harshly. You are no better than me, in fact you are worse considering you do nothing but defend a company that doesn't care about you at all.
YES i ENJOY THE FANBOY BANTER! IT'S MORE ENTERTAINING!
Funny thing is kvally is a bigger fanboy than most of the people he comments on.
It's like arguing with just another xb1 fanboy all over again.
I'm not super duper fanboy mode for it like a lot of people here. a few things really put me off but...
If you arent pro box you are a fanboy. Gawd typing on a tablet is a Pain
Hey crybaby fanboy
If you want to circle jerk with a bunch of xbox fanboys
MUST BE A FANBOY BECAUSE THEY DISCUSS THE SHORTCOMINGS OF
All the fanboys are butthurt.
Take the fanboy glasses off please. It was downgraded! deal with it.
You sound like a silly fanboy right now.
You are either a giant fanboy or a joke account. Take your pick!
I think only a fanboy would try to say Killzone doesn't look next gen. I mean if you want to go...
doesn't make me a fanboy of Sony lol. It's not my fault Sony's machine is able to out perform...
Only a fanboy would say something like that and it's true for multiple reasons. Ki looks...
astro keep sprouting fanboy trash about the xb1 being so powerful
While I was never a fanboy of your caliber I was heavily on MS side even before the 180. I'm sure you can still find my posts cached on google from...
I shouldn't be labeled a fanboy lol.
At least you can admit he is a fanboy. Maybe some people would like to read this nice xbox thread without seeing xbox
guess I'm a fanboy then because 720 is garbage
acting like fanboys...
Out of curiosity, what exactly makes me a fanboy?
...waiting on that magical day when the mods get serious and ban your fanboy ass. Obviously the biggest fanboy on this site.
just because I don't bash on the ps4 doesn't make me a fanboy. Why do I need to bash it when majority of you do it enough as it is? This...
Because he is a fanboy.
Which is funny because it's xbox fanboys who keep bringing up the ps4. As soon as someone who isn't a fanboy says anything
Let me know when the biggest xb1 fanboy on this site actually gets an xb1.
How about you stop being such a fanboy and talking out of your ass?
With you being hands down the biggest MS fanboy on this site who rants and says the most BS. If these mods were worth a damn...
Amg an xbox fanboy is calling my post dumb.
run around posting all the stupid Microsoft fanboy bs they want, untouched.
that was just you being an unreasonable fanboy who can't tolerate anything even remotely negative said about your favorite...
I be dat major sony fanboy though
You do come off like a majorly bias fanboy though and it does get annoying. At least you get paid for it though so I...
Half the stuff you type is uncalled for fanboy drivel. You are Flynn #2. At least he gets paid.
Stop being a damn fanboy
OMG I DON'T THINK XBOX IS THE STRONGEST EVAR!! SONY FANBOY! !!!!
...@ launch is Killzone. I really wish you could see how much of a fanboy you come off as. Every single post you make just drips with fanboy bs.
Ok fanboy. lol it baffles me that people can read your posts and not see a fanboy in it's natural habitat
Yea I definitely don't agree with this. Unless it's possible to be a fanboy to both platforms. =)
didn't even finish reading this fanboy dribble. It's clear you have no sense what so ever and you will forever be a fanboy. I thought maybe you...
a total sony fanboy for example. Now I actually respect him think I was stupid for ever thinking...
This is exactly why you are a fanboy.
It makes me not a fanboy.
He was a horrible sony fanboy. In fact he was the best fanboy I've ever seen, he deserves a medal.
...banned for over 2 years because I was considered a combative xbox fanboy lol.
...your birthday being in march. I love how you dare to imply i'm a fanboy though.
Just goes to show how much of a MS fanboy you are. I bet I'll be enjoying my xb1 before you even hook yours up. I'm such a sony fanboy though..
Stop being a fanboy.
...mean they are right or spreading fud. Actually they've been right about a lot of things but you being a fanboy
Get off my tip, fanboy.
Just like there are silly Microsoft fanboys errrrrrwhere
...Forza or GT lol. I think racing games are boring. I'm tired of xbox fanboys labeling me a sony fanboy though
...it a rest? Even when I was purely xb1 I still thought you were a fanboy of epic proportions.
Guess it's fanboy talk lol?
I still thought you were a fanboy of epic proportions. There is not a neutral bone in your body. The fact that...
'll still be laughing at all the stupid fanboy stuff you post when I say "xbox snap IE".
No, fanboy.
Just because you are a fanboy doesn't mean we all have to be.
...I did not attack you. I damn sure don't agree with what every fanboy in this thread is saying though
guess I'm a fanboy then because 720 is garbage.

Stop trashing Union, stop insulting members, stop trolling. You are ruining it for everyone, PERIOD.
Click to expand...
I lol'd to def!! :laugh:
 
Kassen said:
And I don't understand what you mean by "as well as it did." The Xbox did not sell well at all. It only sold 24 million units sold by May of 2006 whilst the PS2 reached over 100 million units shipped by November of 2005. Obviously the better graphics didn't have too much of an effect on sales for the original Xbox.

And also, I never said nor implied you were saying graphics were the only factor; all I said was that graphics has little significant effect. And also just point out, you were in fact the one to say graphics was the big reason for the Xbox One's lacking sales.
Click to expand...


I think 24 mil is pretty good for a first try. Microsoft obviously thought it was good enough to warrant a 2nd try as well. I also don't recall saying graphics were the sole reason for the xb1's lack of sells. I do believe it's a part of it though. The notion that PS4 is more powerful and cheaper has to go a long way.
 
Hissatsu said:
I think 24 mil is pretty good for a first try. Microsoft obviously thought it was good enough to warrant a 2nd try as well. I also don't recall saying graphics were the sole reason for the xb1's lack of sells. I do believe it's a part of it though. The notion that PS4 is more powerful and cheaper has to go a long way.
Click to expand...
Historically speaking, 24 million isn't not good for a first try. Nintendo's original NES/Famicom sold 31 million by 1991 back when the gaming industry was much, much smaller, and the original Playstation sold over 81 million by October 2001.

Edit: And again, I never said you had said the graphics were the only reason the Xbox One is behind; I only said that you had said graphics was a main reason, and that you did say.
 
Last edited:
Bodhi said:
There is no damn excuse for the X1 not putting out 1080p games just as consistently as the PS4.
Click to expand...
Yes there is. I've been saying it for years. I've bought every one of MS's consoles, but MS doesn't care about games as much as people think. Videogames were there "foot in the door." Clear back in the original Xbox book it was even stated. (original Xbox time) MS got into games because they saw Sony as a threat to their Windows operating system being the one box under your TV giving digital content to the whole living room. So they used games to get their box under your TV. With the Xbox One it is finally their years of what they wanted to achieve to begin with. Multi-function, under-powered box to begin with for the family, games second. They are a software/service/app company, the only cared about games as a way to get that MS branded box under your TV.

Now that it's happening & the games are under-powered compared to what else is out there, everybody is like, "What the heck is going on here!" It's not like MS doesn't have a history of being the biggest greedy company out there. This was known it was going to happen for years. Now all people do is fight over why the console isn't performing well as the other. Well, duh, it's because MS doesn't care about making a high powered gaming console anymore. They care about an average, family centric digital distribution box. TV. Sports. TV. Sports. Cable. TV. Netflix. Sports. Call of Duty - heck, you saw it when they announced it originally. We were the suckers that bought into their vision & they just laugh to the bank. Granted there will still be good games, but not as powerful as they would have been.
 
Bodhi said:
I can say I jumped on the Xbox bandwagon specifically because of it's power and the fact that they were aiming for something similar to the PC that was easy to program for. I knew that meant great looking games. In fact, I think it is directly related to how amazing Halo looked when people first saw it.

Yeah, this generation of consoles has moved me back to my PC as my primary gaming system. I'll need to eventually get an X1 to keep the kids happy.
Click to expand...
I jumped on board as it seemed to be the spiritual successor to the Dreamcast.
 
devilsgrin_6 said:
Yes there is. I've been saying it for years. I've bought every one of MS's consoles, but MS doesn't care about games as much as people think. Videogames were there "foot in the door." Clear back in the original Xbox book it was even stated. (original Xbox time) MS got into games because they saw Sony as a threat to their Windows operating system being the one box under your TV giving digital content to the whole living room. So they used games to get their box under your TV. With the Xbox One it is finally their years of what they wanted to achieve to begin with. Multi-function, under-powered box to begin with for the family, games second. They are a software/service/app company, the only cared about games as a way to get that MS branded box under your TV.

Now that it's happening & the games are under-powered compared to what else is out there, everybody is like, "What the heck is going on here!" It's not like MS doesn't have a history of being the biggest greedy company out there. This was known it was going to happen for years. Now all people do is fight over why the console isn't performing well as the other. Well, duh, it's because MS doesn't care about making a high powered gaming console anymore. They care about an average, family centric digital distribution box. TV. Sports. TV. Sports. Cable. TV. Netflix. Sports. Call of Duty - heck, you saw it when they announced it originally. We were the suckers that bought into their vision & they just laugh to the bank. Granted there will still be good games, but not as powerful as they would have been.
Click to expand...


I remember them claiming they wanted to be THE one system under the tv but I definitely didn't think it meant what it did lol.
 
So in other words saying that it can be done it just needs to be tiled says that any dev can do it if they are willing wich in turn says that all those games are rushed and not given optimisation that they should of had because it took same amount of work as xbox 360 version of the games. What does that say? I hate using this line, but isn't that considered lazy dev who is not willing to put extra time needed when they did for ps3 and x360?
 
The same lazy developers that had no trouble getting 1080p out of the PS4? You sure it's lazy devs and not hardware that's more difficult to develop for? These machines were supposed to be closer to PC architecture so that it would be much easier to develop games for them. Seems the PS4 has that accomplished and it's the XB1 itself that's causing games to perform worse than the PS4 versions.

But don't fret. I'm very confident that within 2-3 years both the XB1 and PS4 will be pumping out great games that look amazing when compared to similar games on PC from 3-4 years ago.
 
Kreten said:
So in other words saying that it can be done it just needs to be tiled says that any dev can do it if they are willing wich in turn says that all those games are rushed and not given optimisation that they should of had because it took same amount of work as xbox 360 version of the games. What does that say? I hate using this line, but isn't that considered lazy dev who is not willing to put extra time needed when they did for ps3 and x360?
Click to expand...

Unfair.

Adding the ability to do this would mean changes to the game engine. Not to mention that it is a new thing for many devs which means time is needed to learn it, optimize it..etc. This I would imagine boils down to the fundamental Project Management, balancing time, money and man power. As we move forward this will become less and less of an issue.
 
But according to Astro, since developers have been developing for Xbox 360 for 8 years, XBO would have a development advantage because they're use to developing for eSRAM/eDRAM based systems!

Also I'll keep saying it, we've come full circle. Lazy developer argument? Check.

Are some of you sure you weren't PS3 fanboys back in the day? lol

Kassen said:
And I don't understand what you mean by "as well as it did." The Xbox did not sell well at all. It only sold 24 million units sold by May of 2006 whilst the PS2 reached over 100 million units shipped by November of 2005. Obviously the better graphics didn't have too much of an effect on sales for the original Xbox.

And also, I never said nor implied you were saying graphics were the only factor; all I said was that graphics has little significant effect. And also just point out, you were in fact the one to say graphics was the big reason for the Xbox One's lacking sales.
Click to expand...

He means it wouldn't have even sold the 24m it did. Not that hard to figure out.

Regardless the argument you two are having is mostly pointless since very little of PS2/Xbox can be applied to the current situation. You two are mostly posting just to read your own words.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Adam and ZombiesRUCrazy
Ketto said:
But according to Astro, since developers have been developing for Xbox 360 for 8 years, XBO would have a development advantage because they're use to developing for eSRAM/eDRAM based systems!

Also I'll keep saying it, we've come full circle. Lazy developer argument? Check.

Are some of you sure you weren't PS3 fanboys back in the day? lol
Click to expand...

I maybe wrong here, but wouldn't that really only be the case if the games used 2xMSAA ? how many games actually used that last gen ? Wasn't the edram the reason for MS trying to get 4?x MSAA as standard across xbox games and that didn't work out. Most likely because you would need to split and tile, right ? which makes it a more complicated procedure and most likely why most games had no AA or some other form like FXAA.

or is that totally wrong ?
 
DriedMangoes said:
What about the other games? Mostly the multiplatform titles are where we see the difference in resolutions.
Click to expand...

You mean launch titles? Yeah, I'm not too worried about the future. Give devs more time with the hardware and we'll see higher resolutions. The very article posted here shows that (although nobody reads the whole article, only the title). But hey... if people want to use an article that says one thing to argue the exact opposite point...good for them. :confused:

The X1 can do 1080p 60 fps contrary to popular belief.
 
Kerosene31 said:
You mean launch titles? Yeah, I'm not too worried about the future. Give devs more time with the hardware and we'll see higher resolutions. The very article posted here shows that (although nobody reads the whole article, only the title). But hey... if people want to use an article that says one thing to argue the exact opposite point...good for them. :confused:

The X1 can do 1080p 60 fps contrary to popular belief.
Click to expand...

No. He seems to be talking about exclusive titles like Forza that are already 1080P. So the proof is already there, but then the article this thread is based on is talking about the difficulties of, not it being impossible. We have known for sometime that the Esram is an issue and other stuff too, like the SDK.

People seem to think that just because the architecture is closer to PC than ever before that there is no learning process.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ceger
Kerosene31 said:
You mean launch titles? Yeah, I'm not too worried about the future. Give devs more time with the hardware and we'll see higher resolutions. The very article posted here shows that (although nobody reads the whole article, only the title). But hey... if people want to use an article that says one thing to argue the exact opposite point...good for them. :confused:

The X1 can do 1080p 60 fps contrary to popular belief.
Click to expand...

No, even with non-launch titles like MGS: GZ, Thief and even Titanfall.
 
DriedMangoes said:
Debatable but understandable, I guess. At which point do you start to worry though or do you not worry at all because resolution doesn't matter much to you?
Click to expand...

I much prefer framerate to resolution. I hate games running at 30 fps, so I'd rather have lower res and better speed.

I also think we'll see a lot fewer 720p games. I'm sure every game won't hit 1080, but at 900p the difference is very minor. The difference in Titanfall is noticeable though, but if you showed me two games and try to tell the difference between 900 and 1080, there's no way I could do it.

If I did care about resolution so much, I'd build myself a new PC. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back