Resolutiongate (resolution discussion)

[sj33]

According to the Digital Foundry article, the textures look worse on the PS4 because they bizarrely opted to use trilinear filtering instead of the 16x anisotropic filtering used on the other versions. Bizarre decision. The One version seems to have a lower framerate whenever the framerate drops, but both appear to have bad framerate issues.

By far the biggest issue is the frame-pacing issue that affects both PS4 and One versions (whereby the same frame is duplicated). Not only does it mean the game looks jerky even when running at constant 30fps, but it also results in 200ms input latency (instead of the 30ms you expect). You absolutely are going to feel that.

[speedlolita]

AF doesn't even hit performance very much, especially compared to AA.

That's dumb.

[EvilBoris]

Both versions yous post processing AA, so there must be some difference between the hardware of the implementation of the AF.

[Brad]

None of us are buying it so who cares lol

[Sketcz]

True fact: I have never been able to tell the difference between a 30fps or 60fps game.

[Brad]

True fact: I have never been able to tell the difference between a 30fps or 60fps game.

Extraordinary. Wish I was like this then I could have saved 50% on a gpu lol

[sj33]

I guess it affects some people more than others. I have to admit, I can see it straight away - much more than differences in resolution, in fact. In my case, I guess much of this comes from the Saturn days when 60fps was the holy grail (the difference between Virtua Fighter 2, and everything else). 30fps is perfectly adequate and still looks perfectly smooth to my eyes, but I can see a 60fps game straight away. It's a significant number because it is the maximum that a regular screen can display.

In gameplay terms, I think it can be a bigger deal with some genres more than others. With racing games and FPS games, 60fps makes a massive difference - in racing games because of how quickly your surroundings pass you by, with FPS games because response time is so important and 60fps is half the response time.

With other genres such as third person games, 60fps is a nice bonus and is still noticeable, but I'd be tempted to prioritise resolution and visual fidelity in most cases.

[VR46]

Leadbetter is back on the case with a new article this morning

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2014-in-theory-1080p30-or-720p60

[Brad]

Same as shaky. Not always important but I am hyper sensitive to it and even spotted that crysis 2 locked at 50fps not 60

[H-Man]

I'm the same and would happily sacrifice visual details to maintain 1080/60 minimum.

[dataDave]

60fps is make or break for anything that revolves around strict inputs. Street Fighter and stuff like Bayonetta would be crap at 30fps.

[dataDave]

Street Fighter's skill-cap would be Fisher Price level.

[Sketcz]

In my case, I guess much of this comes from the Saturn days when 60fps was the holy grail (the difference between Virtua Fighter 2, and everything else).

Really? I noticed the original Panzer Dragoon was maybe a little stuttery compared to other games, since it ran in what... 15fps? 20fps? But higher than 30 and I don't see anything. Someone said Wipeout on PS3 was meant to be 60fps, and I played it, and couldn't feel what was significant.

What does bother me tremendously is anti-aliasing when upscaling 2D images, incorrectly upscaling 2D images so the pixel proportions end up all wrong and you get pixel-wave distortions, screen-tearing because there's no V-sync, and the inclusion of motion blur, which I ****ing hate with the intensity of a thousand suns.

Sadly few developers ever worry about fixing these particular issues (or at least giving the option to disable motion blur).

I'd rather have a 30 fps game without no motion blur and V-syncing, than 60 fps with motion blur.

[Duncan James Waugh]

In gameplay terms, I think it can be a bigger deal with some genres more than others. With racing games and FPS games, 60fps makes a massive difference - in racing games because of how quickly your surroundings pass you by, with FPS games because response time is so important and 60fps is half the response time.

Yeah a lot of people think the difference in input response between the two is merely the difference in the frame rate but as you say it doubles it (and is always more than 1 frame) which can make the response time difference really noticeable, which is just as important as the visual frame rate.

Even if someone can't see the difference in the refresh rate almost everyone can feel the difference in in response time.

http://cowboyprogramming.com/2008/05/27/programming-responsiveness/

[dataDave]

I can't think of any 60fps games with motion blur, that kind of comes naturally with the rate of stuff moving. Motion blur is usually a cover for cack framerates.