I know. How you gonna compare an open world game with a corridor game. Even though Infamous looks better.
And KZSF DEFINITELY looks better. That shyt isn't even close.
Next Gen Console Sales Numbers Since 2013 Launch (XB1, PS4)
- Thread starter Rekkapryde
- Start date
I know. How you gonna compare an open world game with a corridor game. Even though Infamous looks better.
And KZSF DEFINITELY looks better. That shyt isn't even close.
and it still looks better.
Infamous Second Son looks good pretty much most of the time. It's not just a "oh look that tree in the distance look nice but everything else is subpar".
I mean Ryse is no slouch graphically but when it comes down to it, Infamous is pulling off those graphics at a full 1080P with a higher average framerate and on top of that it's an open world title. The full 1080P gives you a much clearer image.
Ryse on PC will most likely>>>>>> since that can be played at 1080P or higher with presumably higher FPS.
Infamous Second Son looks good pretty much most of the time. It's not just a "oh look that tree in the distance look nice but everything else is subpar".
I mean Ryse is no slouch graphically but when it comes down to it, Infamous is pulling off those graphics at a full 1080P with a higher average framerate and on top of that it's an open world title. The full 1080P gives you a much clearer image.
Ryse on PC will most likely>>>>>> since that can be played at 1080P or higher with presumably higher FPS.
here we go again. 1080p. i just showed you the comparison. why are you trying to show me just one game? this is what i'm talking about. if you never knew what 1080p was, you would admit RYSE looks better. or at worst, as good. meaning theya re on the same level.
using animated gifs wont change that.
but since you're stuck on numbers. lets go over this again.
http://www.dualshockers.com/2014/02...n-can-you-tell-the-difference/comment-page-1/
can you tell the difference? sure a little, 1080 p is a bit brighter. and thats really about it. playing these games at full speed you will not notice this at all. but we are going to act like you're going to have the game on pause for 2 hrs straight. just looking.
here we go again. 1080p. i just showed you the comparison. why are you trying to show me just one game? this is what i'm talking about. if you never knew what 1080p was, you would admit RYSE looks better. or at worst, as good. meaning theya re on the same level.
using animated gifs wont change that.
but since you're stuck on numbers. lets go over this again.
http://www.dualshockers.com/2014/02...n-can-you-tell-the-difference/comment-page-1/
can you tell the difference? sure a little, 1080 p is a bit brighter. and thats really about it. playing these games at full speed you will not notice this at all. but we are going to act like you're going to have the game on pause for 2 hrs straight. just looking.
?Uhh I can tell the difference between 1080P and 900P in person. The 1080P game just looks clearer but since that's not what you're talking about then
I don't have to pause the game to admire it's gfx, infamous looks amazing in motion. Have you seen it in person or are you just going off of youtube videos?
The game looks crazy in person.
With your naked eye you can look at a game and go that's 900p? I don't know about you but I've seen people say games like The Last of Us and Beyond 2 Souls on PS3 (720p games) were among the best graphics they've even seen just last year people were saying that. This is in the face of a game like Crysis existing and being able to be played in 1440p or even 4K. They were saying that because they don't have a frame of reference to include known better looking games at known better resolutions.
Uhh I can tell the difference between 1080P and 900P in person. The 1080P game just looks clearer but since that's not what you're talking about then
I don't have to pause the game to admire it's gfx, infamous looks amazing in motion. Have you seen it in person or are you just going off of youtube videos?
The game looks crazy in person.
Now I love my Xbox One but I'm not gonna buy the most graphic intense performance demanding games on it unless it's an exclusive or a timed like Tomb Raider. This Is because I also own a PS4 and on top of that my PS4 has a 1TB HDD in it. What I'm saying is if I only owned an Xbox One I wouldn't care that the games are 900p instead of 1080p because 900p looks good enough to me. Its sort of like how I have this 1080p TV and watch 1080p Blu-Rays but there are people with 4K sets watching better looking movies on a TV with better resolution out there. Doesn't bother me, don't know if it bothers you. Sort of like how there are people with 3 780ti graphics cards in SLI playing games on 3 monitors in 4K. Doesn't bother me either.
There's almost always a "better" experience to be had out there. Sometimes when an experience crosses the good enough threshold it doesn't matter though. Playing Madden on my XBO that's good enough.
No I mean if someone showed me a game that's known to be 900P then I can tell the difference in image quality from a game that's 1080P. For example I was watching Ryse being played and then we switched the input to the PC and started playing a PC game and the difference in clarity was subtle but was discernible regardless. When I first booted up Killzone shadowfalls MP, I could tell there was something off about the image. I couldn't put my finger on it but it was slightly blurrier and fuzzier. Come to find out it wasn't really 1080P.
As for the Beyond/TLOU having the best graphics last year on consoles that's a perfectly valid statement. A game can look amazing at 720P for the console it's running on. Now that TLOU is on PS4, it is better on PS4 and therefore the PS3 version is "okay" now compared to the remaster. This doesn't mean the PS3 version is crappy same way I'm saying Ryse's gfx isn't "crappy" simply because I'm saying a 1080P game on Ps4 with comparable graphics is better imo.
I'm saying blind test no reference point can you look at gameplay and tell it's 900p? Because if you can't eyeball that with out making some type of comparison then it doesn't really matter. As for Killzone there's a comparison to be made with the single player mode. If the whole game was in the MP resolution it would look fine.
and a 1440p game on a PC is better than a 1080p game on the PS4. at some point you cross a threshold that is acceptable performance. at some point the graphics are passable even if they aren't the best possible. i feel the Xbox One crosses that threshold even if it is graphically inferior.
Well I'm not a human pixel counter so of course I can't tell what exact resolution it is but I would have a hunch that it's not running at the native resolution of whatever display the game is on. That's basically what I'm saying. I can usually tell when something isn't 1080P, I can't tell if it's exactly 900p or 720P but I can usually tell it's not running at the native res of the display. It's like when you boot up a computer that doesn't have it's video drivers installed, you can sort of tell that the resolution looks off.
"Passable" is subjective. Some people feel as though 1080p/30fps isn't passable and they demand 60fps. Some think 720p/30fps minimum is passable. It all boils down to someone's preference. If I can have the best, I'll go for that. Again the main reason why there's always this debacle with the PS4/XB1 resolution is because the XB1 simply costs too much for what it provides. There's really no way around that.
Even now that it's $400 some people simply see the XB1 as overpriced. Regardless of whether or not you feel like it's passable, it's the fact that something else out there for the same price pretty much out performs it. That fact though is a deciding factor for some, and isn't for others. For me that, coupled with the fact that it was cheaper made me skip the XB1. Right now the only thing i'm interested in for the XB1 is Halo and Gears.
No it doesn't. The console has more and better features than the competition. If you only look at the hardware specs and all you want is a box that plays games then its not what you want but if you want a box that plays the latest console games and can integrate any other device such as a PC, Cable box, set top box or whatever has an HDMI out in it onto your TV into your game console experience then There isn't another game console that does that.
Before the console came out I was a bigger critic of it than you are now. I bought the thing and used it and I love it. All things considered its the better device overall. I like my JRPGs though and because I like those style games I'll always own a Sony console.
It's funny because these "more and better features" doesn't translate to real world sales. HDMI out is really negligible. I think if the XB1 didn't have that no one would bat an eye. It's really a silly feature to tout whenever someone wants to explain how it's so good. I mean are people really using that as a talking point in explaining what makes a gaming console better?? I mean besides that what else?? Voice controls?? Snap???
These things don't translate to a better gaming experience. If that floats your boat then cool but for me these features might as well had not been there. Before you say "If PS4 had them you'd use them", PS4 has voice controls and it's a gimmick. I used it and while it's not as robust as the Kinect's voice controls, it's still worthless imo. The controller works perfectly fine.
If TV, voice control and the likes are what makes it better in your opinion, then you're entitled to that opinion. I think it makes the system less focused. I used the XB1 extensively and nothing about it changed my opinions on it. The games are what I truly care about. Sorry if I'm not excited about it having a cooking channel app(joke.) It being a better device to you because it simply has a checklist of unrelated gaming features is silly. The PS4 will have shareplay and it already has remote play, two features which I value more over anything else. If I say that makes it the better device, am I wrong in my opinion?
It having the guts to make beautiful looking games like The Order and Driveclub is what I like about it, that is valuable to me. Not "Oh I can watch cartoon network on the corner of the screen while playing Ryse!". People really are dismissing opinions on gaming features being a legitimate reason as to why they'd like the PS4 but then think unrelated gaming features for the Xbox One makes it completely valid to say it's better. What's "better" to you is "worse" to someone else. Good for Xbox that it has these features. If those features were truly earth shattering then the sales of XB1 would have surpassed PS4 since June but it hasn't happened yet.
Like you said, there's a threshold on what is acceptable and the pS4 is perfectly fine for my needs. I don't be playing Destiny wishing I could watch white boy in the hood pranks while playing Crucible on the corner of the screen. I am happy that the PS4 version has extra content though, that effects my gaming experience giving me more.
I bought a system to play games, not to watch ESPN. If I want to watch TV, I could just switch the TV input to the cable box the way people have been doing it for years. It's not like the alternative to plugging in the cable box to the Xbox is some complicated thing.
I'm excited to play Halo Larry Chief Collection and Gears... You know.. games right?? Crazy thing huh?? Excited to play games.
I'm not excited about nor care about any features that are tied to multimedia use.
Last edited:
Voice commands on the PS4 are a gimmick. Some half-assed stuff they threw in there so people can say look the PS4 has voice commands too.
ultimately what we're talking about is two boxes with 85% of the same game library. one box does mostly 900p and the other 1080p so yeah I'm gonna start asking "ok what can one do that the other can't?"
on one hand we've got shareplay (which I don't get because most people are gonna buy the popular multiplayer games so who are you really gonna play with that doesn't have a given game anyway?) and remoteplay (which I don't even use because I'd rather play on a TV at home and on the go the lag of it doesn't work in my favor) and
the other hand I have a box that integrates all my needed multimedia functionality into one machine. where I can walk into the house with my hands full and turn on everything with just my voice then start Netflix and walk in the kitchen and fix my pizza go back to the living room and show Kinect my palm and navigate the menuu through just my hand in the air start a movie and watch the movie without having to wipe my hands down so i can touch a remote including play , pause, rewind, fast forward, volume up and down, then I can instantly switch back to TV and check the score of that blowout sports game then jump right back to the movie and my buddy gets online and instantly i see it and i can transition out of that into playing call of duty or whatever with him again with just my voice and all from the same interface. no input switching or remote grabbing / juggling different remotes.
perhaps that means nothing to you but If I can have everything controlled through one box why wouldn't I choose that? Why would I juggle remotes and inputs from multiple devices when one device can run it all? further more why would people talk down on such an experience as if it was a bad thing? since when is doing stuff already possible but doing it better a bad thing? sure you aren't excited about the Xbox One's features because you don't own one. When I didn't own one I was just as critical but having it here in my living room (and I bought the damn thing just for Xbox One exclusive and to use as a box to just play games) I find myself using those features and enjoying them. I find myself liking the experience it gives me and I didn't buy it for any of that nor did I care about any of it before owning one.
Yeah. The PS4 isn't advertised as a voice control box so it's not really important. I don't think a PS4 owner is losing sleep over the fact that they can't turn on their PS4 with a voice. Sony never showcased the PS4 and hyped up the camera, it was just stuff that was there.
If that's really a deal breaker for someone, they already had their mind made up. Again it goes back to what's important to each individual.
Basically you just dismissed two features because to you they're not of much use because
- You don't "get" the feature despite the fact that it's not just for multiplayer games. What about if someone has a friend who owns "Wolfenstein" and is on the fence and just decides to play the game through shareplay from a friend who has it and then decides to get it/not get it depending on how the game is. You must be thinking of that Far Cry 4 feature which isn't what I"m talking about. I'm talking about it strictly in the sense of me using it for playing a game without buying it.
- You not using Remote play isn't indicative of other people not using it. When I used to work, I used to play during breaks or down time and it was great. here I am, miles away from home playing PS4 games, downloading new games and controlling it from outside the home. Lag varied and some games played fine.
Okay? This reeks of those "As seen on TV" infomercials. You're creating an exaggerated scenario to show the uses of something. What do you do when you finally decide to play Ryse?? Does the Xbox wash your hands for you??
It's funny because never in my years of gaming have I ever come home and was disgusted or annoyed at the fact that because of what I was doing outside is preventing me from using my device immediately. What if you want to browse on the coli on the PC and check out Steam?? Do you shake your head because the PC isn't doing what the XB1 is doing? I didn't say you can't choose that. As for juggling remotes, what happened to the all in one remotes that have been on the market for years?? If you're like me, your Xbox isn't controlling your AV reciever, Wii U and PC. Only thing it's doing is handling your cable box. Let's not gas things up. Aren't you still "juggling" remotes when you want to play the PS4 or use the PC?? And I didn't say the experience is bad, all I said is that experience isn't converting anyone to abandon their existing consoles just so that they can conveniently tell their Xbox to switch to ESPN so they can watch Richard Sherman embarrass Skip Bay.
I don't have to own the Xbox One to be excited about the features it has. Before the PS4 came out, I was excited about remote play because I always wanted a way to play games from outside the house or wherever in the house and shareplay. Features are supposed to convince someone of it's benefits and so far, the XB1's features haven't changed my mind even after using it personally for a an extended period of time. The other day I made a thread saying how do you take screenshots and people were telling on themselves acting like it's not really big deal. You came in and
and said that you can get a screenshot from a recorded video.... really?? I mean You don't have to sell me on the Xbox one though, I already know what I want out of it and it has nothing to do with "better" features.
Last edited:
where did i said infamous didnt look fantastic? you never heard me say a bad thing about infamous now did you? NOPE.
Uhh I can tell the difference between 1080P and 900P in person. The 1080P game just looks clearer but since that's not what you're talking about then
I don't have to pause the game to admire it's gfx, infamous looks amazing in motion. Have you seen it in person or are you just going off of youtube videos?
The game looks crazy in person.
the truth is, all fanboyism aside from either side.
infamous vs Ryse :
Player models = goes to ryse. but its also because the focus is always on the player model. and thats because of a certain direction they took. They took the MOVIE/CINEMATIC approach over the "REAL LIFE" look.. approach
infamous vs Ryse
backgrounds = goes to infamous... But this is an opinion as well and its not truly fair to judge these games vs one another since their art direction is not the same. infamous' backgrounds dont look better just because its 1080p. it looks better because their design team CHOSE to make sure the entire game looked sharp. the man characters are not the focus from a camera angle all game long. like RYSE's character is. . Infamous looks more like REAL LIFE(background).
RYSE looks like i'm watching 300. did i like 300? YEP. would i rather see 300 look more realistic? NOPE. i like exactly how it looked.over the top Cinematic Movie look.
But when it comes to say my lady dragging me to see a Romantic Comedy. i do not want to watch that with a cinematic effect over it. i would rather that look like REAL LIFE.
neither is better. they are both different approaches to a game's graphics. let go of the fanboy for a moment and admit this.
If RYSE was true 1080p from the jump 60fps. on ps4. certain parts where it looks like there's a shadow on the ground or in the distance would be a bit brighter. But because the direction RYSE decided to go in with the look(focusing on the character and not the backdrop. no matter how hi res it would be, you still wouldnt get the hi res background sharpness you got in that sony game. Do you understand this?
what i'm saying is about this 1080- war is this. yall are acting like 1080p vs even 720 let alone 900, is the difference in what we saw from Standard Definition TV sets vs HD TV sets when they first dropped. and yall known darm well thats not the case. so why do you guys keep lying like that is the case. yall are acting like 1080p vs 720 is like 1080p vs 4k. its NOT. so please can we stop it already and get down to these games. lol. where da games at? thats what i want to know.