Microsoft Ditches 720P and Anti-Aliasing Requirements for XBOX360

B

Blackstone

2[H]4U
Joined
Mar 8, 2007
Messages
3,580
I think this is a fascinating development. If the moderators want to kill this thread and post their own in the front page news forum go right ahead but I thought it might fit in here.

Apparently Microsoft has lifted the minimum 720P resolution and anti-aliasing mandates from its Technical Certification Requirements ("TCR").

as of March 2009, Xbox 360 developers are no longer required to utilize full-screen anti-aliasing in their games. The elimination of both requirements is especially noteworthy since the console maker had touted that all 360 games would run at a minimum of 720p with at least 2x FSAA since before the hardware launched.
Click to expand...

http://gametab.com/news/3103528/
 
Interesting news... a step in the wrong direction I would think. Though this really will only affect the mediocre to bad games as the leading developers should still be putting out high quality games, otherwise their sales will begin to suffer.

One thing to also realize this should bring more games to the 360. There are many games that do not look amazing yet are still amazingly fun games to play (great stories, puzzles, multiplayer, etc) that would not have met Microsoft's TCRs. So maybe this could be a good thing also.
 
Unfortunate, though it's not like games have had to render at 720p on the 360 in the first place. That particular 'requirement' is really not as it seems (as we all know).
 
That requirement has been avoidable since day one if you asked nicely.
 
I think we are seeing this because game engines are pushing the 360 and it can no longer handle AA while maintaining acceptable frame rates. That's just my guess.
 
Vengance_01 said:
I think we are seeing this because game engines are pushing the 360 and it can no longer handle AA while maintaining acceptable frame rates. That's just my guess.
Click to expand...

I love how the ps3 and 360 have been releasing sub 720 games this entire gen, but this announcement suddenly means a change in the hardware or game engines...
 
This is actually a step in the right direction. I could care less what the actually resolution or FPS is. All that matters is games continue to look and run better. Better graphical engines and coding techniques often replace these issues well (example: motion blur).

It always makes me laugh reading the sticky "True 1080p games", which lists all arcade or shitty games for the xbox360 and PS3.
 
I agree with ClearM4.
At this point the change will actually allow devs to be more creative to get more performance and graphics out of the system. Optimizing is often about reducing one thing to improve another. The end result hopefully is better overall.
 
Psychotext said:
That requirement has been avoidable since day one if you asked nicely.
Click to expand...

This was done with Halo 3, yeah? There was ridiculous internet nerd rage because it didn't render at 720p. Its understandable to shave off some pixels in order to maintain a smooth framerate and add more enemies, extend draw distance, etc, especially if the difference in the final output isn't compromised as a result.
 
This was done with PGR3, a launch game... and many games since. If I was a betting man, I'd say they've done this so that third parties who have released sub HD versions of multiplatform games on the PS3 can do it just as easily on the 360 (rather than only select groups like the CoD team).
 
Yeah, it is strange that they even bothered to make this "official." It wasn't enforced before, so I am not sure why they would even bring it up. Just creates fanboy fodder (though PS3 is in the same position as far as games below 720p).
 
Serpico said:
There was ridiculous internet nerd rage because it didn't render at 720p.
Click to expand...
The fact that these games are advertised as 720p is what sparked the nerd rage. When a box says that it's 720p right on the box, we are, in a sense, paying by the pixel.

Technically, you could render at 320x240, upscale to 1280x720, and the back of the box would still be adorned with the '720p' logo. That's a problem.
 
phide said:
The fact that these games are advertised as 720p is what sparked the nerd rage. When a box says that it's 720p right on the box, we are, in a sense, paying by the pixel.

Technically, you could render at 320x240, upscale to 1280x720, and the back of the box would still be adorned with the '720p' logo. That's a problem.
Click to expand...

Most of them have 1080p on the box too. Hell, everytime someone makes a list of 1080p games, people want to include MGS4 for example, because it says 1080p right there on the box. Oh noez. Shit gets upscaled, it's not a big deal.
 
Vengance_01 said:
I think we are seeing this because game engines are pushing the 360 and it can no longer handle AA while maintaining acceptable frame rates. That's just my guess.
Click to expand...

Exactly. This is precisely how they intended to stretch this generation to 2011 or 2012 or whatever the unofficial date is now.

ClearM4 said:
I could care less what the actually resolution or FPS is. All that matters is games continue to look and run better.
Click to expand...

Are you trying to catch us sleeping? Is this a test? You just said you don't prioritize image quality or framerate, as long as you see measurable improvements in exactly those parameters. Everyone should be concerned, to some degree, about this because the 360 already struggles to handle GTA4 and just about every engine that's not UE3. Granted, it's not going to look great when plugged into my PC monitor, but the attrocious resolution is noticable on anything but a SDTV. Are you all really content to play on SDTVs until next gen?
 
phide said:
Yeah, it kind of is.
Click to expand...

Boo fucking hoo. Someone stoled my extra 80p from my haloz! My ps3 COD4 was missing 120p's. I want them back!

waaa. If you're whining about resolution, play pc games. Pixel counters give me gas.
 
Put me in the "I don't care" camp.

As long as it is fun, looks good, and entertains me, I'll play it.
 
Technoob said:
Boo fucking hoo. Someone stoled my extra 80p from my haloz! My ps3 COD4 was missing 120p's. I want them back!

waaa. If you're whining about resolution, play pc games. Pixel counters give me gas.
Click to expand...
1280*720 has 50% more pixels than 1024*600. IMHO that's pretty noticeable difference.
 
aop said:
1280*720 has 50% more pixels than 1024*600. IMHO that's pretty noticeable difference.
Click to expand...

And? 1080p is an even higher res. And there are gamers who go way beyond that. So what? If you're going to cry about resolution on any of the consoles, game on a pc.

Personally, I can't stand games without AA, I'd rather have lower res than AA. But guess what, I can play cod4 on my ps3 at 600p, or I can play it on my 3 year old computer at 1080 with mad AA and image quality. Or I could cry about it like a fucking baby on a message board.

I know what I'll pick.
 
Technoob said:
What the hell are you babbling about?
Click to expand...

It's pretty obvious. The xbox is having difficulty playing modern titles at acceptable framerates without sacrificing image quality, or vice versa. You don't need to go fanboy rabid and argue it because the proof is at the very top of this thread. GTA4 happens to be the worst offender, with framerate dropping into the teens frequently enough to be distracting. However, lots of others have been showing signs, such as mangled, blurry textures (Bioshock.) Developers have even noticed the handwriting on the walls and are trying to develop games centered on indoor gameplay to try to maintain IQ and framerate (Dead Space, Batman: AA) If you don't care to acknowledge it, that's quite alright. I play most of my games on the PC anyway so it's no skin off my back. I just feel bad that MS is maintaining the relevence of its hardware moving forward when such a strategy is obviously detrimental to those gamers who claim that they desire graphical complexity in new games.
 
MiG31_Foxhound said:
It's pretty obvious. The xbox is having difficulty playing modern titles at acceptable framerates without sacrificing image quality, or vice versa. You don't need to go fanboy rabid and argue it because the proof is at the very top of this thread. GTA4 happens to be the worst offender, with framerate dropping into the teens frequently enough to be distracting. However, lots of others have been showing signs, such as mangled, blurry textures (Bioshock.) Developers have even noticed the handwriting on the walls and are trying to develop games centered on indoor gameplay to try to maintain IQ and framerate (Dead Space, Batman: AA) If you don't care to acknowledge it, that's quite alright. I play most of my games on the PC anyway so it's no skin off my back. I just feel bad that MS is maintaining the relevence of its hardware moving forward when such a strategy is obviously detrimental to those gamers who claim that they desire graphical complexity in new games.
Click to expand...

Ok, it's clear you have no idea what you're talking about, or are willfully spreading fud, because that's quite a bit of made up bullshit.
 
MiG31_Foxhound said:
... Developers have even noticed the handwriting on the walls and are trying to develop games centered on indoor gameplay to try to maintain IQ and framerate (Dead Space, Batman: AA)...
Click to expand...

Deadspace is indoors because it's, ohh I don't know, in space... And last I checked Arkham Asylum was a building, so yea... indoors. I don't see how those were forced indoors for frame rate issues. Calling shenanigans on that one captain.

And if you're saying that the ideas originated from the need to be indoors, that's also a load of crap. Dead Space (last I checked) was meant to be scary. Confinement and corners, not big open fields, are what people feel more anxious towards.

Arkham Asylum was designed to be a nerdfest playground. "OMG I get to be batman and beat up every batman bad guy" was the point of the game and the best way to do it in the batman universe was at Arkham Asylum. (Not bashing Batman:AA, I loved the game, just stating what it is)

I'm by no means a 360 fanboy, I use both systems equally. I just think that this line of reasoning in your post was pulled right out of your ass.
 
Technoob said:
umad.gif
Click to expand...

You belong on NeoGAF.

---

Project Gotham Racing 3, an Xbox360 launch title, rendered below 720p and received certification. They weren't really enforcing the 720p requirement, so the fact that it's now "ditched" isn't a huge deal.

I can't think of any games that don't use AA on the 360 off the top of my head, but I'm sure they exist.
 
Gotta keep up with the latest PS3 engines? Sorry, too lazy to read the thread.
 
What's wrong with making people work on hard the games for your console? All it means is they can't be lazy.
 
Ste p in the wrong direction indeed. Now, the other point is also true. Its not really a perfect list of 720 up. There are games thatmade it through, bigger games. can't give a list, I don't look it up much. But Halo 3 was big and made it through and hell, it was all over the gaming news.
 
Am I missing something? How is this relevant? If I remember correctly, Halo 3 wasn't even 720p. It was like 640 or something.
 
zamardii said:
Am I missing something? How is this relevant? If I remember correctly, Halo 3 wasn't even 720p. It was like 640 or something.
Click to expand...

It's just bad internet journalism flying around the gaming blogs and such. Just like the "netflix exclusive to 360" non news that was actually years old that got reported a few weeks ago as if it were something new. Says more about how big of followers the internet gaming "press" networks are than anything. As has been pointed out over and over, there have been games literally from launch, for both systems, that render at sub 720. But it's big news and sign of a trend all of a sudden :rolleyes:
 
you ppl need to calibrate your HDTV or get your eyes checked or something, there IS a difference between fake HD and true 1920*1080 games, quite noticable on my 40W4000 i might add, i've played many upscaled games like halo3 and compared them with the ridge racer 7 demo which is a true 1080p title, i can definately tell that it looks MUCH crisper with very little visible aliasing compared to the usual blurry jaggie-fest we see on both consoles (like infamous ), true 1080p and 60fps fixed SHOULD be the minimum requirements not 720p 2x AA and 30fps,but it seems that the hardware doesn't cut it, too bad :(
 
SoFGR said:
you ppl need to calibrate your HDTV or get your eyes checked or something, there IS a difference between fake HD and true 1920*1080 games, quite noticable on my 40W4000 i might add, i've played many upscaled games like halo3 and compared them with the ridge racer 7 demo which is a true 1080p title, i can definately tell that it looks MUCH crisper with very little visible aliasing compared to the usual blurry jaggie-fest we see on both consoles (like infamous ), true 1080p and 60fps fixed SHOULD be the minimum requirements not 720p 2x AA and 30fps,but it seems that the hardware doesn't cut it, too bad :(
Click to expand...

And the full list of true 1080 games can be counted on your hands and feet basically. So again, if you don't like anything sub 1080, what could you possibly have to be interested in on consoles, other than maybe half a dozen full retail games, and a few dozen downloadable small games?

It's like going to applebees and bitching up a storm that you're not getting a good steak. Don't go there then.
 
And the full list of true 1080 games can be counted on your hands and feet basically
Click to expand...

Well, isn't half the point of a min requirement to increase the number of games at said resolutions? Guess it comes down to blame, and who it's more on; the console makers and their hardware limitations, or the game developers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top