Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by CoolHand on Saturday September 24 2016, @02:02AM   Printer-friendly
from the hehe-they-said-pissing-hehe dept.

Get ready to endlessly debate the value of "native 4K" on consoles

http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2016/09/microsoft-and-sonys-emerging-4k-pixel-pissing-contest/

Sony's PlayStation 4 Pro (launching in November) and Microsoft's Xbox One Scorpio (launching late next year) are giving the pixel-counters out there a new, 4K-sized battlefield to fight over. Now, Microsoft is drawing a line in the sand in that developing battle, with Microsoft Studios Publishing General Manager Shannon Loftis telling USA Today that "any games we're making that we're launching in the Scorpio time frame, we're making sure they can natively render at 4K."

The word "natively" is important there, because there has been a lot of wiggle room when it comes to talking about what constitutes a truly "4K" game these days. For instance, according to developers Ars has talked to, many if not most games designed for the PS4 Pro will be rendered with an internal framebuffer that's larger than that for a 1080p game, but significantly smaller than the full 3840×2160 pixels on a 4K screen (the exact resolution for any PS4 Pro game will depend largely on how the developer prioritizes the frame rate and the level of detail in the scene). While the PS4 Pro can and does output a full 4K signal, it seems that only games with exceedingly simple graphics will be able to render at that resolution natively.

-- submitted from IRC


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 24 2016, @04:15AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 24 2016, @04:15AM (#405846)

    Sure there friend, a pissing match might not be a negative thing, but surely it is a vulgar one eh? Is this really tha sorta thing you folks want the kids to see?

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 24 2016, @04:23AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 24 2016, @04:23AM (#405849)

    > Is this really tha sorta thing you folks want the kids to see?

    Yes.
    If you don't want kids to see it, then get your own kids.

  • (Score: 2) by edIII on Saturday September 24 2016, @04:40AM

    by edIII (791) on Saturday September 24 2016, @04:40AM (#405850)

    I would at most say it is juvenile. Of course it can be vulgar because it's related to urination, but that is generally reserved for something offensive. The idea of some boys playing out in the woods and deciding who can pee the farthest doesn't offend me. I accept that as part of childhood, and natural development. I'm sure that it is nearly universal behavior.

    Getting beyond the technically vulgar nature of it, it's not unreasonable to assume a benign sporting contest. It may even be rivals, but that doesn't automatically imply a negative and caustic relationship. Again, if you see a pissing contest between boys as something rather benign and innocent, it shouldn't surprise you that I interpreted it the same way.

    God forbid, you ever have a friendly rivalry where you can shake hands afterwards huh?

    --
    Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.