Are Current-Gen Console Game Resolutions Simply Too Low?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 8 тра 2024
- ► This clip comes from DF InDirect #1 - our Supporter-only Q+A show
► Support us on Patreon! bit.ly/3jEGjvx
► Digital Foundry UA-cam: / digitalfoundry
► Digital Foundry Merch: store.digitalfoundry.net
► Digital Foundry at Eurogamer: eurogamer.net/digitalfoundry
► Follow on Twitter: / digitalfoundry
Its crazy that we are still talking 720p resolution in 2024, but they did no forget to put "8K" on the box... what a joke
Don't worry! This generation will end with 8K/10fps titles. I just know it!
For sure. Video games. Now a days are a joke. The last great generation we got was the 360,wii, ps3 era. Video games atent the same anymore. Corporate greed has taken over to the point where we get the same games, same graphics, drm, can't play your games offline, no manual I could go on. I stop buying consoles and games. I do however love the switch and try to buy physically when I can here and there and stellar blade was the last game I bought. I will not buy anymore consoles or games going forward unless it's from Nintendo
Except they do have at least 1 game render at 8k. Df has a video on it. So like yeah.
@@D3liNLwhat’s the point of 8k if graphics are horrible, resolution is overrated
They just keep fooling everyone, and I keep watching it. I checked out 10 years back. It's just circles and they just catch the next gen kids who have not been watching this shit for 1/4 of a century. It's 2024 and I was bored shitless of this crap OVER a decade ago. In 2024 it's ALL SHIT. Fkn chugging and stuttering along at 28FPS in TWENTY TWENTY FOUR.
Anything slipping below 720p is inexcusable
Unless it's a switch held
@@colinmx.switch isn’t really current gen, the shiz is 9 years old
Yeah! 900p should be the lowest. Hoping starfield gets a 40fps mode on series s at 1080p
You guys have some low ass standards. This is 2024. NATIVE 1080p should be the absolute minimum.
Anything slipping below 1080p, or my monitor resolution is inexcusable. FIFY.
I'm paying to play in native res, not downacaled crap.
Please stop using fake techs as a means to bypass optimizing games! Tired of this shit 😤
That was NOT the point of the question that we don't have better upscaling solutions
Many last gen games looked wAAAy better because they avoided using technologies that were simply beyond the scope of the hardware(RT) and spent time and effort into making the game look and perform well using the technologies that worked well with the hardware
Exactly! Upscaling is just companies trying to find cheap shortcuts. Also the argument that back in the day ‘the ps3 struggled to hit 720p’ is irrelevant when you consider the vast majority of new HD TV’s that released back in ‘05/06 were only 720p and 1080i at best. That’s why 1080 was originally labelled as ‘full hd’ because it was a selling point of the better ones available at the time.
I think with some of these games, they were designed for 30FPS as that has traditionally been what most console games ran at. Then they were surprised by all the dialogue around frame rates we get these days and added an imperfect 60FPS mode where that simply hadn't been the target.
@@Wolfos530 the majority of PS2 games targeted 60 fps though (over 60%). In fact that remains the console with the highest number of 3D games that deliver 60fps. What happened is that pretty screenshots became the priority.
Developers have full control over the graphical fidelity of their games. There is nothing preventing every game from hitting native 4k120hz, other than the nonsensical compulsion for MOAR polygons, MOAR textures, MOAR shaders, MOAR motion blurs.
@@MyNameIsBucket YEA .
DF: Upscaling won't be used as a crutch you guys, Y'all are crazy
Also DF: Man these games are really blurry and reliant on upscaling.. What's going on?!?
Yep, the moment I saw upscaling like FSR was coming to consoles, I knew this would happen.
And then in the next generation, the same thing will happen with fake frames.
@@deathtrooper2048 Yup, every game next gen is going to feel like molasses because everything will be 30 faked up to 60. I mean assuming there IS a games industry in a few years if idiots keep shit canning successful studios for *check notes* taking a normal amount of time to develop a video game like Tango who had the audacity to not magically have a game ready to go.
@@devilmikey00 They made successfull game. Wanted to do part 2 but would've needed new hires. That didnt fly with money department, so they are now gone. They also been bleeding people since Mikami left and whole ghostwire hell.
remembering Immortals of Aveum running at what is essentially 480p on PS5. Completely unacceptable
The sad part is i used to run a 5700xt, which was pretty much dead on par with a PS5 (slightly faster, no RT) and i had zero issues getting 90fps average 1080p. It could easily do 1440 60 across all games as well but devs are obsessed with frame rate eating tech like RT that just isnt worth the tradeoff.
Its less work for them to force RT
Don't blame RT it is the state of the art tech that provides photo realistic lighting in every form of rendering like CGI and Animation as well. It's always the devs that have a poor implementation of it. Like RE4 remake where it increases VRAM usage, reduces FPS without any visual gain.
@@DragonOfTheMortalKombat actually the most of us dont care about "realistic" lighting. Games are games and not reality. I would prefer a more "gamy" graphics with nice artstyles like Valheim, Elden Ring or a Hollow Knight. This looks far more pleasing than any realistic rt game while running also better
Last gen we had 4k with the xbox one x on games that looked great. Now games don't really look that much better and rely more on TAA/upscaling (not a good combination with low resolutions and higher output resolutions like 4k) and have inconsistent FPS as well. There are only a few games on Consoles which I would say genuinely look better than most last gen games (Like Forza Motorsport on Xbox and Rachet and Clank on PS5).
Forza Motorsport 7 still does beat Forza Motorsport 8 in most graphical situations
@@MrSkollll No it doesnt you are braindead or blind ..gt7 is very cartoonic in comparison to fh8
@@MrSkollllForza Motorsport 7 was a good looking game for sure.
@@MrSkollll While Forza 7 does look good, a lot of the times it would fall flat with the lighting and would be inconsistent. Forza 2023 overall looks better and more consistent in actual gameplay outside of sharpness (even though there is more visual noise than FM7).
@@deathtrooper2048 Agreed, even though FM7 does look good, FM23 is overall a nicer looking game.
Yes, FSR does not make 720p magically look good when upscaled
720p? No. 1080p and higher? It helps.
fsr $ucks..even at 4k it isnt good
1440p upscaled to 4k looks good, but when upscaled from 1080p or lower that's when it looks bad
@randyrrs7028 not really..even dlss performance looks better than fsr q. Amd needs to up their game
@@RZLK-02 also agree with you about DLSS, it handles image quality much better although I have no issue with FSR 2 1440p-2160p (obviously if I had access to DLSS on Xbox I would choose that over FSR tho) I wonder how Sonys new AI upscale method will compare and I hope Xbox follows with their own method instead of sticking with FSR unless major improvements are made
This generation of consoles should be focusing on native 1440p ! Hell even 4090 cards on some games cant achieve native 2160p and 60fps.
Or just dont use raytracing and similar effects or allow us to turn them off like elden ring and devil may cry V
@@007GoldenLion WAIT you can turn then off on some games? SHIT this should be on every game !!!
4k gaming was a lie, glad im still gaming on my old 1080p tv. 4K tv owners wasted their money
@@randyrrs70281080p gaming in 2024 ?!?😐 Stop playing games at peasant resolutions my man.😬
@@JamesBond77 No point in buying a 4K display if you can't play at that resolution, people keep talking like 4K is the norm but the vast majority of games are still 1080p or lower
The way console graphics are (d)evolving, in 20 years' time they'll be back to Pong at 20x20 resolution but with fully path traced shadows and lighting. Still at 30fps.
It all boils down to companies being ran by greedy boards and trying to maximize profit at all costs, cutting all corners possible with no regard to quality, their fanbase or legacy.
It's all about pushing out products as quick as possible and then hoping the damage control will be good enough to mitigate the backlash, then marketing clean up the image before the next release, rinse and repeat.
I feel more and more people are getting pushed away from gaming these days due to abusive prices and predatory practices, which makes you go from hype to "Okay I guess I'll skip this one too" real quick.
Then everybody goes surprised Pikachu face when stuff doesn't sell well.
True but consoles are are now outdated, hopefully ps5 pro will be better.
1080p60 could work well in this era.
Jumping up to 4K looks amazing, but the pixel count is enormous, so expecting anything like 4K60 with ray tracing from consoles is a big ask.
Loads of games were 720p30 or worse, in the 360 era, and the Xbox One could hardly do 1080p30.
4K is just a crazy number of pixels, and display tech has raced ahead in the past 15 years.
Gotta check those expectations, unless you're willing to buy a £700+ machine.
the AAA industry is in serious trouble and i am amazed DF hasnt made a feature video about this...
Yea the RT on consoles has got to go. At least for this generation. Most games the effects are so negligible its truly pointless unless you are looking for it.
Half the time its just RT reflections which are already a waste of resources no matter the platform. Hardly anybody is going to look at a puddle of water and think how impressive it looks. Even over moderately well done SSR.
Yup, the same with most volumetric effects but ESPECIALLY clouds. Turn that shit down to nothing. Who's staring at clouds while playing? It doesn't even look much different most of the time despite taking a fair bit of resources in most games.
RT isn't actually for the players' benefit. At least on paper, it's supposed to reduce manual work for developers, who can let players' hardware do the heavy lifting. Yes, non-RT modes are hard to distinguish from RT today, but that is the result of months and months of manual rendering and testing that the devs want to eliminate. The fact that the RT result looks more realistic is just a bonus.
As game development costs skyrocket I don't blame devs for wanting to get a head start on RT. Yes, the current consoles are not quite ready for it. But it's also important for the devs to build up experience so that when better hardware becomes mainstream (hopefully next console generation), they will be ready to quickly push out good-looking games without having to learn from scratch.
It is called emersion. Some people care about that in games.
Totally agree 👍
The only RT I truly enjoy and can see a big difference with is ray traced global illumination
Final Fantasy VII Rebirth, a game designed exclusively for PS5 and not held back by the Xbox Series S to unleash its full potential: 720p resolution
That’s Final Fantasy 16
Ff7 rebirth on performance mode is like above 1080p. I think youre mistaking it for ff16
The fact that every FF game from like the last decade has looked pretty ugly to boot and you start to wonder where the performance has gone.
@@parsashirali8957 I played Ff7 rebirth for 100 hours...the game is above 1080p but it looks like a switch game
@@parsashirali8957
No, it’s upscaled to 1440
Internally it’s well below the 1080
These consoles had 2 choices the way I see it:
Push tech and stick to 1080p 30 FPS to see the true generational leap
The Nintendo approach, keep 8th generation level visuals (which arent bad at all) and instead use the extra power to emphasize high stable framerates and better IQ.
Please developers go for 40fps mode, its great balance between graphics and performance.
40 fps was something that should of been the norm in last gen. 60fps should be the minimum now.
Except last gen vrr and 120fps displays weren't anywhere near as easily available as they are now so 40fps last gen was not viable
@@Daniel189HLL 40fps was a nice add on to begin with. The whole industry shouldn't be held back because of it. Graphics engines today have a a level of detail that requires 60fps 1440p minimum to actually see.
Ray Tracing and 4k are the biggest mistake I've ever seen Sony and Microsoft do with their consoles. There is absolutely no reason at all for consoles with like an RX 6700 level of GPU to be using Ray Tracing which struggles on all but the best PC GPUs, and 4k which requires either a 4090 or DLSS on lower tier GPUs to run at 60fps.
If they were targeting 30fps then it made sense, but to me they should have been pushing the visuals in other ways. The 2080Ti would barely play games at 1440p with RT, the 3090 was able to comfortably do it at 4k with upscaling, the 4090 can finally do RT without necessarily using DLSS, but PC is still little bit away from RT running well at 4k on mid-range GPUs. The current gen consoles had mid-tier components compared to PC at the time in 2020.
I believe games are looking worse as the generation goes on. I can’t remember that being the norm in any other console generation. I firmly believe that this is just cost saving in development and just dropping resolution instead of optimisation
Strongly agree! Demon Souls was a launch title and still looks amazing and runs at 1440p 60, yet games are launching now with worse visuals with one RT effect added in which you can barely see because the game is too blurry to even appreciate the effect
@@fakharakhtar8606 demons souls sprang to my mind too! Recently went back to play it and all I could think was ‘now this is what a current gen title should look like’. Meanwhile FFVII rebirth looks worse than FFVII remake from last gen.
Honestly people need to understand we're in the middle of a double render-paradigm shift.
No only are we shifting to Ray Tracing, but we are also shifting to compute geometry (Mesh Shaders). Both of which allow for extreme amounts of flexibility in the work that can be done for the developer and theoretical very high-end returns visually. But they come at a cost.
It's like Fixed Function -> Programmable Shaders. There was a time where things had growing pains, TSR solutions are the attempt to mitigate said growing pains.
Downside is AMD sort of was on the backfoot every time this generation (RT, Mesh Shading, and Upscaling) so they are far behind NVIDIA and even Intel in the "Next Gen" featureset, DLSS and XeSS 1.3 look extremely good, the former able to reconstruct as low as 360p into a viable 1080p image for example if the implementation is good. Not to mention how far ahead the Ray Tracing Deployment in Ampere/Lovelace is versus the anemic RT capability of RDNA2 (legitimately, 1 Ampere RT core at 1GHz actually may have more RT Acceleration capability versus the whole 36 Ray Accelerators in the PS5)
I'd link a video showing Doom Eternal modded with a DLSS 2.5 Ultra Performance Profile to show this, but I think video links are not working at the moment last I checked? Dunno.
At the end of the day the devs are still making the decision to make games that can't run on the hardware.
Agreed, we're literally shifting into higher dimension of perception
👽
@@TheFirstRealChewy But they can run on the hardware. People are screaming about 720p and treating it as if it is the same 720p as back in the seventh console gen. It is not. The visual details are far higher then anything those games could create.
@@Alovon DLSS 2.5 is old af. Use DLSS 3.5 or better lmao, they are much much better looking.
we need to clean up 1080p before anything else ditch FXAA that makes way to many games look fuzzy as all hell and focus on visual tech that can sharpen up image quality without taxing AA solutions.
Edit: Meant TAA.
Most games are using TAA, not FXAA. TAA is what causes the blur as it replaced the main AA method. FXAA has almost no performance impact.
@@deathtrooper2048 thanks I meant TAA I just mixed up the AA methods >.
What do you propose instead of TAA? It's the best AA technology we have and when done right produces excellent results. When some AI enters the mix - you can run at a slightly lower res and get nearly indistinguishable image from native with AA, which looks better than native without AA
@@yarost12 well the latest version of FSR looks way better than just using TAA. Also if you use the upscaler in UE5.4 it looks way bettter than TAA. You can easily tell when games are being lazy and using crap TAA... Like FF7 remake part 2.. It only uses TAA and looks so bad! But other games like Horizon look way sharper and use a different solution at a similar base resolution. I think they using Sony's in house upscaler? Anyways there are many other options than just using crap TAA
@@Jrfeimst2 you do realize that everything you proposed is essentially TAA on steroids? And FSR2 doesn't look better than TAA, don't kid yourself, it breaks up the image to shit.
We're yet to see how the latest version performs, so far we've seen 2 GIFs with their combined resolution amounting to a postmark.
I just want consistent 1080p 60fps
Get a pc then
Yea how dare we ask for the lowest expectations from these tiny little corporations like Sony and Microsoft.
The nerve.
I think you mean 1440p 60fps
@@LewdGyrations hell yeah, get on pc, and join us for stutter city and awful, buggy ports. You will love it (I do not love it and never buy a "AAA" on pc anymore)
@@dylanhendley5003 have you got a Pc? Tell us more. You dont like Pc gaming?
900p upscaled to 4K just isn’t enough information to look good
art style matters with resolution it requires to properly show on
This is the first console generation in a long time where many games have a 60 FPS performance mode. I want it to stay that way regardless of resolution going forward. Options are always nice, so if people want higher resolutions, allow them to do that with the graphics mode. That said, developers should keep 60 FPS performance modes around, too. I understand that people don’t like lower resolutions, but I don’t mind them if that means my game can run at a higher frame rate which I care more about. Plus, games with performance modes are future-proof for later generations that support backward compatibility as shown with the Series X and PS5 running Xbox One X and PS4 Pro games at their maximum resolution on performance mode at 60 FPS and still look phenomenal.
Best comment ever on this subject matter. 👍🏼
1080p 60fps should be easily done by ANY game right now
1440p. 1080p blows
@@karenk683 Sure but way more realistic to what I said
Nonsense. That’s evidently not the case. The CPUs are too weak. Devs are not holding back.
@@raskolnikov6443 When did I say it was a Dev problem?
@@raskolnikov6443 The PS5 was doing just fine till 2023ish. Around the same time when we had a very high volume of AAA releases and an abnormally high volume of layoffs. Im actually absolutely amazed at how devs can work together and pump projects as complex as AAA games when they know about their inevitable layoff and 100 hour work weeks. Like if i were in that situation I wouldve simply given up and lost any energy or inspiration for whatever im working on. I would be more occupied applying and answering DMs on linkedin for my next job lol.
Nah, fuck that, if your ps5 game has worse image quality than the average ps4 game, you done fucked up
But is 8k written on box of ps5 is in 8k or it is also 720p upscaled to 8k?
80p to 8K
Yeah I don't agree with some of the opinions said in this. There are games that look great graphically, run at high resolutions and at 60fps on console like Doom Eternal, so no, low resolution is not "necessary" for hitting 60fps, either optimize the game better or lower the graphical fidelity, there is no excuse to ship out a game today at 1080p or lower or at 30fps.
I always feel like DF is maybe a little high on their own supply when it comes to resolution - especially for consoles. I was in NYC this weekend, dropped by the Nintendo NYC store and they had Princess Peach Showtime playing on a 16-foot screen (or rather a wall-sized LED array) with 4:2:0 chroma subsampling (not even smoothed on decode) and nobody cared. Every imperfection was on display larger than life and it was fine. It looked good, even.
Myself, I finally got a 4k TV and I've been playing Immortals of Aveum and I absolutely cannot see on my TV the stuff you all pointed out in your coverage. It's too far away and it moves too fast.
And, hell, I've been playing Kingdom Come Deliverance on Switch and it's, again, just fine. Nice looking, even, at times. The lighting is FAR more important than the resolution there.
Like, I get that the goal of your work is to analyze this stuff, and I love seeing the breakdowns and explanations, but when you sit down and just play the game, do you really notice? Or have you just trained yourself to notice after poring over hours of HDMI capture video?
I wonder what they did with Stellar Blade since it is 60fps and still super detailed and sharp. There is maybe a little shimmer as a trade off but it also keeps the crisp specular highlights perfectly.
It was kinda nice coming off Rebirth which iirc is the same resolution in performance mode looks 10x blurrier. And don’t get me started on Dragons Dogma PS5 ooof that’s an ugly, blurry, stuttery, npc pop in mess all around.
They did what no one does: optimize.
They made a ps4 game on ps5
Optimization. It’s becoming a lost art. Developers targeted console specs and built the game around it. Nowadays devs are brute forcing for high end pcs and using VRR/ai upscalers to optimize. The difference is jarring when you compare multiplats to console developed games.
Developers managed to do a hell of a lot more with PS4 hardware than they are now and those were basically tablet cpus. PS5 Zen isn’t amazing but it’s nowhere near as bad as the 4’s cpu was at launch.
@@CruxisAngel954 Zen2, the PS5 is basically a Ryzen 3700X with a RX6700 slapped, literally the exact same PC i'm running, and if i can run Dragon's Dogma 2 at 1080p ultra 60 fps (with drops in cities) and 1440p high/mid with the exact same FPS's why the hell the PS5 can't do it?
@@unlimitedslash Because you mistakenly believe the PS5 is "basically a Ryzen 3700X with a RX6700" seemingly not understanding the significant differences.
Yeah im looking forward to amd fyr 3.1. dont know how fast this will be implemented on the console games and if frame generation is supported but hopefully the upscaling of lower base resolution will get better. 720 base rez is still challenging even for the mighty DLSS
I think so. for example: playing Warzone then playing Spider-Man 2 I immediately notice the native 4K difference. Like it was on I still see aliasing
We haven’t really seen any upgrade in current gen from last gen just faster loading times I’m afraid it’s been an eye opener for sure!
Why did we start using techniques like FSR and DLSS anyway? I feel like traditional upscaling that we had in last gen looked fine. Hell I’d say checkerboarding generally looked better too
HellBlade 2's PC requirements give me hope. They give target resolution/frame rate per setting with a footnote that upscaling can be used; but not needed. Hope they set some kind of bar here with their game. I suspect it will play very nicely on the console as a result. :)
Higher resolutions are the absolute biggest waste of system resources imaginable. It makes sense when you're just a few feet away from your computer monitor to have the highest resolutions possible but I just don't see what the point is when you're sitting on a couch a significant distance away from a large TV set. People are enamored with the IDEA of playing games in 4K or even 8K. The REALITY though is it makes little difference. Using modern processors to run gameplay essential uses of ray-tracing or even more ambitious uses of layers upon layers of transparency effects would be better for gaming but you probably won't get that with higher resolutions as it really just compounds the problems associated with running such effects.
Using the 360/PS3 as a scapegoat about people not complaining during that generation is bunk. People were playing on shitty 720p/1080p LCD's back then, not 4k120 panels. It simply mattered less if the game was running at lower resolutions because they were much closer to the native resolutions of the panels. Also, it's just flat out not true. Plenty of people complained about the fact that later era 360/PS3 games ran like crap. It's partly why PC had a resurgence because it was relatively inexpensive to build a mid range rig and it offered a much better overall experience and games were cheaper.
Also, when the PS4/Xbox One came out. Making a pc that could run games smoother wasn’t that expensive. This generation has been mess in Visual quality and effects. We still haven’t gotten the next generation leap yet.
Yes
Another thing to mention is tv size is what makes a big impact on perceived resolution clarity. Resolution is struggling witch is why I refuse to go above 65 inches on my OLED until resolutions catch up. So maybe next gen I will upgrade to that 77 OLED.
I am shortsighted and wearing glasses so consoles reached peak resolution for me already because for me it is not limited by the Technology. I wish I had olivers awesome eyesight...or his beautiful spirit lifting smile. 😌 I played some Metro last light today on series x and it looked pretty awesome to me. 🤷🏻😅
I primarily play on PC when it comes to graphics but when I first got a PS5, I was quite amazed at how good Returnal, Tales of Arise, RE8 looked. I was even more impressed with Ragnarok which ran 1440p+ and my LG gaming monitor showed VRR with 70+ fps.
Fast forward now, pubs are patting themselves in the back for 1440p output with 864p internal res using FSR1/2 at 60 fps.
Its just very inconsistent nowadays.
720p native is strange for a non handheld in 2024. I would think the resolution for a 2020 console would match my TV from 2014, which is 1080p.
Lifelong PC only gamer here but I dont like dunking on consoles just for the sake of it. I would place the majority of the blame with the developers in this. When you look at Sony's first party games for example, they get the fps to visual quality and resolution balance mostly right.
I think RT should be ignored on consoles entirely, and we clearly lack developers that care for optimization, the baseline should be 1080p, if you can't reach 1080p 60fps on a hardware like the PS5/XBOX Series S/X you don't have a project that it's "too big" or "too complex" you have an optimization problem.
The PS3 had The Last of Us, or Destiny 1, Final Fantasy XIII, the vast majority of Assassin's Creed games, heck you even have games that came out "recently" like COD Ghost, and MGS V, and it runs them, maybe not at 60 fps, but they are playable, but it clearly shows the lack of optimization we've been seeing since we touched the x86 systems and we have an standard hardware between sony and microsoft, devs have become complacent and rely too much on engine tools that allegedly do the work for them, and that has provoked that devs have stopped thinking in how we can push this hardware further.
We have a fairly recent case: Kaze Emanuar, remaking the Mario64 engine, the dude is achieving gamecube graphics ON THE FREAKING N64, Immortals of Aveum has no right to look and run as bad as it does, on a hardware like the PS5, when right now we are are managing gamecube graphics on the N64, we have Wolfenstein The new order on 360/ps3 and it looks way to similar in quality, there is an entire gen of consoles between them.
Another case: Killzone Mercenaries on the PSVita, how the hell did they manage to do it? i don't fucking know, but that's an optimization milestone if I've ever seen one.
Now everyone relies on upscaling to "fix the game" for them, na boy, if you can't run FFXVI at minimum 1080 native 60fps you have to fix it, if Dragon's Dogma 2 can't achieve 1080p 60fps native you have to fix it.
Heck we recently had a video by Taki Udon showing the Nintendo Switch, running games AT NATIVE 4K.
I played Jedi Survivor for an hour on my Series S and I think it looks pretty good on that console
Lower resolutions on consoles results in LESS headroom on PCs. One of the points of waiting for a native PC port, is that the extra headroom on the PC can overcome poor optimization for a stable locked 30 FPS on PC, for when that was not accomplished within the console spec. 720/28 FPS on console becomes 720p/30 FPS on PC at the mid-range.
I remember a time when games at 1080p could look pin sharp. For some reason that doesn't seem feasible nowadays.
Makes a change from a question about framerates I guess.
there are games on series x snd ps5 that are 720?? whaaaat? really did i hear that right?
4k gaming was a lie, glad im still gaming on my old 1080p tv. 4k tv owners wasted their money
Yes they are.. we were promised 4K last gen with the PS4 Pro, and they failed to deliver which was to be expected then Sony promised it again with the PS5 and failed to deliver once again as most games are still running between 1080-2160p at 30fps, what is the PS5 Pro going to do over the Vanilla PS5 aside from using PSSR to upscale games just like how checkerboard rendering worked.. and potentially adding other ray tracing elements.. if this console can’t run games at higher resolutions and frame rates out of the box and requires a patch then it’s useless and should be canceled, this generation hasn’t even really started yet, I would have still been perfectly happy with my PS4 at this point, very few games actually take advantage of the current gen hardware, sad generation to say the least
i switched to pc because of the 1080p on a 4K box and 720p
I agree with the write in.
Yes, yes it is! How the hell can we have a console with 4K on the box run sub 1080p?
I would hate going below 1080P; preferably no lower than 1440 for upscaling to 4k
Let the customer choose. 1080p on a 1080p looks great. But now I get a higher resolution above 1080p downscaled to 1080p with additional performance loss because it's running natively and internally higher. Just let me run native 1080p and give the extra horsepower back if I'd like to do so, or when I have a screen resolution like that. 4k screens are rather cheap these days, I know, but I don't want to throw away what is still perfectly fine to use. Internet television through the provider is almost always 1080p still as well.
And plasma screen are still a lot(!) better for motion than OLEDs
If I remember correctly, the Last of Us Remastered on PS4 pro would change some settings depending on the system output resolution. I think all games should function like that.
Elden Ring, for instance, would be 100% locked at 60fps if it was rendered at 1080p on PS5. But nope, it has to be at least in 1520p and drop frames to hit that, for honestly no good reason. And if you play on a 1080p screen, all of that extras pixels go to waste (supersampling benefits aside).
No point in buying a 4K display if you can't play at that resolution, people keep talking like 4K is the norm but the vast majority of games are still 1080p or lower
@@randyrrs7028 nicely upscaled 1080p-1440p looks pretty good on a 4K display. Native 4k at 30fps is also possible (Elden Ring, Demon's Souls, Forbidden West are all native 4k in quality mode).
The problem is that devs are pushing more than this consoles cam deliver and aren't optimizing shit.
@@bismarckluna 100% agreed
The same journalists who said ps5 pro is not needed are now praising developers that implement "high end effects" and RT and drop resolution below 720p, what a joke !!
Man I have a qled 75 inch 4k with vrr and I don't really care about resolution. I like the raytrace lighting and reflections on console and I like 60 or higher fps but resolution don't bother me. Even more so when it's dynamic as it often is a decent res most of the time. Good motion blur goes a long way too.
No because the best gaming experience is on 720-1080p. This is the sweet spot. Anything higher is barely noticeable to the human eye unless your on a massive screen.
Given the hardware, every game should be running at 1440p at 60fps. I think it should be a standard. Last gen was 1080p at 30fps or 60fps for some games. 4K might've been too big of a jump. Its is 4x the resolution of 1080p. But the PS5 pro should help with running games at 4K 60fps.
YES
Absolutely
Nahh, 640x480i is perfectly fine!
Exactly.
In this day and age, 720p is just simply too low. It is setting the bar too low, and letting developers off of the hook.
Warzone on the Xbox Series X is tragic in 4K 120Hz. I had a PC with a 7900XTX and the graphics difference is incredible. So crisp, no trees etc disappearing and reappearing due to a low draw distance and the sound is miles better. I know the 7900XTX is twice the price of the console but I think it’s time they got the new consoles announced. We can’t wait until 2028 for next gen consoles.
This is why Stellar Blade is really refreshing. The native 1440p Performance mode or the Balanced mode are good, relatively sharp and smooth.
This is how games should run on that gen.
Yes because 4k + modern graphics is way too big a leap for consoles. Previous gen only had to worry about 1080p. Which was the same res available in the 360/PS3 generation.
Minimum performance expectations went like this:
PS2 - 480p 30fps
PS3 - 720p 30fps
PS4 - 1080p 30 fps
PS5 - 2160p 30fps/1440p 60fps
One of these jumps look a bit excessive compared to the others lmao
4k gaming was a lie, glad im still gaming on my old 1080p tv. 4k tv owners wasted their money
@@randyrrs7028 yeah thats why in 2018 when I was seeking a TV I actually went with a 1080p set as I was going to have my PS4 on it. Less than $300 at the time for a 43” LG with basic HDR spec.
A lot of 4k TVs now do a decent job upscaling though. I moved the PS4 to a Hisense U7G and it looks good as well. But obviously not nearly as hood as native 4k from my Razer laptop that I plug into it from time to time for Witcher 3.
The current gen equivalent is a 4060?? Seems like an awfully generous comparision. Figured it would be closer to a 2070 (maybe 3060 at the most).
When they first came out they said it was very close a to a 2070 super.. is a 2070 super close to a 4060? I havent looked
Do you have a poor 4060? Defending this poo from NV this hard. Yeah XSX and PS5 can beat poor 4060 at 30FPS high res mode for the majority 3A titles. 50--60FPS mode 4060 may have advantage over PS5 at some demanding titles like Avatar, alan wake 2. Oh Alan wake 2, XSX can beat poor 4060 at the stable 60FPS for the same settings.
@@Jrfeimst2 yeah they are very close. 4060 8G is set between 2070super and 2080, but has only 128bit memory bus that is kinda terrible at 1440P or above res for today' 3A titles.
@@Jrfeimst2 So to completely beat XSX and PS5 gaming experience, you need a GPU like RX6800/7700xt above, or RTX3070/4060ti above to install in your PC case. hehehe.
@@thepaintbrushonlymodeller9858The difference is that the NV has DLSS which leaves the PS5 far behind. Also not forgetting RT.
Path tracing and raytracing should be dev only normal consumer can not afford it
resolution and stable fps is something REALLY IMPORTANT.... especially if the taa solution or upscaling solution is bad implemented... in older games full hd with 2x msaa looked fine, when playing far cry 5 on full hd with taa, it almost looks like xbox 360 graphics (im not kidding)... some games do better some worse, but going under full hd is a big nono...
resolution and good Anti aliasing is ALWAYS better than newer engine, new effects... its beyond me why they always need to push newer engines so much... there should be a minimum resolution imo that the game needs to designed for...
yes. If you can hold 4k 60 on last gen ghrapics dont try push ghrapics in first place . higher fielity requires higher FPS and pixel count or else it looks off.
Wish the current gen consoles had access to DLSS which is a way better upscaling solution when compared to FSR etc.
~4k40fps is best solution for consoles.Avatar in 40fps very good
But on XBOX THEY shouldn't lock fps on 40 .For Xbox better solution is unlocked 40-45fps
Lowest common denominator.
Most people own 60hz displays.
40fps would slide show for most people.
What really worries me is performance. I think game developers are so focused on fidelity that they forget how important it is for a game to FEEL GOOD TO PLAY. This generation is better than ever in this regard with performance vs fidelity options but games like dragons dogma 2 with its one setting of “sludge” really worries me… but maybe it’s the exception to the rule. Hopefully.
I stopped playing helldivers on ps5 because of the low rez on performance mode same thing with final fantasy 7 rebirth
isnt it more a case that everyone is prematurely chasing high resolutions before the hardware can easily handle it?
TV companies kinda forced it.
The bigger the screen the higher resolution you need.
They totally skipped QHD.
Hardware manufacturers are still playing catch up.
Last year I built a high end QHD system, cost £2000.
4k would of been an extra £1000
@@user-sx3pc4dj3r The problem with QHD is it sits in a weird middle ground.... so I can understand why it was skipped. I almost got a QHD monitor (for the size) but just cannot afford the HW to go along with it and a 4K monitor in 1k mode is apparently still not good enough.
You make a good point but I would add that it seems more likely that the hardware manufacturers were locked into multi-decade planned obsolescence production which got disrupted by the introduction of higher res output.... or AI got too good too fast and they needed some way to slow down genpop capacity to keep profits flowing.
In the end we can only speculate as to why they are stubbornly playing catch up. As it stands the HW is simply too slow, too hot, too power hungry and too expensive. I don't even want to think of what it would take to properly drive 8k.
This gen wasn’t good enough for 4k tvs and they don’t have great upscaling either (up to this moment). Just a bad mix of not having the tech or hardware needed to do the job. The lost generation. I do think this gen probably pushed a lot of people to buy pretty high end PCs. So it helped the PC market is my guess by not doing a good job with 4k.
I think the reason we see games have such low resolutions, is because the divide between console generations have been blurred more than ever before, especially with the PS4 Pro and One X, so developers have felt pressured to use more cutting edge effects to try and distinguish current gen games from the previous generation, which has resulted in image clarity being sacrificed.
I think its clear with current-gen hardware, the tradeoff of having these advanced visual features for image clarity and performance isn't worth it. To me, I think developers should have always used a native 4k 30 FPS as a MINIMUM baseline (1080p for Series S) for this console generation. You can go down to lower resolutions like 1080p-1440p for or use upscaling tech like FSR 2 for performance modes or cutting edge visual features like ray-tracing, but I feel like there should be at minimum be at least one native 4k option.
I think people will have to accept that if they want native 4K 60Fps to become standard these console are going to have to become more expensive so they can be more powerful. The increasing power demamds of games is keeping pace with the power increases in console hardware and making the console more expensive to make them more powerful is the only way to bridge that gap without breakthroughs in game dev techniques and engine optimization. I think $100 more is reasonable, $200 more is a push, and $300 is too much.
Graphic is good enough, the problem is lack of creativity and captivating stories
Amen to that. I regularly play 360/PS3 games because the stories in games were sooo much better.
@@TheAmazingSpiderGuy_99 give us another mass effect and I don’t care how the shadows look. If starfield story was at mass effect 2 level who would have cared
No to captivating stories, just give me a fun game. I have seen too many modern games have crap core gameplay because they focused too much on the "story".
Good gameplay mechanics create their own story.
We have also a lack of beautiful females with tits and asses in western games. 😕
@@dragons_red "story" in those games is nothing more than propaganda lol. Cough...... last of us 2.........cough
The problem is that developers take the easy way out nowadays. They don't rely on clever solutions to deal with limitations like all previous gens (especially up until the 7th gen). Instead, they just let the over the counter solutions available in modern engines to do the heavy work, and hope that consoles having similar architectures compared to PCs to deal will make do.
Publishers have been ruining the game industry, but modern devs have their share of fault as well. And if this trend continues, it will only get worse.
I played Jedi fallen Order on my old quadcore/980ti PC and 1080p plasma and it was a gorgeous fluid game.
I upgraded to a 4K Oled with VRR tv + PS5 and Jedi Survivor was a blurry stuttering mess.
Years has passed, 1500€ of investment and I have a far worse experience. This gen has been a disapointment so far with so much games not thought for the plateform.
What is the point of having beautiful effects if there are compltetly blurry?!
I have nothing against upscaling, but it's not meant to go from too low a resolution, use it in it's range of efficience!
Watching this in a blurry 1080p. LOL
4k gaming was a lie, glad im still gaming on my old 1080p tv. 4k tv owners wasted their money
@@randyrrs7028i felt this way until i actually played on a 4k tv consistently it’s a massive difference
I've been gaming on PC for 12 years at this point and some of the things that I've become accustomed to still isn't even available on consoles The fact that we're talking about 720p in 2024 on anything that's not the switch is ridiculous.
Yeah I was shocked at how much better Jedi Survivor looks on my new 4090 rig compared to PS5.
Shocking indeed. How a game looks better on a device whose RGB cost more than ps5
Does it look 4 times better? Since its 4 times more wxpensibe
@@ajibsaladka🤣
Most games are great. I wouldn´t judge on bad examples too much. I also find that Rise of the Ronin in Ray Tracing Mode with unlocked FPS is running good enough with close to 60 most of the time (for a really bad optimized game overall). The lower resolution doesn´t hurt to image quality in my case.
But you find also enough games with better resolution. Persona 3 Reload runs in native 4k 60fps with raytracing. Sure, not the most challenging, but it works good and it has great viewing distances at the same time (you really see characters and most stuff to the end of the screen). If you check the list of native 4k or 1440p games, you can clearly see, it really depends on the developer, the game itself and the engine!
I’m fine with 1400p but gotta have 60fps.. I’m done with 30
Also why does 720p look worse now??? like on say a ps3, ps3 720p looks crispy compared to when a modern game drops to that resolution
Probably because your display got larger.
If you were to dig out and old smaller 1080p it'd look clearer.
Because a lot of games use newer AA methods like TAA that add blur and aren't as sharp. So it makes 720p look a lot less sharp and more blurry than on old consoles that either didn't use AA or used some sort of MSAA
Because even 720p native has better resolution than 720p upscaled to 4k via fsr
Absolutely!! And I can’t stand it! Would much rather have a locked framerate and high resolution than tech/ray tracing etc..
The TAA or FXAA Anti-aliasing or upscaling, make the game lower resolution that why always prefer to turn them OFF.
What defines a generation? Resolution or Visual fidelity?
I believe both, but in this age of gaming, you can't have one without giving up on the other
If watchdogs 2 on the ps5 had a 60 fps patch, it would look better than most current gen games on the ps5. Native 1440p must be the minimum and the maximum resolution for all ps5 games with a framerate targeting 60fps.
TAA blurry visuals and sub 60 fps are ruining modern gaming visuals for me.
Yes.
one of the most impressing games on xbox series x is metro exodus the next gen version... HOLY SHIT does this game look good...
honorable mentions:
the halo franchise (infinite i dont know), bulletstorm, some wolfenstein games, witcher 3... witcher 3 looks a little bit soft, but with the right viewing distance its fine
imo price is not a factor anymore for deciding to get a console....
you should ask yourself a few questions:
-am i have a problem learning or atleast figuring out how hard it is to build a pc?
-do i have a problem with little bit of tinkering and getting know how ?
- do i mind building myself (you can save alot of money, especially with used parts)
-do i play often?
you can even buy used pcs very cheap...300 - 400 dollars can get you a decent pc i swear
playing all titles native is just something else... a console is not a pc and the series x is not the pc in the slightest
even older games profit so much from higher GPU power... a game needs to be half life 1 old to not profit from high resolutions... any game wich has not superflat textures profits so much from high resolutions its not funny
Developers should be aiming 1440p upscaled from native 900p via fsr2
60fps should be the default with some exception like gta6 and games of that caliber
Answer: Yes.
Definitely. It's a huge issue, especially for people playing on big 4K screens. It's the one thing that might make the PS5 Pro a worthwhile purchase.
The issue is not the hardware, its shitty non optimized software.
Problem with gaming at the moment is they are focusing on resolution and fps. Old games were great fun to play they had only one goal in mind it should be fun to play. Remember ps1 games people still say those pixelated games are still the best.
Im fine with 1080p.
Everyone in the comments saying below 720 is inexcusable or they want a 1080p 60fps. Bro the expectation was a 4K (upscaled if necessary) 60fps experience or a 1440p and up to 120fps experience. That was my expectation and what we were told at the starting of the gen. What the fuck is going on with talks of 720p (and below!) showing up and begging for 1080p 60fps? Such a shitshow