Wednesday, November 5, 2014

Thank you Sledgehammer for giving people exactly what they wanted and proving a great point.

In the last 48 hours the phrase dynamic resolution has become one of my absolute favorite things in the entire world.  Not because it just sounds cool, but because it has thrown a massive curve-ball into the whole #Resolutiongate fiasco.  I have never been one to care about game resolution.  I have said it probably hundreds of time at this point, but a boring game is still going to be boring in 720p or 1080p.  It just does not matter to me.

Resolution to me is just such a non issue and I will never understand why people get so caught up in all the resolution comparisons.  Especially when they only own one console.  That to me is the pinnacle of stupidity.  Why even waste your time caring if you do not have the option to play it on the other console anyway?  It just makes no sense!

Despite all that; for months and months the mantra of many has been that 1080p is a must for this current generation of games.  Anything less is just a joke and it beneath the $399 barrier to entry of the consoles.  Queue Call of Duty: Advanced Warfare and the dynamic resolution system.

When it was first announced that the Xbox One version of COD:AW would have dynamic resolution the defenses went up.  Pretty much any comment section you go to from that time will back up my statement that people chalked it up to being nothing more than some bullshit P.R. phrase.  They basically treated it like the developer was just avoiding admitting that the console was weaker than the PS4.  Something that is pretty well established at this point.

Fast-forward to the launch of the game and subsequent onslaught of reviews and it turns out dynamic resolution wasn't just some P.R. speak.  It was a way to get the absolute best experience out of the game's single player campaign.  Not only that, but it turns out the version with dynamic resolution is the better version if you choose to listen to Eurogamer.
"From the Metro Interview:
GC: OK, well from a real world controversy to a very specifically games-related one: resolution.
MC: [laughs] I can tell you the frame rate is rock solid on both Xbox One and PlayStation 4, 60 frames per second. That’s kind of the heart and soul of Call Of Duty. You’ve probably heard that for years, right? PS4 runs at 1080p and Xbox One runs at 1080 scalable. Which will scale from 1360 all the way up to true 1080. So 1360×1080 up to 1920×1080.
GC: Is that dependent on the game mode?
MC: That’s dependent on the performance hit of the scene…
GC: Oh, so it’s changing in real-time?
MC: In real-time, yes. On a frame by frame basis. So Xbox One at times will run at true 1080 and sometimes it’ll run at 1360×1080 and scale in between those two marks. Its minimum threshold is 1360×1080 but the majority of time it runs above that. And 1360×1080 as the low bar is 50 per cent higher resolution than Ghosts at 900."

I find it very funny that people hinge on this idea of 1080p regardless of the fact that there are other options available which while sub 1080p can actually make a game more enjoyable.

I for one love Sledgehammer right now.  They gave those people who demanded 1080p exactly what they wanted.  They gave them a game at 1080p, but the trade off was a less stable and more noticeably changing frame-rate.  So now that it is official that the Xbox One version of the game is smoother do you think the reviews will reflect that?  Nah--I bet sites will call it a wash. Lower resolution with smoother gameplay doesn't trump that sweet sweet 1080p in the eyes of gaming journalism.  I will be curious to see how all of this plays out.


Post a Comment