COD4 missing 120 p's, not running in HD
We're not sure what exactly is going on, but it seems like developers just can't get the hang of wrangling their p's. First, Halo 3 is discovered to be only 640p and now, according to a (very long) upscaling discussion on the Beyond 3D forums, Call of Duty 4 for the Xbox 360 is not running in 720p resolution. No, in fact, it is running in (gasp!) 600p. That's 120 p's missing. Where did these p's go? Have their families been notified? These are questions that need answering. Wait, what's that? The game is running with 2X anti-aliasing? Oh, well never mind then. Screw those p's. We never liked them anyway.
[Via Evil Avatar]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Edgar N, @ Nov 21st 2007 3:35PM
couldve fooled me!
Cerixus @ Nov 21st 2007 3:39PM
I think there's some in my pants.
xenocidic @ Nov 21st 2007 3:41PM
what fucking nerd is counting the pixels anyway?
the game looks gorgeous
docLEXfisti @ Nov 21st 2007 3:41PM
so on PS3 it's full HD (1080p) then or also upscaled from 600p? just interested ... nothing more
frrs @ Nov 21st 2007 3:41PM
And the game *still* looks great. Just goes to show you that stuff like this shouldn't matter to the average person. If it looks great, it looks great. If it doesn't, it doesn't. Simple as that.
Tony @ Nov 21st 2007 3:46PM
This is really old news. Both systems run at 600p. On one hand it's a shame our "next gen" systems can't run at 1080p, but on the other hnad COD4 looks FREAKING AMAZING so who cares. If I had a 65 inch 1080p set it might matter but this looks so good on my 42" 720p Panny Plasma...
Tr3y MoNey @ Nov 21st 2007 3:47PM
It's a good thing I got Rack Band. You just made me never want to play COD4 again. Yeah Right!!
Tr3y MoNey @ Nov 21st 2007 3:51PM
Plus, the chick from Best Buy that I slept with last night told me (while we were doing it) that I had plenty of P to share with everyone. ZING!!
neil @ Feb 8th 2008 10:18AM
your right hand does not count
therpham @ Nov 21st 2007 3:59PM
Now what happens when some poor uninformed person reads that and things that the p stands for pixels or something instead of simply representing progressive scan? All those minutes reading a pamphlet at Best Buy will only serve to confuse them!
Big Filth @ Nov 21st 2007 4:01PM
Positively preposterous and perplexing. Perhaps a patch provided would produce the extra P's?
http://www.thegreatgamer.wordpress.com
Junoflux @ Nov 21st 2007 4:01PM
who really cares except for the really really arrogant guy who has OCD (Obsessive compulsive disorder) and MUST have the best setup on the block. Normal people just don't look too far into it.
Tony @ Nov 21st 2007 4:03PM
@4 - It's the same resolution on both systems.
Technically anything over standard definition is automatically high definition anyway, regardless as to whether or not it's an "accepted" number. With it being upscaled on my TV I can't say I really care as it is.
TORO @ Nov 21st 2007 4:07PM
You still got 720p's in my heart COD4, and you too Halo 3.
Eddie @ Nov 21st 2007 4:12PM
Oh crap, I didn't realize COD4 sucked.
This sucks. I thought playing COD4 was fun, but I was wrong. It's the P's that make it fun...
While I'm up sacrificing my copy of CoD4, would anyone like anymore Soma?
Half a gramme, and you won't give a damn...
dan @ Nov 21st 2007 4:12PM
p stands for progressive not pixels, so not missing 120 "p's"
SCC @ Nov 21st 2007 4:23PM
And, of course, if you really wanted to get technical then you would say it's missing 120 lines of resolution.
violenceinhd @ Nov 21st 2007 4:33PM
It may be running at a lower resolution than Halo 3, but it doesn't look like a jaggy MESS like Halo 3 because it has anti-aliasing.
Boff @ Nov 21st 2007 4:33PM
Indeed. 720p is 720 progressive not pixels.
But whatever, it looks shit hot on my 720p projector & 6ft screen too ;o)
beans @ Nov 21st 2007 4:34PM
@16
you got it...they wouldn't be getting technical about it though, that would imply they were somewhat right in the first place...if it were missing 120 pixels...someone really has no life if they spot it...120 lines of pixels...still no life, but at least it's somewhat noticable...either way, who gives a shit, the game is awesome.
Joe Schmoe @ Nov 21st 2007 4:41PM
I don't care, its better than XBOX1 and PS2 so what's the difference? Point is, this Gen isn't about graphics alone, and the Wii is proof positive of that. COD4 is an awesome game, and so is Halo 3, and pixel counters are those guys who get off over graphics versus fun gameplay.
Lets look to Xbox 720 and PS4 for the games to be native 1080P with 16x anti-aliasing....and by then we'll have new game engines, new Direct X tech, new ways of creating 3-D Textures on top of standard polygons.....point is, Graphics Tech hasn't grown by leaps and bounds since the PS1/N64 days, it's better, but not the kind of leap you would expect...From ps1 to ps2, and ps2 to ps3, xbox to xbox 360. People expect more, and we were let down. HD is definitly improving the experience, even if we are missing 80-120P, but we need to find ways to be satisfied in this generation without depending on graphics alone. Next gen will wow us with graphics, now wow us with the gameplay. COD4 is teh awesome!
Skyfire360 @ Nov 21st 2007 4:43PM
Console gamers talking about resolution cracks me up. You think 1280x600 looks good? Try 2560x1600 on a 30" monitor
ItchyTasty @ Nov 21st 2007 4:43PM
I thought all games were required to run 2x anti aliasing by Microsoft? Anyway COD4 looks just fine to me and at a buttery smoothe 60 fps.
razer @ Nov 21st 2007 4:56PM
I applaud the responses to this because it could of easily turned into a fanboy flamewar. I do have to agree that these people need to get a life and stop counting pixels.. On the other hand I think these games should be performing as advertised and it's nice that someone calls them on it. All I can say is the game looks amazing and easily the best looking game on consoles. If any game deserves a perfect 10 its COD 4 and it proves that a game can look amazing and not be native 720p or 1080p. The 360 upscales to 720p anyway so I don't think that extra 120p's will be missed.
Thomas @ Nov 21st 2007 5:10PM
I'd rather have 600p w/ 2xAA than 720p with no AA.
Loban @ Nov 21st 2007 5:22PM
Skyfire360, lots of hardcore console gamers are PC gamers too (myself included). I just recently converted from a strictly PC gamer to a console gamer because I got sick of the bullshit compatibility problems, escalating cost, and crappy console ports that comes with being a PC gamer. I can't afford it anymore. I can spend $350 on an Xbox 360 and get close to PC graphics without all the run-around of PC gaming. I just want to put a disc in, sit on my couch and play, and not worry about patches and drivers and all that crap. And yes, while seeing it on my 50" plasma at 2560x1600 (even if my Plasma could show that many pixels) would be amazing, I'm probably not gonna notice much difference from 1280 x 720 when sitting 12 feet back. I've built my own gaming PCs for 10 years now so I know what I'm talking about, but I just can't do it anymore. PC gaming is pissing me off lately. I just wanna play and it's just easier on a console.
gonzo @ Nov 21st 2007 6:08PM
I agree, the game looks great and as far as details, all I need to do is make sure that my aiming reticle is right between your eyes and pull the trigger. The beauty of that is that there's no need to fiddle with anything at all.
And to go along with a couple of people who play on PJs, hell yeah it's shit hot playing in HD on a screen measured in feet.
Oh and you know what Halo 3, you're good looking yourself so don't feel so down about it.
Now excuse me since I just bought Rock Band, this should be fun playing on my 9 foot screen
Taylor @ Nov 21st 2007 6:25PM
I'm sick of people trying to act all proud of themselves because they found a game it not running tat 720p. If the game looks AMAZINGLY beautiful as CoD 4 does. Then that's the bottom line. I'm sure the world won't blow up if we're missing our 120 pixels in a game when it is made up by 2x AAing. So get over it. It still looks great.
Sean @ Nov 21st 2007 6:33PM
The game is running at 720p, be it native or non-native. It looks great, and unless you directly access the frame buffer, you'll never be able to know the difference.
What would be interesting is someone with the correct capture kit (debug kit + video capture hardware) took a direct frame-buffer shot (which would be at the engines native res, PGR3 frame-buffer shots were 600p), and then compared it to a high quality screen capture after the 360 had upscaled it, just so we can see how little difference it actually makes.
poop @ Nov 21st 2007 7:04PM
Isn't the deal here that MS advertises gaming in HD but is just giving us upscaled non-HD resolutions? http://www.xbox.com/en-US/hardware/x/xbox360prosystem/highdefdetails.htm
They make it seem like the games are now in HD (as opposed to xbox 1) but really it's just the x360 scaler that gives us HD resolution.
Dr Forrester @ Nov 21st 2007 10:06PM
Fix the link, please.
Big Daddy Bane @ Nov 21st 2007 10:14PM
@11 I do you stupid sonovabitch!!! and "normal" people can sux a fatty in hell!!!
BananaBoat @ Nov 22nd 2007 1:57AM
It's a shame that we can't have both the resolution and the 2x AA (2x AA isn't even that great to begin with. 4 is where it's at).
Oh well, game still looks and (more importantly) plays great.
SovietSpartan @ Nov 22nd 2007 3:38AM
@14
I think Soma was the drug that made people happy in Brave New World? Or was it the drugs the Grammaton Clerics didn't want to take in Equilibrium.
I'll take the whole gramme by the way :)
mattclarkie @ Nov 22nd 2007 6:42AM
Is the issue that the 360 can't handle it, or is it just the developers. Or is it because of the Wii version, so they have to water down the game.
Either way, the games look good. I would just like to know the explaination for it.
Marc Federico @ Nov 22nd 2007 2:51PM
yea 720p means 720 pixels spacially in the vertical realm. 1280x720 progressive scan, meaning the whole screen is painted at once. interlaced (as in 480i) means alternating horizontal lines are painted, like line 1, 3, 5...etc and on the next frame 2,4,6..etc. now that we know those facts, we can move on. who cares about it as long as they run it with 4xAA to smooth it out really nicely. as long as the framerate is good and there arent jaggies, i could care less. ps3 has the disadvantage of not being able to upscale to 1080p with a dedicated hardware scaling chip like the 360 has.
Chris @ Nov 23rd 2007 9:58AM
lol hate to be an ass
Buy yes microsoft says the nextgen i high def and thanks to the ingenious HANA scalers they built every game new and old is presented in high definition end of story.
As for games like halo3 and cod4, even if they are 600p or whatever the case may be if they are above the 480 threshhold they are in the realm of high def even if you neglect to see that the 360 has one of the best upscalers on the market.
Loban @ Nov 26th 2007 12:03PM
Oh, and Skyfire360, I used to be the same as you when I was a hardcore PC gamer. I would brag about the PC's superiority to console gamers to make them feel inferior. Until I realized console gamers just don't care. While they do care a little about the technical side of things, they really just wanna have fun without having to worry about: do I have updated video drivers, how about sound drivers, what version of directx am I running, etc. etc. etc.