Infinity Ward Executive Talks About Lack Of Native 1080p COD: Ghosts In Xbox One

 

When Infinity Ward announced that Call of Duty: Ghosts will run only in 720p mode natively on Microsoft’s next generation console Xbox One, there were lots of criticism and comments on the web about the capabilities of Xbox One against Sony PS4. Microsoft downplayed the whole resolution thing, but the media was not ready to leave it. In an interview with Eurogamer, Mark Rubin from Infinity Ward commented the following,

What everyone will ask is whether this is the result of the Xbox One simply not being as powerful as the PS4, and you’re doing your best with the hardware you have, or whether for future versions you may be able to get the Xbox One version running natively at 1080p?

Mark Rubin: It’s very possible we can get it to native 1080p. I mean I’ve seen it working at 1080p native. It’s just we couldn’t get the frame rate in the neighbourhood we wanted it to be.

And it wasn’t a lack of effort. It wasn’t that it was like last minute. We had the theoretical hardware for a long time. That’s the thing you get pretty quickly and that doesn’t change dramatically. It was more about resource allocation. The resource allocation is different on the consoles. That huge web of tangled resources, whether it’s threads-based or if it’s GPU threads or if it’s memory – whatever it is – optimisation is something that could go theoretically on forever.

I definitely see slash hope both platforms will look way better the next time we get a chance at it. As an obvious analogy – and if people are not sure about this it’s pretty simple – look at Call of Duty 2 versus COD 4. It was a massive leap forward in graphics, and that’s just because it takes time to get through this.

First launch, first time at bat at a new console is a challenging one. That’s just the way it is. For people fearful one system is more powerful than the other or vice versa, it’s a long game.

Is all that you’ve just described the reason the Xbox One version is native 720p and the PS4 version is native 1080p?

Mark Rubin: In a way. I don’t know if I can point to one particular cause. Early on, we didn’t know where exactly the resolution of anything would fall because we didn’t have hardware or the software to support it. We tried to focus in on 1080p, and if we felt like we were on borderline of performance somewhere… We tried to make the best decision for each platform that gives you the best-looking game we could get and maintains that 60 frames a second.

There’s no specific, oh, well, the VO chat on Xbox took up so much resources that we couldn’t do 1080p native. There’s no definitive one to one per se cause and effect. It’s just an overall thing. We took each system individually and said, ‘okay, let’s make the best game for each system.’

I think both look great. Some people might notice if they had them right next to each other. Some people might not. The Xbox One is 1080p output, it’s just upscaled hardware wise.

It was a late decision, too. That call wasn’t made until a month ago.

Read full interview from the link below.

 

Source: Eurogamer

About the author  ⁄ pradeep

Pradeep, a Computer Science & Engineering graduate.

  • koenshaku

    Interesting that they had to half the resolution though if the decision wasn’t made until a month ago and they had it at 1080p, one would think in some levels where they were getting frame drops 900p resolution would have done the trick instead of such a drastic decrease to 720p xbox 360 levels. Either he is lying or Activision just cashed a check from Sony lol. Either way this sort of thing was reported early on from hardware analyst.

    • nohone

      Most likely it was the dev team did not know how to properly optimize the code, and rather than put the resources into finding the correct way to do it they just cut the resolution and shipped it. Occam’s Razor – never underestimate the laziness of people.

      • Bugbog

        I wouldn’t refer to it as laziness! As you you point out, Occam’s razor usually states that the simplest answer is usually the right answer (i.e. don’t over-think things): They couldn’t get a constant 1080p @ 60fps, therefore set everything to 720p @ 60fps.QED.

  • Joe_HTH

    Let’s be honest. Microsoft either didn’t want to spend the money to make a more powerful console or they severely underestimated their competition, or their will to make something more powerful. Ultimately, I don’t think it’s going to be a big deal by the time this gen is over, but this should teach Microsoft a valuable lesson. Don’t skimp on hardware power and build the most powerful console you can, and still have the economics make sense.

    Microsoft was just too conservative, and the fact that their 50% less powerful console is $100 more expensive, does not look good or bode well. Microsoft is probably going to lose market share and undo some of what they gained with the Xbox 360.

    Microsoft has screwed this entire launch up with their messaging.

    • koenshaku

      Well as you had it from the last console generation it was practically split three ways in a shrinking console market. It was previously dominated by one which was Sony, as a result they can not afford to take large loses on hardware anymore and expect software to recoup the loses as was the case before. All companies including Nintendo that always lagged behind anyway chose to try hardware innovations instead of just graphical hardware enhancements. The Wii was a huge success and Nintendo was never to be underestimated again that is why they are shoving tablet and smartphone co-op play to make the wii look insignificant and a kinnect packaged inside the box to make it more approachable to non-gamers. What we see now are more cautious console makers none of them are going as far reaching as the 360 or the PS3 did when they hit the market, because at the end of the day you must please your share holders in an increasingly competitive market with handheld gaming growing more in popularity by the day we will only see who made the smartest decision and where consoles will be left in the market down the road. If I am anything to go by though I don’t see myself buying either and I will be doing more PC gaming than ever these consoles don’t impress me at all.

    • Truthhz

      “too conservative”

      You got that wrong. Microsoft’s design for the Xbox One is very risky and groundbreaking. By building the system with virtual machines, MS essentially allows you to run “two” devices, a gaming and entertainment/app machine, at the same time. Hard core gaming junkies may hate that, but I think it’s brilliant.

      MS knows that more time is spent by Xbox Live subscribers with TV/Movie/Music entertainment than online gaming. With Kinect and virtual machines, MS built a truly next gen console. PS4 is just a PS3 with faster hardware.

      Besides, 1080p games will be coming out for the Xbox One. Devs just need time to max out performance on the new console.

      • Joe_HTH

        I’m not talking about that. I’m talking specifically about graphics performance. I agree the Xbox One has some interesting design elements, as well as some advantages over the PS4. However, in terms of video game graphics, it’s obviously a significantly less powerful platform, and you have to wonder why? Why did Microsoft skimp on that part of the console. A more powerful GPU, which wouldn’t be difficult, would have made all the difference.

        • Eolirin

          They would see almost no benefits from having a stronger gpu, because they don’t have the general memory bandwidth to feed a significantly stronger gpu without gddr5 memory. GDDR5 ended up being cheaper than expected (though it’s still a lot more expensive than the ddr3 the xbox one has) but since early on MS decided they needed 8gigs, it would have been a big risk to go there. The PS4 was going to only have 4 gigs of ram until pretty late in the process. Given all the other stuff XB1 is doing that wouldn’t have been an option.
          Also given the costs of Kinect, going with fast enough memory to drive a stronger gpu, coupled with the increased costs that a larger gpu would bring in terms of yield, MS would have to either take a significant loss on each system or they’d be pricing the machines in the 600 dollar range.

      • Philippe Wechsler

        I agree their platform is more innovative, but
        1) this are nice to have features, but as it is a gaming console the primary features should be related to gaming. If both platforms would be on the same perofrmance level, then this would be a real benefit. But as the ps4 definitive offers more power and the games really do look better, this features cannot compensate the underpowered hardware.
        2) Of course the software will get optimized, but the same goes for the competition. Also, the cpu and gpu are the same architecture, the only differences are some memory management engines. Therefore the ps4 will unfortunately always outperform the xbox one. Maybe there will be games that run at 1080p on the xbox, but then the ps4 version will most likely have more advanced particle or lighting effects.
        3) All these talks cannot change the facts: the ps4 has a lot more power than the xbox one.
        Xbox one is fine for casual gamers like Family games, 2D and Indie stuff, especially with Kinect. Core games will find the better deal with the ps4, but the most exciting expirience will still be a pc.

    • NGM123

      I’m a fan, but is certainly appears MS have spent the absolute minimum to just get the job done and nothing more, in the process not allowing for any margin of error.

      Hardly future proofed if at day 1 of a 10 year life span it’s struggling to keep up.
      This is a piss poor effort from MS, day 1 it should have been able to belt anything out of the park, instead it’s on par with a 360.

      Penny wise and pound foolish, this will cost MS plenty in the long run & all to save $1 per console.

      • Philippe Wechsler

        absolutely true! I also think they are more focused on Kinect and no gaming related features like skype,live etc. They forget all core players that are not interested in this stuff.The problem is that you have to pay twice for these features: once by buying the console that is much more expensive and twice by buying a xbox live account to access these features. I personally do not require one of these features, so why should I buy a xbox one?

    • grs_dev

      Joe_HTH you clearly don’t get it. Please don’t be honest. Your honesty reveals utter stupidity.

      No we will not sit here and pretend that you know that you know what you’re talking about, because you don’t.

      No the company that understood that getting into the console business was a loss riddled road is not going to just skimp on components in its attempt to reinforce its supremacy and dominance on the living room experience.

      So please think before you open your mouth, your laptop, your browser, etc.

      Microsoft for better or worse has in the last few years overhauled its programming foundation for gaming. This means that a lot of the previously written libraries that could be ported over from PS3 to PS4 simply do not convey in the same manner on the Xbox platform.

      That’s the reason why optimizations made in the past are not panning out in the present.

      I don’t know about you, but I personally feel that I am going to be getting games that are truly built from the ground up for the Xbox One while all PS4 owners will be getting basically the PS3 code, optimized for PS4 hardware.

      • Philippe Wechsler

        1) the base architecture of both platforms are the same, the are only different by memory management and minor stuff. Basically both are a x86 machine with the same cpu and gpu, only with different amount of shaders.

        2) you can optimize whatever you want, unless the guy from sony are not totally incompetent they will always have the faster platform due to the faster hardware.

        3) games for the one and the ps4 are both built from the ground for these platforms. What’s the matter with having some older libraries if they are reliable? Windows 8.1 for example has some dll’s which are older than a decade. Also, you have no clue wether Microsoft or Sony are using older libraries.
        Maybe you should think twice before posting bs?

  • GG002

    This might interest some people. Xbox One at 720p vs. PS4 at 900p in Battlefield 4. Except for some gamma differences (which I assume you can change), my preference is clearly Xbox One. Much more definition despite less pixels.

    • GG002

      And two screenshots. Which one do you prefer, Xbox One or PS4?

    • grs_dev

      According to this comparison the PS4 looks like crap.

    • Jdrm03

      I highly suggest you download the full video gameplay and not base your opinion on youtube videos.
      Digital Foundary has already said that the ps4 version is better and that they screwed up the recording of the xbox one gameplay.

      • GG002

        I am well aware of that, and there is not much difference, I still prefer Xbox One. By your tone, you sound like an Xbox One hater and a PS4 lover, so I would expect you to be bitter when people prefer Xbox One.

        • Jdrm03

          I have an xb1 pre-ordered with bf4, dead rising and forza, thanks. I just am not blind.

          Typical fanboy response from you though. hur hur, not taking it up the a## from Microsoft, must be a hater.

      • laserfloyd

        Wait, what? They screwed it up and made it look better? I had to read that a few times. That makes no sense at all.

        • Jdrm03

          What you are seeing is over sharpness and high color contrast. TV settings.
          You can make the ps4 version, pc version etc look exactly the same as the xb1 version you think looks better.

      • nohone

        IGN, Polygon, and JoyStiq are all reporting that there are framerate issues on the PS4. So while 1080 would have been better on X1 -if they could make it work smoothly, it appears the PS4 having 1080 is not a sign that the PS4 is the more powerful device.

        http://www.forbes.com/sites/davidthier/2013/11/05/reviewers-are-reporting-frame-rate-problems-with-call-of-duty-ghosts-on-ps4/

  • imr

    i have pre-order the Xbox One , and now i’m thinking of canceling it.
    to many bad news :(

    • grs_dev

      Good that will make it easier for the rest of to buy one! thanks!

  • Mark Matheson

    Xbox 360 came out when standard definition was the norm but every single 360 game played in HD.
    Xbox One is coming out when 1080p is standard and so very few games look set to support that resolution – and 4KTV is just starting to happen.
    It is fine saying that 720p will be fine for now but a couple of years down the line we will all want to see the higher-than-1080p games and neither XO nor PS4 will be able to support that. Both systems are woefully underpowered to support the next generation of televisions.
    This said, I am not cancelling my XO – there is still a glimmer of hope that the games will silence the negative vibes we’ve all got!

    • NGM123

      Hope your right. I will buy an XBO, but I’m a bit nervous.
      I’m hoping the live experience will make up for some of the other short falls, this may be what really ends up separating the 2 consoles.

  • hysonmb

    Developers don’t have time to learn the limits and create games that can take full advantage of new consoles. It happens every cycle, early titles look marginally better than previous generations and gameplay is no different until they learn how to leverage the resources. By E3 next year, we should be seeing games on Xbox One and PS4 that can’t be done on the 360 and PS3.

    • NGM123

      Sincerely hope your right.