Sony sued over Killzone: Shadow Fall's graphics

[GhostWindGamer]

Have you married a kardashian or cast member of the jersey shore?

 

Then you have not seen read or tried every act of stupidity possible

 

Edit: woops sorry for the double, thought I hit edit

Ok wise guy then I've almost done/read/seen every act of stupidity

[Trik'Stari]

Ok wise guy then I've almost done/read/seen every act of stupidity

I was trying to cheer you up lol

[GhostWindGamer]

I was trying to cheer you up lol

It made me laugh so it worked

[Xorbot]

960x1080 can still be described as 1080p though.

 

Imagine 1x1080p

[KONA]

The Resolution is a lie....

The Resolution is a lie....

The Resolution is a lie....

[Trik'Stari]

The Resolution is a lie....

The Resolution is a lie....

The Resolution is a lie....

30Hz is an artistic choice....

30Hz is an artistic choice....

30Hz is an artistic choice....

[LucaZ]

960x1080 can still be described as 1080p though.

Uhh no, resolution may be a number but refering to something that is not, isn't. 1080p is referred as 1920x1080p, and that is a native ratio of 16:9. 960x1080 is just a number, not a native resolution.

[Guest]

lol console kids think they can get 1080p@60r15

[samcool55]

They have no chance in hell of winning the lawsuit. Technically, the PS4 WAS displaying 1080p.

There are always people like you, and i will explain why i have an issue with that. The engine doesn't render in real 1080p but in a resolution lower than that with some weird tricks. So the game renders in a resolution, and upsamples that to real 1080p, but upsampled 1080p is not the same as native 1080p, and it's not because the screen receives a real 1080p signal, it is really 1080p. The problem is the upsampling. If you don't care about upsampling, watch youtube video's in 240p next time, your pc will upsamples it to 1080p or whatever your res is, and you just said you have no problem with that "because it is displaying  1080p" (or whatever your res is)

[Rassilon]

There are always people like you, and i will explain why i have an issue with that. The engine doesn't render in real 1080p but in a resolution lower than that with some weird tricks. So the game renders in a resolution, and upsamples that to real 1080p, but upsampled 1080p is not the same as native 1080p, and it's not because the screen receives a real 1080p signal, it is really 1080p. The problem is the upsampling. If you don't care about upsampling, watch youtube video's in 240p next time, your pc will upsamples it to 1080p or whatever your res is, and you just said you have no problem with that "because it is displaying 1080p" (or whatever your res is)

The single player is 1080p30, the multiplayer is 1080p60

[samcool55]

The single player is 1080p30, the multiplayer is 1080p60

It itsn't. 1080p is 1920x1080, and not 960x1080. And the engine runs at 960x1080 and upsamples that to 1920x1080, and an upsample isn't the same as native.

I will show u what the issue is. I took a random picture that was 1080p native (1920x1080), made a copy, cropped it top 960x1080 (the resolution the engine renders) and upsampled that to 1080p, if there was no problem, they should be exacly the same, but they arent.

Look at them yourself: https://imageshack.com/i/idBef3sKp

https://imageshack.com/i/kqGbjU4wp

If there was no issue, they should be exacly the same, but it just isn't.

[Rassilon]

It itsn't. 1080p is 1920x1080, and not 960x1080. And the engine runs at 960x1080 and upsamples that to 1920x1080, and an upsample isn't the same as native.

I will show u what the issue is. I took a random picture that was 1080p native (1920x1080), made a copy, cropped it top 960x1080 (the resolution the engine renders) and upsampled that to 1080p, if there was no problem, they should be exacly the same, but they arent.

Look at them yourself: https://imageshack.com/i/idBef3sKp

https://imageshack.com/i/kqGbjU4wp

If there was no issue, they should be exacly the same, but it just isn't.

What? You can't upscale something that's cropped, what's wrong with you?

[samcool55]

What? You can't upscale something that's cropped, what's wrong with you?

What do u mean? I upscaled a cropped native 1080p image.

The native 1080p picture is to show you how it should look if there was no upscaling, but there is upscaling but to upscale the native 1080p image it has to be cropped to 960x1080 first.

It's to show you how a native 1080p image looks compared to a 960x1080 image upscaled to 1080p...

It's not rocket science. Should be easy to understand.

[juretrn]

 

 

There are always people like you

Really? Are you sure you want to take it there?

 

There are always people like you, and i will explain why i have an issue with that. The engine doesn't render in real 1080p but in a resolution lower than that with some weird tricks. So the game renders in a resolution, and upsamples that to real 1080p, but upsampled 1080p is not the same as native 1080p, and it's not because the screen receives a real 1080p signal, it is really 1080p. The problem is the upsampling. If you don't care about upsampling, watch youtube video's in 240p next time, your pc will upsamples it to 1080p or whatever your res is, and you just said you have no problem with that "because it is displaying  1080p" (or whatever your res is)

You don't get it. THE COURT DOESN'T GIVE A FUCK. Upsampling still creates an image that is of the advertised resolution. 

[Rassilon]

What do u mean? I upscaled a cropped native 1080p image.

The native 1080p picture is to show you how it should look if there was no upscaling, but there is upscaling but to upscale the native 1080p image it has to be cropped to 960x1080 first.

It's to show you how a native 1080p image looks compared to a 960x1080 image upscaled to 1080p...

It's not rocket science. Should be easy to understand.

I'll draw you a diagram.

http://i.imgur.com/XS3CmN3.jpg

This is what Killzone does.

In the single player, it divides the screen into two parts like in the diagram and updates them both 30 times a second

In the multiplayer, it updates one at 60, and the other not at 60. Either that or it updates them at different intervals, but both at 30, and interlaces them so it feels like 60 frames per second. The full image on the screen is always 1080p, the game just renders it in halves rather than as a whole.

[AlwaysFSX]

960x1080. Woah. That's terrible stretching.

[samcool55]

Really? Are you sure you want to take it there?

 

You don't get it. THE COURT DOESN'T GIVE A FUCK. Upsampling still creates an image that is of the advertised resolution. 

There are people that have exacly the same opinion as yours on other forums where i'm active, what's wrong with that?

 

And i don't care if the court cares or not, it's just the fact i agree with the guy making saying what on the box isn't true. He does have a point, and i agree with him. And what the court thinks of it, we will see.

 

 

I'll draw you a diagram.

http://i.imgur.com/XS3CmN3.jpg

This is what Killzone does.

In the single player, it divides the screen into two parts like in the diagram and updates them both 30 times a second

In the multiplayer, it updates one at 60, and the other not at 60. Either that or it updates them at different intervals, but both at 30, and interlaces them so it feels like 60 frames per second. The full image on the screen is always 1080p, the game just renders it in halves rather than as a whole.

 

 

Then he still got a point, maybe the res is ok than, but then there is an issue with the fps, there are no 60 complete new frames per second but it's just some cut n paste stuff trying to make t 60fps, but it isn't. If it is there was no half render or part render stuff. It would just calculate 60 brand new frames every single second, and it does not do that. If you change the part size that runs in 60fps to 1 pixel, and the rest of the pixels is the other part that runs at 30fps, does it still run at 60fps then? If you follow sony's logic it does. But if you follow reality, it doesn't. 

[Th3 Mans1ay3r]

I think we all figured out that all the companies lied like crazy about their graphical capabilities with their games. Like a full 6 months ago.

[WarlockTheWise]

Uhh no, resolution may be a number but refering to something that is not, isn't. 1080p is referred as 1920x1080p, and that is a native ratio of 16:9. 960x1080 is just a number, not a native resolution.

1080p means 1080 horizontal lines of pixels.

 

3840x1080, 1920x1080, 960x1080 etc. can all be described as 1080p because they all have that many lines.

 

When referring specifically to 1920x1080 the acronym used is FHD.

 

aspect ratio doesn't apply to line counts either, my screen is 1200p but is not 16:9. The Order: 1886 renders at 800p (1920x800) which is 2.40:1.

[LucaZ]

1080p means 1080 horizontal lines of pixels.

1080p (aka Full HD/ FHD and BT.709) is a set of HDTV high-definition video modes characterized by 1080 horizontal lines of vertical resolution[1] and progressive scan, as opposed to interlaced, as is the case with the 1080i display standard. The term usually assumes a widescreen aspect ratio of 16:9, implying a resolution of 1920x1080 (2.1 megapixel) often marketed as Full HD. @ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1080p

[WarlockTheWise]

1080p (aka Full HD/ FHD and BT.709) is a set of HDTV high-definition video modes characterized by 1080 horizontal lines of vertical resolution[1] and progressive scan, as opposed to interlaced, as is the case with the 1080i display standard. The term usually assumes a widescreen aspect ratio of 16:9, implying a resolution of 1920x1080 (2.1 megapixel) often marketed as Full HD. @ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1080p

You are aware that you just proved my point right?

[BallGum]

Really? Are you sure you want to take it there?

 

You don't get it. THE COURT DOESN'T GIVE A FUCK. Upsampling still creates an image that is of the advertised resolution. 

 

The courts are about arguing over the small and minute technicalities of the case. From what I gather, in the case discussed they advertised it as native 1080P, but as others have explained, it isn't native 1080P.

 

Courts are there to sort things out. If they don't look at the small details, something is wrong.

[LucaZ]

You are aware that you just proved my point right?

Yes and No. You left out the part that the "p" stands for progressive. Plus if your going to talk to people about 1080p, they'll think 1920x1080. And it is assume in the market as aspect ratio of 16:9

[mr moose]

The courts are about arguing over the small and minute technicalities of the case. From what I gather, in the case discussed they advertised it as native 1080P, but as others have explained, it isn't native 1080P.

 

Courts are there to sort things out. If they don't look at the small details, something is wrong.

The scary thing is that if they decide with a jury they'll end up with a group of people who have no Idea about the technicalities of what they are looking at and make a decision based on who they like instead.

[mr moose]

Yes and No. You left out the part that the "p" stands for progressive. Plus if your going to talk to people about 1080p, they'll think 1920x1080. And it is assume in the market as aspect ratio of 16:9

 

I agree with this,  the marketplace and T.V manufacturers universally accept that the screen standard is 1920x1080 how many people have a tv that is portrait in orientation?  None.  So it is fair to say that the expectation of labeling something 1080p will be that it is 1920x1080 (or at least maintains the landscape orientation in a widescreen format) and scans progressively.