Jimquisition: Children of the Resolution

Aardvaarkman

I am the one who eats ants!
Jul 14, 2011
1,262
0
0
XDravond said:
Well I rather take 720 with ultra quality than 1080p with low quality...
False dichotomy. The PS4 isn't sacrificing quality for resolution - it simply has a much more powerful graphics system. That can be used to improve quality, resolution, or both. I don't give a crap about the console wars, but as Jim says, that's just the fact of the matter. Microsoft skimped on the graphics hardware for the Xbone. It's just never going to be able to achieve the same graphical level as the PS4.

Of course, how developers utilize this is an open question. There are some developers who still release games today with PS2 or even PS1-level graphics for the PS3 or Xbox 360 (see today's Unskippable for a perfect example), and there are other developers who optimize their games to eke every last bit of quality possible out of ageing graphics systems (see GTA V for an example).
 

Aeonknight

New member
Apr 8, 2011
751
0
0
Keiichi Morisato said:
bringer of illumination said:
josh4president said:
GLORIOUS PC GAMING MASTER RACE REPORT IN!

Let us overclock our graphics cards and re-bind the controls on our keyboards in a way that makes shooters barely playable while dismissing the ease and comfort of a gamepad in celebration of our innate superiority over the dirty console peasants!
First of all, you're literally fucking delusional if you think shooters play better with a gamepad.

Secondly, if I actually wanted to use a gamepad on my PC I CAN DO THAT, I have a fucking PS3 controller that I use to play emulated games with, if I wanted to use it for shooters I could.

But I don't since literally every single test has shown that people using Keyboard and mouse always wipe the floor with people using gamepads, even IF the gamepad users have aim-correction.

But it's okay, you can keep spreading your delusional console propaganda, we both know you're never gonna accept facts even when they're plainly and obviously available.
he said "ease and comfort" not superiority, and in that regard, he is absolutely right. i own many PC games, but for action games i break out my Xbox 360 Elite rechargeable game pad. for FPS i use a mouse and key board for FPS games due to having better accuracy.
Honestly I'd put reaction time over what preferred control peripheral you choose. In shooters, close range to mid range your better accuracy doesn't matter much compared to who saw who first and reacted faster. Only time I see a mouse absolutely stomping a controller is at long range, when you're looking at a single pixel you need to hit (some exaggeration of course.)

There's of course a dozen other factors that come into play (like positioning, weapon vs weapon, etc.) But I don't see a mouse as being the deciding factor in who would win in a firefight compared to other variables.
 

srpilha

New member
Dec 24, 2008
122
0
0
Such interesting discussions. Please allow me to quote from the vid the line that best summarizes the topic, in my most humble opinion:

TETRIS FLOPS TO THE GIGGLE BITS

srsly, I'm going to start using this when "tech talks" start getting out of hand
 

Aardvaarkman

I am the one who eats ants!
Jul 14, 2011
1,262
0
0
GoaThief said:
[Seriously though, I'm glad someone got the reference - I was getting worried about it there for a while.
Yeah, that was one of my underlying problems with that - the majority of people here aren't going to get the reference, and I think more people should listen to the original, as it is a truly breathtaking song. The reason it gets sampled so often is a pointer to its influence and cultural significance.

Do you know much about the UK Acid Techno scene by the way? If not I can assure you this track was not made "just because", as above it is pretty politically charged and no doubt made as a homage. Out of interest, what subgenre of techno tickles your pickle?
I'm no expert, but I was around during the era, and went to plenty of early raves. Not "The Summer of Love," but soon after. I was already into jazz, early hip-hop and rap around the time techno came around.

As for sub-genres, I generally hate that term with a passion. It's so stupid the way people define themselves by slight definitions of style, when it's all just music. I remember when the metal-heads hated rap, and the rap enthusiasts hated metal. But I liked both, and then came along the fusion of rap and metal.

Similarly with electronic music, where I like liked techno, house, trance (when that became a thing distinct from techno somehow), breakbeat styles, but for some reason people identified so strongly with a particular style that they were closed off, and even at war with the other factions.

Personally, jungle, breakbeat, acid house, deep house, happy hardcore, classic electronics (Kraftwerk etc); all do it for me. But there's stuff I love and hate about all those genres. Personally, I'm returning more and more to rock/punk/alternative these days - whatever you want to call the stuff made with guitars and drums, etc. But also to chip tunes and experimental electronica. Mostly because the dance floors have turned to shit, and it's becoming harder to find a good rave that's about the music.

At both ends of the spectrum, whether it's "live" rock music or electronica, I care more about performance than genre. The qualities of a live performance are so compelling, even if the performer isn't a technical maestro. And this comes back to Gil Scott-Heron's song. It's remarkable because it is so organic. The complexity of his rhythm, timing and phrasing is just mind-blowing, which is why a sample can't replicate its power. It does more than make you want to dance, it makes you want to go and do something great - which is why so many who have come since have been inspired by him and reference him.
 

RJ Dalton

New member
Aug 13, 2009
2,285
0
0
Honestly, I worked for DirecTV for a while and they did a demonstration of 1080 vs. 720 vs. standard definition. Side by side, I couldn't tell the difference between the two different HD settings. And a lot of people can't either. The difference is there (it has to be), but most people can't recognize it without the two being side by side and even then, there are some people who still can't tell the difference. So the whole argument is really stupid, I think.
 

Darth_Payn

New member
Aug 5, 2009
2,868
0
0
Congrats on the new gig, Jim! We eagerly await more of your unquestionable brilliance!
As for the 720p vs. 1080p debate, I need to do some more research on it. I kind of lost track of what "p" means in this context. I just want to be able to see what's on my screen while I'm playing.
 

Lightknight

Mugwamp Supreme
Nov 26, 2008
4,860
0
0
Beautiful video Jim. You touched on all the points that needed addressing. From the currently strong pc element that seems to rise above consoles at the moment, to the objective differences between the console's capabilities, to the importance of games over the capabilities of the machine.

I do find it interesting that Microsoft claims this to be a 10 year system with these kinds of resolution problems from the onset.

But seriously, at what point are graphics simply good enough? This generation has done something interesting for me. It has produced games that I can still play with little to no problem 6 years after they've been released. Is Bioshock 1 a little rough around the edges? Sure, but completely playable and still pretty when it wants to be.

At some point graphics are good enough and doing better is just throwing money away. I, for one, am hoping for developments in physics and AI scripting. That will make a bigger difference in realism than more polygons or whatever. Imagine a day where you could shoot a door to the right of the face of an enemy and rain the resulting splinters and dust into their eyes and have them actually respond accordingly? That's the kind of direction I want to go in.

The thing I'd be most afraid of regarding the XBO, aside from it's terrible launch, is that Microsft's CEO forerunners are pushing for selling off the console.
 

loa

New member
Jan 28, 2012
1,716
0
0
Yeah, you'd think 1920x1080 which is the resolution my desktop has been running at for years now would be the standard by now.
I don't get how a console "can't handle 1080p" anyway. Resolution is the most maleable thing ever, plop some graphic settings down and everything can "handle" 1080p. My shitty Tablet can "handle 1080p".

Same thing for fps, everything can "do 60fps". I think even my brick ass gameboy from over a decade ago ran at 60fps.
It's entirely on the developers to optimize for that and not a cut and dry matter of what the hardware "can handle".
 

Aardvaarkman

I am the one who eats ants!
Jul 14, 2011
1,262
0
0
Lightknight said:
But seriously, at what point are graphics simply good enough?
Never. It won't be good enough until we get neural implants that bypass the eye altogether. And they won't be good enough until we bypass the visual cortex altogether. And then there will be complaints about the glitches in the implants, and implant wars about which is the best implant.

Face it. We will soon all be part of the Matrix. Or are we already there, but this is the best resolution our robot masters could implement? Whoa.
 

ImmortalDrifter

New member
Jan 6, 2011
662
0
0
When it comes down to the come down I really can't see a difference between 720p and 1080p when displayed on a large screen. That being said, this video is finally what broke my purchasing decision. I'm going PC for next-gen.
 

Megacherv

Kinect Development Sucks...
Sep 24, 2008
2,651
0
0
tzimize said:
I really dont understand how anyone who has had a mouse in their hands can play shooters on consoles.
Firstly, before I go on to rebut, TitanFall is on PC, which I might eventually get if I get a new system, but I'll be getting a PS4 first (no Titanfall == sadface), just thought I'd be a bro and point out :D

But seriously, it all depends on how comfortable the person is and how the developer designs the game. Faster, more twitch-based games are better with a keyboard and mouse; but if done well a console FPS can be enjoyable. I run a society in our university which runs a fortnightly LAN session in one of our department's computer labs, mostly playing TF2, and that's obviously all KB+M and I enjoy it a lot, it feels fun to use. I will, however, happily play a console FPS (I'm looking forward to the new Killzone after sinking a fair few hours into the KZ3 multiplayer after they released it as a standalone download, genius idea for consoles) and even enjoyed playing the Killzone: Mercenary beta on Vita. The games worked well with the controller-based gameplay and I find it comfy to sit back on a couch and hold a controller in my hands that does the job well if the game is built with the controller in mind.

Zachary Amaranth said:
Come now. There is absolutely no benefit to a controller. EVER.
Come now, isn't that being a little bit of a silly billy. What about platformers? Hack-and-slashers? Driving games? Hell, I even prefer third-person shooters with a controller as opposed to a keyboard and mouse, but that's just me. Controllers are a good thing, otherwise they wouldn't still be around.
 

Callate

New member
Dec 5, 2008
5,118
0
0
It's sort of funny. I can remember upgrading my monitor from 1024x768 to 1280x1024 and being surprised what a difference it made. It wasn't that I could make out tons of previously unnoticed detail on textures or that I had a wider field of view; it was just that suddenly the screen seemed less... cramped. Less overcrowded. I could sit back a little further.

My current monitor is, in fact, 1080p. (That's 1920x1080 for the tiny number of people following this discussion who aren't up on the shorthand.) Yes, my current video card could probably push higher in many games; I don't really feel the need. I'm playing games from a whopping three feet away from the screen at most. I think we're in the era of diminishing returns, and I'm honestly skeptical that the 4k televisions are going to be any more of a revolution than the 3D televisions were. In both cases, their development seems to have more to do with an urgent need on the part of manufacturers to sell us new televisions than any kind of real shortcoming in what we have right now.

When I want to play a game on the television, I have a Wii. Its resolution is much lower, but the kind of games I play on it still look just fine. Resident Evil 4 looked terrific. So did Kirby's Epic Yarn. I might- or might not- some day move on to the Wii-U or PS4, but I'm in no hurry; I see very little reason to join up to be on the front line of the next console war. Especially while I still have a reasonably good gaming PC.

I'm also pretty sure that 720p on the XBox One will look just fine for most purposes. It's still a heck of a lot cleaner than the SP we were playing on not so long ago. But I do find it just a tad perverse that with all the hullabaloo in the waning days of this generation about "next generation experiences", Microsoft failed to clear that particular hurdle. It almost makes me wonder if they knew this when they started pressing the XBox One as a great way to watch television.
 

XDravond

Something something....
Mar 30, 2011
356
0
0
Aardvaarkman said:
XDravond said:
Well I rather take 720 with ultra quality than 1080p with low quality...
False dichotomy. The PS4 isn't sacrificing quality for resolution - it simply has a much more powerful graphics system. That can be used to improve quality, resolution, or both. I don't give a crap about the console wars, but as Jim says, that's just the fact of the matter. Microsoft skimped on the graphics hardware for the Xbone. It's just never going to be able to achieve the same graphical level as the PS4.

Of course, how developers utilize this is an open question. There are some developers who still release games today with PS2 or even PS1-level graphics for the PS3 or Xbox 360 (see today's Unskippable for a perfect example), and there are other developers who optimize their games to eke every last bit of quality possible out of ageing graphics systems (see GTA V for an example).
Yea oh uhm should have been more clear with what I meant. (I was trying to be a bit sarcastic..)
I meant that everyone is just talking resolution and never mention anything about the quality being equal level, I'm pretty sure they run the same "level" of graphic quality, but to stare on one of the numbers and miss all the rest is kinda fun :)

And yea Xbone does seem to have a bit weaker graphic part (the SRAM is debatable of what it can help out with for exampel..) so out of what the numbers gives us at the moment the PS4 is better in horse power anyway... But I wont buy either in the nearest future have to many unplayed games in my Steam catalog... But I don't really care for the "war" I would look in to what games I want the most before buying and not really caring about the rest so much..


(But computers still rules :) the power from a 4770k+3*780Ti and 32GB RAM and a bunch of SSDs would be nice to get for the price of an PS4/Xbone...)
 

mjc0961

YOU'RE a pie chart.
Nov 30, 2009
3,847
0
0
I don't care about resolutions so much other than enjoying how the Microsoft fanboys and Sony fanboys have switched places. Before PS3 got the lower res games more frequently and it was the MS fanboys boasting and Sony fanboys saying it doesn't matter. But now the tables are turned and it's glorious laughing at all the hypocrisy.

Ponyholder said:
Wait, people hate Adam Sessler? I thought he was all around liked by most.
People like Adam Sessler? I thought he was all around hated by most, and for good reason: he's an obnoxious drama queen. Oh no a trophy title he doesn't like, better knock a point off a review score. Oh no he has to go to New York to review PS4, better have a massive cry on Twitter.

I was really hoping Sess would leave the industry over it like he was claiming he'd have to and go do something else so his whining would never be a thing gamers have to hear about ever again, but alas, he's here to stay with his mediocre at best reviews and hard-on for needless drama.

I'd much rather watch level headed regular gamers on YouTube talk about things than bother with Sess. Yeah, they may not be called "journalists" like he is, but at the end of the day they all spend most of their time sitting in front of a camera talking about things, and yet the ones who aren't "journalists" do it more professionally than Sess does.
 

Silentpony_v1legacy

Alleged Feather-Rustler
Jun 5, 2013
6,760
0
0
Oh good lord. Its the 90s bit wars all over again! Hide the video game titles! COD-720 and Dead Rising-1080 are coming!

Don't worry, Bioshock 4, I won't let them name you Bioshock64...or whatever...
 

Lightknight

Mugwamp Supreme
Nov 26, 2008
4,860
0
0
Aardvaarkman said:
Lightknight said:
But seriously, at what point are graphics simply good enough?
Never. It won't be good enough until we get neural implants that bypass the eye altogether. And they won't be good enough until we bypass the visual cortex altogether. And then there will be complaints about the glitches in the implants, and implant wars about which is the best implant.

Face it. We will soon all be part of the Matrix. Or are we already there, but this is the best resolution our robot masters could implement? Whoa.
Heh, and then I'll be the old-fashioned coot that says he isn't "goin' to get no eye emplant..."

Silentpony said:
Oh good lord. Its the 90s bit wars all over again! Hide the video game titles! COD-720 and Dead Rising-1080 are coming!

Don't worry, Bioshock 4, I won't let them name you Bioshock64...or whatever...
Hey, those changes in bits made drastic differences. Usually doubling each time. This isn't drastic enough to be the bit wars all over again. It's just in the same vein.
 

Dragonbums

Indulge in it's whiffy sensation
May 9, 2013
3,307
0
0
Lightknight said:
The thing I'd be most afraid of regarding the XBO, aside from it's terrible launch, is that Microsft's CEO forerunners are pushing for selling off the console.
Wait, that's actually(or supposedly) happening?

I know Microsoft shareholders weren't fond of the Xbox line to begin with, but are they really planning on attempting to sell off the line to another company? Or did you mean something else by it?


I thought they were just going to shut down the department as a trim the fat kind of thing.
 

Saulkar

Regular Member
Legacy
Aug 25, 2010
3,142
2
13
Country
Canuckistan
Zachary Amaranth said:
Come now. There is absolutely no benefit to a controller. EVER.
Actually I use a 360 controller for Arma 3's Jets and Helicopters. The difference between keyboard and mouse and controller when it comes to flying is a night and day comparison.

I could use my Saitekx52 but it quickly becomes cumbersome in such a fast paced environment and thus it is generally reserved for slower paced Flight simulators and Mechwarrior.