hit tracker

Article: Final Fantasy XIII leaked, does indeed run at 720p

Discussion in 'Archived General Gaming News' started by Zeus, Mar 3, 2010.

  1. 11,051
    0
    0
    Zeus

    Zeus MaxConsole News Team

    Joined:
    May 29, 2003
    Location:
    Athens
    Home Page:
    http://www.maxconsole.com
  2. 8
    0
    0
    Sinow

    Sinow Loyal Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2007
    It could just be the TV that says that it does, but it doesn't mean that the native resolution is.:)
     
  3. 657
    0
    0
    Aeond

    Aeond Loyal Member

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2006
    i'm getting this for my ps3, there is no way my eyes could handle that gimped 360 version.
    guess the (only) xbox360 owners have to really bite the dust here.

    http://www.n4g.com/News-485472.aspx
     
  4. 1,817
    0
    0
    sirxlaughs

    sirxlaughs Loyal Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2006
    Your poor eyes wouldn't notice the difference unless it was explicitly shown to you.
     
  5. 5,715
    3
    0
    danight

    danight Loyal Member

    Joined:
    May 4, 2006
    I doubt xbox 360 or ps3 fans care either way. No online means it really doesnt matter if you like psn vs live.
    Its just not gonna be a system seller either way.

    There will be tons of people doing comparisons... The 360 will upscale and the ps3 has 1080p cutscenes.
     
  6. 848
    0
    0
    SLAYERPSP

    SLAYERPSP Loyal Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2005
    360 up scans everything to 1080p anyways so who cares. and i get to play it now i don't have to wait in til march 9th and its free 3 disc cost all of 2.20 cents. im good with it
     
  7. 657
    0
    0
    Aeond

    Aeond Loyal Member

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2006
    that's really funny because last time (3 days ago) i went to my ophthalmologist he was telling me that my eyes are absolutely perfect so i can exclude this factor as the main error.
    bummer, huh? maybe you should just accept the fact, that the 360 version is really gimped and square really did sloppy work.

    btw, i own a xbox 360 myself. just to be sure that people like you don't make any false fanboy conclusions.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 3, 2010
  8. 1,817
    0
    0
    sirxlaughs

    sirxlaughs Loyal Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2006
    I already know that the 360 version is inferior to the PS3. You're acting like looking at it would burn your retinas. You've never watched standard definition TV? I hope you only play PC games, as only most of those are guaranteed to play in high, native resolution rather than being upscaled.

    Why would you have to add a qualifier to the end of your post? Good for you if you own a 360. It doesn't make your statement any less ridiculous. Unless you were trying to make a joke. In that case, good try, but it still needs a little polish.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 3, 2010
  9. 657
    0
    0
    Aeond

    Aeond Loyal Member

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2006
    I'm a graphic whore I'll admit it, but what square did here can be filed under massive fail and clearly undermines the fact that the xbox 360 already performs on its peak performance and its storage device is last-gen.
    yea, it hurts my eyes. i mean we're living in 2010 so I can at least expect hd ready resolution.
     
  10. 13,435
    958
    113
    billysastard

    billysastard MaxConsole Co-Admin Loyal Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2007
    Location:
    West Yorks, UK
    Home Page:
    http://www.maxconsole.com
    i'm getting the ps3 version so not fussed about the (nuked) 360 release
     
  11. 1,817
    0
    0
    sirxlaughs

    sirxlaughs Loyal Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2006
    Everything is HD resolution ready. If FF13 on the 360 hurts your eyes, then every blurry PS3 game must've rendered you blind by now. I don't know how you made it through the previous generation of standard definition games. Also, the "storage device" (by which you probably mean DVD and not the HDD) is not the problem. Microsoft proves this time and time again. Having to swap discs in a linear game is not indication that a medium is "last-gen." It's only an indication of a game with a lot, or very large, files.
    Square did a good job on the port with the limited amount of development time. People are exaggerating how bad the port job is like they forgot all the bad PS3 ports. All of a sudden, there's an inferior 360 port and everyone screams that the 360 is tapped out.
    You're living in 2010, and most people still don't have HDTV's. If your eyes were really "perfect", they'd be able to handle the world's visual imperfections.
     
  12. 111
    0
    16
    pin

    pin Loyal Member

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    Home Page:
    http://
    Arse, talking, out of

    If what you're saying was true regarding it using an outdated storage medium, I'm sure the army of PC users would have something to say to you. A large proportion of pc games are shipped upon multi-dvds and this is really a non-issue.

    Whether this was the epic failure by Square/Enix you say, I would say more of an over-sight as they could have not compressed CGI and upped the disc count ( I'm sure someone would have whined about that though...;))

    Btw, 720p (which it does natively run at, confirmed by me playing it now) is the definition of HD Ready
     
  13. 2,651
    35
    48
    kneehighspy

    kneehighspy Loyal Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2003
    Occupation:
    Early Retirement, Relaxation
    Location:
    usa
    yep it does run at 720p natively.
     
  14. 2,211
    0
    0
    Cue

    Cue Loyal Member

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2007
    The storage medium is to blame, that or MS are, because they charge per disc so its either lose money or compress the sh*t out of it, they chose to compress the **** out of it. PC 'unzips' data and installs much like some PS3 games do because they all have HDDs, 360s don't. the analysis of the resolution from the leaked game is already all over the net and they say it's 576p ie not HD. Doesn't mean the game is unplayable though. Read the gaf or beyond3d thread.
     
  15. 605
    2
    0
    Tempos

    Tempos Loyal Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2005
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    That's not that accurate. Recompressing a compressed file adds unnecessary overhead and doesn't gain much in terms of compression, perhaps less than half a percent. If you've ever downloaded a RAR'd archive containing video you'll notice it's not worth the speed decrease to compress the archived files for minimal space savings. It's very quick to copy a large archive into memory and decompress it into several hundred/thousand files compared to copying those files one by one from the disc - it's the same concept as zipping a file and unzipping it on your remote server vs copying each file via ftp. Larger files typically aren't compressed again, there's no need.
     
  16. 3,798
    0
    0
    iLLNESS

    iLLNESS Loyal Member

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2005
    Occupation:
    HV Industrial Electrician, Mechanic + Emergency Re
    Location:
    Canada
    for ff13 being such a quick port, it runs awesome.

    looking at the timeframe i'd say square had much less time to port to 360 then other devs have had on ps3 ports.. and those 'longer' alloted times for ports to ps3 most often turned out to be ****.

    how did the 360 get such a good port in such a small time? anyone? anyone?

    and the ps3 installs arent being installed from a compressed file to an uncompressed one. they are being installed cuz the ps3 is soo horribly slow at loading data they are essentially 'caching' files (like the 360 does ON THE FLY with no issues)

    and LOL at system being tapped out. give me a break. no console is ever tapped out, ever. thinking that is just moronic.
     
  17. 556
    0
    0
    Taft

    Taft Loyal Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2004
    Location:
    Sweden
    Home Page:
    http://
    So.... How is it? Do it run 720p or not? It seems that you can't find an answer anywhere lol. One second IT DOES! And another NO IT DOESN'T! Hope to see a review soon.
     
  18. 1,817
    0
    0
    sirxlaughs

    sirxlaughs Loyal Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2006
    This is nonsense. If you're going to blame Microsoft for SquareEnix's shortcoming with FF13, then you might as well blame Sony for Bayonetta. Sony mandate that if a multiplatform game is released later for the PS3, that it must contain extra content/features. This could cause some developers to delay 360 releases in favor of a simultaneous release. But you don't hear people complain about it, right? I may be wrong, but I have no heard of any developer other than id mention anything about disc royalties. Also, Carmack later explained that the per disc royalty (above two discs) was not the only factor in deciding to put Rage on two discs. Unless the actual royalty cost is known, we won't know how big a factor it is when making multi-disc games. Didn't another id employee come out and say there is no per-disc royalty? It was about the cost of manufacturing or something (possibly just PR cover-up, though)? There's never been a comparison on the varying manufacturing costs of dvd vs blu-ray.
     
  19. 26,553
    170
    63
    Xenogears V

    Xenogears V Senior Helper Clean-Up Crew

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2006
    Location:
    Italy Rulez! - Proud To Italian
    For sure, game most downloaded in the hostory. Good move Sony to loose the exclusivity.
     
  20. 2,211
    0
    0
    Cue

    Cue Loyal Member

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2007
    well you can blame sony for having a "hard to program for" console like many have done already but this is alot simpler than that I'm not talking about shortcomings in programming. It's 576p because of disc size and disc size alone. What else could it be? it's irrelevant to the arch or shortcomings in programming since its just a BINK movie and the only thing that stopped them from releasing it with a HD resolution on both is the difference in disc size. Why not release your game on many discs then? it's either cost or the amount of discs required became impractical (1 BD>5DVDs) but at the end of the day its the format that lead to it being sub HD because that was the reason (only difference) regardless of the underlying reason for not using even more DVDs and you're probably right about the royalties.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 4, 2010

Share This Page