John-ShepardBattlefield 3 will be rendered in 720p high definition on consoles. …why so disappointed?
DICE rendering architect Johan Andersson doesn't quite understand why people are getting all bent out of shape over this unsurprising fact. As Andersoon replied to a distressed fan at his Twitter page :
"Yes, just as 99% of all games for those platforms."
And then:
"How is [720p] a shame? Name a single FPS game that runs at 1080p on any of the consoles? Would have to do huge gameplay cuts."
"We think huge levels, lots of players, great fx, destruction, vehicles & varied gameplay is more important than 1080p."
Well, that's probably true. It's just that these days, more and more consumers have access to full 1080p high definition and with Blu-Ray movies taking full advantage, you can't blame certain people for having expectations. Furthermore, let's not forget that what we've seen of Battlefield 3 so far has been amazing…but much of it has also been on PC, which is a different matter.
In truth, very few games are rendered in full 1080p on consoles these days, but if you want them, you basically need a PS3. You know, MGS4, GT5, etc.
Related Game(s): Battlefield 3
I'd take higher polygon count over higher resolution any day. I'll be playing BF3 on pc, so i'll get both 😀
I'll take a higher frame rate.
Sharp visuals are greatly advantageous in a shooter, so that players can spot enemies at a distance. Jaggies create unnecessary difficulties.
I'd take FullHD over high poly count or extra lighting passes any day, but World is right: rock-solid frame rate is #1.
And, for the love of Dog, V-synch!
Last edited by Fane1024 on 6/20/2011 5:10:31 AM
The only thing that really caught a difference for me was the smoke and particle effects. They didn't look half as good as they did on the PC. Maybe the muzzle flash too but the game looked great either way.
Yeah, this is pretty much the case with every game, besides CoD of course. (The FPS, not the res)
sounds like the reaction people had to ps3 footage on the jimmy fallon show. it doesn't look as good as pc everyone screamed. dice said back toi all the people complaining what did you expect? if it looked as good as the pc then we failed the pc.
720p is fine on this current gen of hardware.
I saw that Jimmy clip of BF3. yeah, not nearly PC quality.
The only thing that matters is it still looks pretty damn good.
I wish DICE would go to Naughty Dog or Guerilla Games and ask them how to do proper graphics on the PS3. The game looks fine but I know that it could be better. Even Crysis 2 looks better than it at the moment.
KillZone 3 and Uncharted 2 both run @ 720p
As does inFamous 1 & 2, Fallout 3 & New Vegas, ALL COD, Bad Company 1 & 2 and 90% of All cross-platform games.
People are just way to preoccupied with the resolution # these days that they forget the point of playing games. HAVING FUN.
It's like people getting pissed about DNF cause it doesn't LOOK like COD! It's f***ing Duke! It's a cult classic, and straight up entertaining!
Get over the resolution difference your mind doesn't even notice, and have fun!
/end rant
Neither MGS4 or GT5 render at full 1920x1080p.
Very very few games truly do:
RR7
Tekken 5 DR
Super Stardust HD (with current patch)
I think some earlier version of Virtua Tennis does
Full Auto (ps3)
Many of Sony's NBA games
I think there's a that EA Home Court game that does too
Who the poop thought BF3 was going to be 1080p in the first place?
I know, Killzone 3 isn't at 1080p so we certainly shouldn't be crying about it. =)
I owned Full Auto 2 (Full Auto was the 360 version) and needless to say it was no graphical powerhouse compared to today's games.
Aint no such thing as real 720p or 1080p on consoles yet lol. Everything is upscaled anyways, so there is no need to complain as to PC players are gonna get the best looking version PEIROD! As to us PS3 gamers are gonna get the best console version, until the Wiiu comes out xD rofl
Hey, not everyone does it like CoD and friends. Many of Sony's exclusives render natively at 720p
What Temji said. Many PS3 games are 720p native.
…and some are 1080p, as Temjin said.
Rare, but *not* non-existent.
Last edited by Fane1024 on 6/20/2011 5:14:23 AM
It's okay but when you talk up your game and hype its visuals and its engine to the friggin max and talk sh*t about the competition then people expect a LOT out of you.
People are upset that the PS3 versions isn't closer to the PC version because the PS3 can handle more than what they are doing with it. The 360 can't, but they have to make it identical so that's what you get people.
Multiplats no longer use consoles to their fullest potential. That's a fact.
Yup, Naughty Dog needs to have a chat with them!
Uncharted 2 is 720p. MGS4 is actually 1024×768 upscaled to 1080p (assuming you're playing on a TV that's outputting 1080p and not 720).
Nuff said. 🙂
They'd still look better in 1080p (IF all other aspects were equal, which would require more magic from the engineers).
Well when it looks that pretty, i'm not surprised.
Didn't they said bf3 also runs at 30fps?
yup that got some rage on too, seems pretty pitiful after all that boasting.
Or you can just get the game on PC and run it on higher resolutions… just saying.
Anyway, after seeing the Jimmy Fallon PS3 footage, I was impressed until I saw the car blow up and the smoke effects were pretty average. Pretty much confirmed a PC purchase for me.
I've got 4GB RAM and a NVidia GTX 460 on a duo Core processor. Would that be enough to run this game on semi-high?
The system requirements haven't been released as off yet but my guess is you should be okay for the most part. Though a lot of the big PC games nowadays are recommending quad cores or higher for the best experience.
don't know why people would complain about it being 720p and at 30fps. kz and uc both run at 720p and 30fps and the games run very smoothly. heck i think gow 3 was even 720p 30fps and that game is a massive beast in visuals. dice said while back too that what was shown was pre-aplha coding so i can bet the console version of ps3 at least will be overall better looking than what was shown. people thinking the console version should be similar to pc version need to stay off the wack pipe. thinking you can get massive visuals and quality out of 5 year old tech to be on pare with new tech in pc your off your nut
They talked up the visuals like the second coming of Christ, I'm not surprised people are disappointed.
that's the danger of developers talking games up. if it doesn't meet people's expectations then you get a lot of backlash. all the people saying frostbite 2 is the sh*t are now complaining about that ps3 footage not looking nearly as good as pc.
a real turn of events on the hype bf3 was getting. that's also a risk you run when showcase pc footage first. i always knew the game would be 720p 30 fps. that's really all the consoles can handle while maintaining good textures and aa.
LOL at the dolt who got upset about this. What did he expect? No one said the game was going to be render at in 1080p. Kids these days.
Jawknee, I hear you; only issue for me is I come back to those heady days when Sony promised so much with the PS3.
Remember, as we have always discussed and pointed this out before; the PS3 was promising real high definition gaming, so people I think generally were expecting 1080p 60fps out of the box.
It may be that Sony was meaning 720p as standard rather than 1080p, but I guess it has been a rallying cry for the negative Sony naysayers.
Personally I have also felt that the true next generation gaming era will start with PS4… the PS3 was a high definition prelude to what may be the kind of hardware we have wanted all along in some respects…
Again, we will see what the future brings, but you can only imagine playing Battlefield 3 with DX11 shaders at 1900 x 1200 🙂
Q!
"play.experience.enjoy"
Honestly when the PS3 was announced I new nothing about 720p vs 1080p or 60fps. It just wasn't something I new about or really cared to know about. I just wanted a new Final Fantasy and Resident Evil(both of which turned out to be massive disappointments. Ha!)I don't remember Sony over promising anything. I just remember my shock at the price tag when it was first announced.
Yip, and the price tag was the clue… we were buying into cutting edge tech. It was, in all sense and purposes, a 64bit computer system; but contained to be a console.
But 5 years have passed, this is ion's in the tech world. Sony is right in that there is more "juice" to be squeezed out of the system… we will have to see what else we will see, even though we know games like UC3 and GoW4 etc should be spectacular.
Maybe it is not all about the graphics and the PS3 will be proof of this…
Q!
"play.experience.enjoy"
I was expecting it to be 1080p, since Crysis 2 and FFXIII were able to be played on the PS3 and they were very big games, but I wouldn't be surprised that Battlefield 3 is only 720p since Bad Company 2 runs at 720p.
Crysis 2 only runs at 720p on the PS3… as far as I know!
Q!
"play.experience.enjoy"
They are upscaled though and Crysis 2 suffered as a result. The game runs much better when you uncheck 1080i/p and let it run in 720p which by the way isn't even its native resolution.
EDIT: Nope Qubex. The PS3 upscales it to 1080p but the game suffers as a result. The frame rate and motion blur is much worse when running it at 1080p.
Last edited by Jawknee on 6/20/2011 12:20:00 AM
Ok, thanks for that Jawknee… I have test played it recently and I have to say that Cry-Engine 3 is awesome; BUT, the resolution issue is very evident compared to the PC… you can see where the latest PC rigs shine. I did notice a lot of visual artifacts and "shadow wiping"… i.e. the effect of a diagonal line running across the surface of a wall when you are walking towards it etc…
Funny how in exclusive game engines, such as the engine used for UC2 and Killzone 3, these anomalies aren't readily present. I haven't seen them anyway… Just shows it is possible to produce a clean engine if the will, time, money and effort is there…
Q!
"play.experience.enjoy"
the ps3 version is actually running at the lowest resolution. something like 10% lower than the 360. that's why it looks a little blurry. i still think cryengine3 is way better than u3, but i was a little dissapointed crytek had to fall back on an old multiplat trick with the resolution cut.
i almost think its a port of the 360 version. some developers have proven the ps3 can have better muliplats. la noire is a great example of that. it has better framerates and shadows when compared to the 360. not to mention being on one disc.
spoiled kids! just as long as the game is fun,that all i ask for. i come from the atari 2600 gen and 720p is great. low standards you say? No! just being realistic. i had a good rigg for pc gaming but the truth is, pc gaming is very expensive. All of you pc gamers know it. plus you people are just getting to spoiled. stop complaining about it.
Seriously. My first console was an NES and now we are looking at games that are light years ahead and these kids are still whining.
That's why I'm rather forgiving of many things whereas the spoiled people aren't. They don't know there was a time when 90% of games available were unplayable and the "gitches" and "technical errors" that hurt games in reviews today were once standard operating procedure even on PS1.
Still though, games like Assassin's Creed take it too far 😉
Last edited by WorldEndsWithMe on 6/20/2011 12:46:07 AM
My very first game & console was a couple of finger puppets(cut from a pair of mittens), playing inside a cardboard box(with the center cut out to look like a TV).
My, my, how graphics have really changed since then……..
At least 720p is HD, I'm not complaining. DICE delivers.
Not in my book it isn't…unless you want to call 1080p VHD or something.
720p is barely above PAL resolution.
I consider it MD (Low/Medium/High).
I'm cool with 720 P as long as the frame rate is good.
Even in 720P, most FPS on consoles don't have a good frame rate and if you think they do, try playing that same game on a PC 🙂
ooo maybe if they actually added decent options in games where we could enable/disable effects, lighting, multiple resolution modes, vsynch, antialiasing, bump mapping, etc.
that would be awesome so you could disable effects to get a better framerate, especially when you go online!
I'm not surprised. Few console games are, and they're generally very simple. As long as they deliver on the promise of huge levels and varied gameplay. I hope that the game is of a decent length too. I have no issues with this news, and fail to see how anyone realistically could.
Modern Warfare 3 is running at 60 fps, never mind the fact that BF3 will look better, have a higher native resolution, and probably be a better game. Rest assured the arguments about which is better will hinge on that fact.
wow, someone call in the shock police a CONSOLE game looks WORSE then a f*cking PC game!
my lord, are people really THAT stupid!?
complaining about that is like complaining that your 20 year old herbie is slower then a brand spanking new 458 itallia.
i mean come on common sense people!
my ex boss told me one day that it was gone, took me all this time to realize it!
i could understand if it looked crap but for crying out loud it looks fantastic!
again people are forgetting its not due out for another 4 months the game could change MASSIVELY by then!
my lord, talk about crying over spilt milk!
my lord, when did everyone turn into such graphic whores?
i always said graphics has destroyed games this gen, but you did not have to prove it for me!
At this stage of the game people want graphics and gameplay and feel they should be able to get both. I reserved the ps3 version of this game but I may be switching that over to a PC version once I see the specs required and what my new laptop will be able to do
I agree with him, all of that in a gameplay is more important than higher resolution. And besides, there isn't that big of a difference between 1080p and 720p anyway. People should stop bitching so much.