Results 1 to 12 of 12

Thread: Bioshock ps3 native resolution 680p

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    25

    Bioshock ps3 native resolution 680p

    Forgive my syntax error I'm not english but a tecnical forum said bioshock on ps3 has 680p of native resolution compared 720p of 360...is it true?

  2. #2
    Yes. PS3 version of Bioshock is not a good port at all

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    25
    Quote Originally Posted by Picolo Manolo View Post
    Yes. PS3 version of Bioshock is not a good port at all
    Ouch... really I hope at least the native resolution can be the same, bad news for me. I don't want to blame the developers but at the end ps3 it isn't completely the same but inferior to 360 to be honest, count of pixels is undeniable.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Tejas (but I've lived all over)
    Posts
    6,669
    Here is the official thread about the PS3 visuals:
    http://forums.2kgames.com/forums/showthread.php?t=23044

    I'm not sure where Picolo is getting his information from, but the PS3 native resolution appears to be 720P. As the official answer explains, the PS3 port has a slight "blur filter" applied to smooth out the framerates, so it may appear a bit softer in some areas. Perhaps you are mistaking this softness for a 680P native resolution?

    To balance this out, more detail has been added to some of the textures, giving the PS3 port a nicer appearance in some areas compared to the 360 version.

    You also get the exclusive Survivor Mode level of difficulty (which the 360 and PC do not have).

    You also get access to exclusive Challenge Rooms which will be available next month as downloadable content (no details yet on pricing).

    Finally, 28 professional game reviewers on Metacritic have given the PS3 version of BioShock an average score of 95/100! Does that sound like "not a good port at all" to you?

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    England
    Posts
    81
    fanboys - love um

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    25
    Quote Originally Posted by japester View Post
    Here is the official thread about the PS3 visuals:
    http://forums.2kgames.com/forums/showthread.php?t=23044

    I'm not sure where Picolo is getting his information from, but the PS3 native resolution appears to be 720P. As the official answer explains, the PS3 port has a slight "blur filter" applied to smooth out the framerates, so it may appear a bit softer in some areas. Perhaps you are mistaking this softness for a 680P native resolution?

    To balance this out, more detail has been added to some of the textures, giving the PS3 port a nicer appearance in some areas compared to the 360 version.

    You also get the exclusive Survivor Mode level of difficulty (which the 360 and PC do not have).

    You also get access to exclusive Challenge Rooms which will be available next month as downloadable content (no details yet on pricing).

    Finally, 28 professional game reviewers on Metacritic have given the PS3 version of BioShock an average score of 95/100! Does that sound like "not a good port at all" to you?
    Well the source is beyond3d forum, so I only want to to know if is it true or not, normally beyond3d is a serious technical forum and it discovered many native true resolution in its test. So if it is false, good to know . But I repeat native resolution on its test is 680p on ps3 so it meant it's a ****py port but just inferior to 360 version, no more for pixel count.
    Last edited by assurdum; 10-31-2008 at 09:15 AM.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Tejas (but I've lived all over)
    Posts
    6,669
    Since I am only a volunteer and do not work for 2K, my reply is my best guess based on the thread I linked to. If you want a definitive answer, I would ask your question in that thread (and maybe link to the beyond3d test you are referring to). The developers and programmers do read that thread and might be able to clarify things.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    England
    Posts
    81
    People are just finding anything to bash the PS3 if you prove this to be 720 they will find something else, just because someone somewhere has stated something does make it true.

  9. #9

    Thumbs down

    Quote Originally Posted by Richerson View Post
    People are just finding anything to bash the PS3 – if you prove this to be 720 they will find something else, just because someone somewhere has stated something does make it true.
    http://forum.beyond3d.com/showpost.p...postcount=1469
    QUAZ51:on grandmaster screenshot it's 17/18 ratio = 680p (+ blur)
    interesting because the first leaked PS3 screenshot in may was in 720p. (http://www.gamed.nl/messages/74505.jpg) it's a very little downscale (680p it's like 720p game on overscaned TV), probably for stabilize framerate
    Bioshock is 680p.

    QUAZ51 of Beyond3D was one of the first guys to measure native resolutions and never failed : Halo3, Cod4 and since then every major release...


    Keep denying every information people are giving about the ps3 version...

    EDIT:
    Quaz51 and halo3 http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=9097
    Halo 3 renders internally 640 lines of vertical resolution -- 80 lines short of 720p

    Following Halo 3’s release, millions upon millions of eyes were glued to Bungie Studios’ newest game, absorbing all there is to see. With it being nearly uncontested that Halo 3 delivers in the gameplay department; some eyes may turn to scrutinizing the game’s graphical prowess.

    Those pixel-counting types with sharp eyes have discerned on the Beyond3D forums that Halo 3 does not actually run at a full high-definition resolution of 720p. By vertically and horizontally counting and calculating pixels on screen, it was found that Halo 3 runs with 640 lines of vertical resolution rather than the 720 lines at which that most other Xbox 360 games run.

    Bungie quickly responded to the discovery of the unconventional resolution with a message on its official website. “One item making the interwebs rounds this week was the scandalous revelation that Halo 3 runs at “640p” which isn’t even technically a resolution,” wrote Bungie’s Luke Smith. “However, the interweb detectives did notice that Halo 3’s vertical resolution, when captured from a frame buffer, is indeed 640 pixels. So what gives? Did we short change you 80 pixels?”

    “Naturally it’s more complicated than that,” Smith continued. “In fact, you could argue we gave you 1280 pixels of vertical resolution, since Halo 3 uses not one, but two frame buffers – both of which render at 1152x640 pixels.”

    “The reason we chose this slightly unorthodox resolution and this very complex use of two buffers is simple enough to see – lighting. We wanted to preserve as much dynamic range as possible – so we use one for the high dynamic range and one for the low dynamic range values. Both are combined to create the finished on screen image.”
    Last edited by PixelizedBigD; 11-01-2008 at 06:13 AM.

  10. #10
    That's a thing about fanboys (picolo). When they are presented with facts contrary to what they think, they just shuts up.

    Fanboy opinions don't matter. I hope you understand, picolo.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Tejas (but I've lived all over)
    Posts
    6,669
    Let's stop the "fanboys" comments, guys. I know Richerson started it, and I've already warned him about it. We can discuss and disagree, but throwing around dismissive labels isn't going to help.

    As I said, I don't know the exact official answer. But after thinking about this, I realized, "What's the point?" Arguing the number of lines of resolution seems like an attempt to justify an already negative opinion of the game. What if the game had 517 lines of resolution? All that really matters is how it looks to your eye. And while some people have made it clear that they do not like the slight blur, a huge number of people love the graphics. That doesn't mean the image is perfect, but it does mean that the majority of folks seem to be quite happy with the port.

  12. #12
    I did notice a resolution drop, the only way i can tell is because of the XMB. Does any one knows any sort of benchmark i can run?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •