Random Gaming Thoughts II ~News Items Beware~

There's an outrageous number of copies of Michael Jackson: The Experience on Wii in the local charity shops - like, all of them have copies in stock (and that's plural as well). Strange enough to be comment-worthy, natch. I can't explain it, though it probably sorts out this year's Secret Santa.

The whole 30 framesgate is just companies trying to bullshit their way out of making their games run properly if you ask me. At this point we have long passed the point where textures and models and so on are going to take the massive steps forward they took from the ps1 to the ps2 and then the ps2 to the ps3. Now the real next step forward is getting the games seen on the ps3 and 360 to render at 1080p at 30 frames per second. We've got to the point where I do not see any good reason to have games running at a sub standard rate or below the 1080p threshold just so they can throw a few more sparkly things nobody actually pays attention to when playing a game anyway.

Case in point is wipeout hd on the ps3, the game is utterly stunning in motion, but if you were to pause it you'd see its models are mid tier stuff. But that doesn't matter because of just how amazing it looks when running.

Speaking of Secret Santa, does anyone else want to be master of ceremonies or am I doing it again?

That's a very Nintendo approach; they'd rather a game not be photo real but have convincing animations and run well.

I opened a certain game for the music thread today and, after marvelling at the cute little disk, I saw the manual. It made me nostalgic for the days where'd I sit and read a game's manual before firing it up to get myself psyched. I've actually brought it with me to work so I can read it.

You are in charge of it again it's your job.

I still think 60fps & 1080p is what all should aim for but would likes of Walking Dead Benefit from it though not really also some games like Tomb Raider definitive edition on PS4 can run at 60fps but drops now & again to around 40 ish, where it might of been better to lock it at a stable 30fps.

I do love a manual remember coming from the shops and reading them on the way back on the bus.

If you wouldn't mind, Drunka? You did a great job of it last time. On the other hand, I'm sure somebody else will be willing to MC if you don't want to.

Obviously 1080p > 720p, but I find the difference in quality wildly disproportionate to the amount of debate that those numbers actually get. Frame rate differentials are more noticeable, and I do prefer 60fps; but again, a smooth 30fps is fine in the context of a good game.

While I do miss manuals (you just don't get Cranky Kong's witticisms in the electronic manuals), anything that cuts down on paper usage is good.

The difference of 1080p and 720p is huge though almost 2 million mega pixel differences, you sometimes see when a game is 900p on ONE and 1080p on PS4 you see people go who care about 180p but it's not it's the difference in mega pixels & it's about 30% less on the ONE. That's like having 30% less of your TV or even more if it's at 720p but who really uses 720p anymore.

I'm not buying AC:U but it's very much annoyed it's at 900p it's 2015 nearly guys 1080p should be the standard. Kojima is pushing MGSV:GZ to 4K on PC (which the PS4 might be able to but definitely can be pushed past 1080p if you trust Kojima) we should be aiming for that it's only going to be a few years in till 4k becomes more consumer friendly.

masofdas wrote:

The difference of 1080p and 720p is huge though almost 2 million mega pixel differences, you sometimes see when a game is 900p on ONE and 1080p on PS4 you see people go who care about 180p but it's not it's the difference in mega pixels & it's about 30% less on the ONE. That's like having 30% less of your TV or even more if it's at 720p but who really uses 720p anymore.

On paper it is but for me that is tougher to judge with the naked eye & I'd think most folk would only notice a difference if they had the same game running side by side, when playing a game in 720p I've never thought "I'd enjoy this more if it was 1080p" but I do agree they should be aiming for a standard.

Its a power issue for Sony/MS as their main focus is making games look breathtakingly beautiful so because of that resolution & framerate will suffer at times, this is why I've always said Nintendo have played it really smart in how powerful their systems are  as a lot of wii U games run at 1080p/60fps & their games aren't exactly ugly to look at, are they?

Bang on, Jas. And I thought that a lot of Wii U games (e.g. SM3DW, a gorgeous game) were in 720p? If neither of us can tell, that shows how much of a difference it makes!

I don't notice the difference between 720p/1080p as much as I notice the difference between 30fps and 60fps. Framerate is more important to me than graphical fidelity.

I do see it a difference it's why I wouldn't buy any 3rd party on a xbox one if I had one. But yeah I can enjoy game's in lower than 1080p though but it's nice to have.

I've watched a 720p tv show episode on a 1080p tv and then a few days later watched it on blu ray in 1080p I can say there is a big enough difference that it bothers me.  But even ignoring that I can easily notice the difference between a game playing in 720p and 1080p, and while it's easy to ignore it just highly bothers me that the so-called "next gen" systems have opted for silly particle effects (and fish ai that allows fish to move out of your way, mustn't forget that industry changing bombshell!   ) that nobody actually cares about or notices when playing a game over the sheer and gigantic benefit that would come from having games seen on the ps3 and 360 playing at a fixed 30 or 60 frames per second at rendered 1080p.

But most PS4 games and even some ONE games do run in 1080p though and using the power of the systems for AI is great but using it fish is not the kinda thing you hope for though but a sports game though better AI would be great.

SM3DW is 720p 60fps balla but of course upscales if your TV outputs at 1080p then better your TV is better that is. But I do love how Nintendo seem to do amazing things with such little power though mainly for picking the right aesthetics for the right thing.

For those of you who are getting the new 3DS: is there anyone who isn't getting this as their faceplate?



Just look at it.

When you stare into the void...

That is incredible.
I'll probably get the XL, though, which I don't think has plates.

You are correct.

I quite like this one:

I'm partial to this one

Your image isn't working. (for me anyway)

Same here Jas.

I do like the faceplates a lot, very much on the fence on which New 3DS to get.

Fixed it..

I kind of expected the pokemans one but it is a pretty neat design.

I like the really minimalistic ones so kk is still my favourite. It really is tempting to get the smaller machine just for the plate possibilities but I could never go back to the smaller screen size.

That's the thing I've used a XL for so long now and with likes of Xenoblade coming to the New 3DS, I'm thinking I want a nice big screen and the New will be become my main system. But then there's a possibility to the small New 3DS as I really like the face plate idea also it's bigger then it's original counter part including the screen.

So I think I will have to have a go with a small New 3DS before buying unless we get something like this

Then it's a easy decision which to get.

Don't hold your breath for a MH4 3ds bundle.

I don't get why folk think the new 3ds is small as it's more of a middle ground between the original 3ds & a XL which you can see in this video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RGrCTKsl2FY&list=UUPaFAXsGaB84xIK0HbvSOuQ

I know it's not small but it's small compared to the XL, and that's what I'm comparing it to as I'm looking at New's.