Home Gaming Killzone: Shadow Fall’s Multiplayer is sub 1080p

Killzone: Shadow Fall’s Multiplayer is sub 1080p

2 min read
50

resolutiongate

Resolutiongate is the ridiculous term that’s ingrained in to the new console zeitgeist.  the scandal has come about since news that many Xbox One games fail to hit that sweet 1080p resolution, especially when compared to the same games running on Sony’s glorious PlayStation 4. Only it looks like Sony’s console isn’t quite the 60fps, 1080p beast either. In a new bit of pixel counting, Eurogamer’s Digital Foundry revealed that Killzone: Shadowfall’s multiplayer is rendered at a resolution just higher than 720p, and still fails to maintain 60fps.

According to digital Foundry, the game’s multiplayer is actually rendered at 960×1080. That means that it’s at full horizontal resolution – and allows them to say it’s “1080p” – but at half the vertical resolution. The frames are interpolated, making it look like a fully rendered scene, when in fact every second frame is missing half the vertical data.

This is the reason why Killzone: Shadow Fall’s multiplayer often seems blurry. It’s not some sort of anti-aliasing effect, as many presumed.

In the single-player mode, the game runs at full 1080p with an unlocked frame-rate (though a 30fps cap has been introduced as an option in a recent patch), but it’s a different story altogether with multiplayer. Here Guerrilla Games has opted for a 960×1080 framebuffer, in pursuit of a 60fps refresh. Across a range of clips, we see the game handing in a 50fps average on multiplayer. It makes a palpable difference, but it’s probably not the sort of boost you might expect from halving fill-rate.

Now, there are some mitigating factors here. Shadow Fall uses a horizontal interlace, with every other column of pixels generated using a temporal upscale – in effect, information from previously rendered frames is used to plug the gaps. The fact that few have actually noticed that any upscale at all is in place speaks to its quality, and we can almost certainly assume that this effect is not cheap from a computational perspective.

That Guerilla Games has had to implement this in pursuit of a faster refresh is neither surprising, nor disappointing really. what is disappointing is that the Image quality’s taken a definite hit here, without that sweet 60fps being standard. the game has a rather variable frame-rate.

However, at the same time it also confirms that a massive reduction in fill-rate isn’t a guaranteed dead cert for hitting 60fps. Indeed, Shadow Fall multiplayer has a noticeably variable frame-rate – even though the fill-rate gain and the temporal upscale are likely to give back and take away fixed amounts of GPU time.

I just find it odd that this is only really being noticed now. What this does show, I suppose, is that for most gamers, native, full 1080p really isn’t that big a deal. It also shows that more are willing to turn a blind eye when it comes to PlayStation, all while chastising Xbox for everything that’s not 1080p.

Want high resolution, high frame rate gaming? Get one of these.

Be a PC viking!

Last Updated: March 3, 2014

50 Comments

  1. Hammersteyn

    March 3, 2014 at 11:34

    Everyone line up. There’s work to be done.

    Reply

    • Alien Emperor Trevor

      March 3, 2014 at 11:41

      Easy way to take care of troll. Needs more RAM!

      Reply

    • RinceThis

      March 3, 2014 at 11:51

      HAHAHAHA!

      Reply

  2. Spathi

    March 3, 2014 at 11:37

    “It also shows that more are willing to turn a blind eye when it comes to PlayStation, all while chastising Xbox for everything that’s not 1080p.”

    No. It shows that gamers don’t like paying more for a less powerful machine.

    Reply

    • Hammersteyn

      March 3, 2014 at 11:41

      Also this is really the first time LG posted an article about PS4 not being 1080p

      Reply

    • Alien Emperor Trevor

      March 3, 2014 at 11:42

      I thought it showed most people can’t spot the difference without the difference being pointed out.

      Reply

      • Spathi

        March 3, 2014 at 11:45

        Well for a game only available on one platform, sure.

        Reply

    • Joe Vicious

      March 3, 2014 at 18:56

      Uh huh, sure it is

      Reply

      • Spathi

        March 4, 2014 at 08:16

        Yeah, because people actually like paying more for a machine that is less powerful and focused on TVTVTVTVTSPERTSTV we MERICA!!!

        Reply

  3. Admiral Chief in Vegas

    March 3, 2014 at 11:39

    I like that helmet

    Reply

    • HvR

      March 3, 2014 at 11:45

      Needs Nvidia Logo and Steam logo engraved on each side.

      Reply

      • Alien Emperor Trevor

        March 3, 2014 at 11:54

        Why do you want to ruin it with the Nvidia logo? 😉

        Reply

        • HvR

          March 3, 2014 at 12:05

          Because these days if you prefer AMD and Radeon you might as well be a console gamer.

          Reply

          • Alien Emperor Trevor

            March 3, 2014 at 12:15

            I prefer being called cost-effective :/

          • HvR

            March 3, 2014 at 12:43

            Isn’t that a excuse all console gamers use 🙂

          • Alien Emperor Trevor

            March 3, 2014 at 12:55

            goddamnit. lol.

  4. iAmWeasel

    March 3, 2014 at 11:39

    Uh oh.. Pieter Kruger is gonna be on this one like white on rice on a paper plate in Alaska. *runs for cover*

    Reply

  5. Alien Emperor Trevor

    March 3, 2014 at 11:40

    Blurry? So the shadows fail? tee hee.

    Reply

    • Hammersteyn

      March 3, 2014 at 11:43

      It’s console and at R800 – R1000 a game now a days (or sooner than we think) I don’t even know why we still bother or why we get our fucking hopes up.
      * Edit – shadows fail LOL

      Reply

      • Alien Emperor Trevor

        March 3, 2014 at 11:45

        That escalated quickly. I was just making a bad pun about blurry shadows 😀

        Reply

        • Hammersteyn

          March 3, 2014 at 11:47

          I know, Monday blues. I did make a edit to the original comment. Was rather clever

          Reply

  6. Melasco

    March 3, 2014 at 11:47

    I agree, it’s a pretty pointless mud slinging contest this early in the cycle. Just give us games to enjoy! What resolution they choose to render means very little to me if it looks that good….

    Reply

    • Alien Emperor Trevor

      March 3, 2014 at 11:49

      I agree, it’s stupidly overblown.

      Reply

  7. Unavengedavo(aka. Bilbo)

    March 3, 2014 at 11:51

    I am actually getting gatvol of this whole P debate… I honestly don’t care about that, what I am more worried about is games getting shorter and more expensive and you have to pay to finish the game O_o
    http://cdn.memegenerator.net/instances/500x/46721839.jpg

    Reply

    • evilmonkeyman289

      March 12, 2014 at 03:01

      For the love of god, at least say it’s the resolution of a game instead of calling it “p’s” makes you seem like a kid.

      Reply

      • Unavengedavo(aka. Bilbo)

        March 12, 2014 at 05:36

        I did it on purpose, because it is starting to become like the whole “my dad is bigger than your dad” argument.

        Reply

  8. Sir Rants A Lot Llew. Jelly!!!

    March 3, 2014 at 11:56

    Hehehe. PC Viking. Nice.

    Reply

  9. Sir Rants A Lot Llew. Jelly!!!

    March 3, 2014 at 12:05

    Can I add my 2c worth even though I am a PC gamer and not on console?

    Could it be that people make a fuss because on todays screens anything less than 1080 in general looks and that’s why people complain?

    I know that consoles can upscale far beter than a PC so 720p on a console will look better than a pc on 720p on the same screen, but I am sure that the difference is becoming rather noticeable as TV’s DPI go up so fast. In the next few short years 4k is going to become a standard in TV’s at which point 720 on a console is going to look monstrously bad?

    Excuse any ignorance or assumptions from that but it’s just how I see it and why I assume peeps are getting all worked up over it

    Reply

  10. HvR

    March 3, 2014 at 12:09

    The worst part of this is actually the developer trying to pull a fast one in selling 1080i as 1080p by shifting the interpolation to the vertical.

    Might be btter for MP etc but that is just plain old lying for a product you are almost paying R1000 for.

    Reply

    • Sir Rants A Lot Llew. Jelly!!!

      March 3, 2014 at 12:13

      In all fairness are you paying for pixels or for quality of gameplay?

      Reply

      • HvR

        March 3, 2014 at 12:40

        My personal choice gameplay, story and design always trumps pretty pictures and if not detrimental to gameplay I do not mind 26 fps but might differ for other gamers who would only want to play 1080p 60fps.

        I just hate it when they lie and this falls in the same category for me as the recent F2P vs Pay-to-win and always online DRM crap that has been spoiling a great hobby.

        Reply

        • Sir Rants A Lot Llew. Jelly!!!

          March 3, 2014 at 13:13

          Ok fair enough. I understand your point.

          What worries me though is that the timing of this release is not so good. In a few short years 4k TV’s will be the norm and imagine how 720 will look on a TV with 4K worth of pixels 🙁

          Reply

    • FoxOneZA

      March 3, 2014 at 12:21

      Uncharted pulled the same trick with interpolation. That and no anti-aliasing can give a gamer a headache when played for long hours.

      Reply

  11. iAmWeasel

    March 3, 2014 at 12:21

    Everyone who moans at PS4 guys for bigging up 1080p and 60 FPS are completely missing the point. No one cares about 1080p.. people care that on one console you can get a better experience IN GENERAL vs the other console. It doesn’t matter if it’s 1080p, 900p, 720p.. whatever. The point is if I buy the game on PS4 it’s going to be better in some way shape or form, and the console itself will cost less. Is it really THAT hard to grasp this? Yes gamers do care about that, and PS4 outperforming X1 in sales is proof of this.

    Reply

    • Orion

      March 3, 2014 at 17:57

      Because the Sony fans were lied to. Sales advantage due to misinformation. Dreamcast all over again.

      Sony lied. End of story.

      Reply

      • Spathi

        March 4, 2014 at 08:18

        “Sales advantage due to misinformation.” – ROFL! Uhm, no.

        Reply

      • Maundrel

        March 6, 2014 at 05:02

        I understand you are a fan boy but I would suggest some more research as the image is not being upscaled by the system, The game fills in the bottom and top 480 lines with previously rendered frames but the final output from the game itself is a 1080p image. This is nothing like BF4 or other sub 1080 games that are upscaled on a hardware level. This is why it took 4 months for someone to figure it out. If anything it is a testament to the developers skills……now only if they can work on their story telling (palm to face)…

        Reply

    • Player276

      March 3, 2014 at 19:51

      O please, if PS3 was put into another box and called PS4, the sales would roughly be the same, and the ponies would still be defending their “better” console.

      Reply

  12. FoxOneZA

    March 3, 2014 at 12:22

    Pffftttt…It’s that AMD APU that’s bringing these consoles down. No wonder those things are frowned upon in the PC world.

    Reply

    • Maundrel

      March 6, 2014 at 04:58

      You must not be in the PC world because that could not be further from the truth, PLENTY of gamers run on AMD processors. Hell I just sold my Phenom II X4 955 for $30 more than what I paid for it 4 years ago, they are still in high demand.

      Reply

  13. Pieter Kruger

    March 3, 2014 at 12:56

    Hmmmmmmm

    Reply

  14. Jecht_Sin

    March 3, 2014 at 15:13

    It’s interlaced, not upscaled. Which means that at 60 fps it actually uses 120 semi-frame buffers per second (and before anyone argues, 100 if it drops to 50fps). Reusing, if my understanding is correct, the previously rendered other semi-frame buffer to build the final (pure) 1080p image. At which point the AA should be applied.

    Not sure how this technique would really work (is it skipping all odds columns when rendering a semi-frame? How? Isn’t that a waste?) but that’s why DF instead of dropping bombs like this would be much better explaining them first. Especially after they always considered the MP game to run at 1080p60fps.

    Reply

    • Player276

      March 3, 2014 at 19:50

      No, it snot buffered semi-frame. That makes no sense from a technical standpoint.

      Reply

  15. Nigel

    March 3, 2014 at 15:34

    hahahahahahahaah sony ponies

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Check Also

Xbox Series X Restock Update Today: Track on Twitter, Walmart, Best Buy and More

New consoles are on the horizon, and while Sony and Microsoft have spoken plenty about wha…